webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

REP SCALISE 2 4%

---

leadership pacs? drucker

oil money AEA IER see open secrets

sea change BS ltr plus 20 mcmorris

FRC $?

GUN CONTROL

merri ok

format broken

not paying as much attn as i shd since he got bumped in cantor crash

---

1 24 out on chemo?

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who left Congress at the end of 2023, are also top recipients of corporate PAC funds.

---

https://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/steve-scalise

13* 4%

-----

GGL 7 26

Vendor/Recipient Profile: DRUCKER LAWHON LLP

OpenSecrets

https://www.opensecrets.org › campaign-expenditures

DRUCKER LAWHON LLP received $3,791,064 in reported payments during the 2024 election cycle. See a list of their customers.

AI Overview

+3

Drucker Lawhon is a prominent fundraising consulting and accounting firm utilized by political entities connected to House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, including joint fundraising committees like the Scalise Leadership Fund.

Role and Services

Financial Scope

November 14, 2023

Scalise launches big-money political vehicle

News: House Majority Leader Steve Scalise is launching a new joint-fundraising vehicle, Scalise Leadership Fund 2024, that is aimed at supporting more than 50 Republican incumbents, candidates and committees.

Scalise Leadership Fund 2024 will filter money to Scalise’s reelection campaign; Eye of the Tiger, Scalise’s leadership PAC; Congressional Leadership Fund, the House GOP super PAC; the NRCC’s general, building and legal funds; 34 incumbents; eight candidates and eight nominee funds.

Scalise will be able to raise up to $586,200 from individual donors into this account. Then the JFC redistributes those contributions.

With Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) out of the leadership and Speaker Mike Johnson untested as a national fundraiser, Scalise will become more of a focal point in the House Republican money game. We reported in the AM edition Monday that Johnson raised $16 million in the 10 days since starting to raise money for CLF. But all eyes will be on the NRCC’s November fundraising report, which should be out in the next week or so, to see how McCarthy’s ouster and resulting internal GOP battle to replace him impacted the party committee.

Scalise has long been one of the top online fundraisers — and he’s looking to leverage that ability for this new vehicle. The Louisiana Republican has raised more than $96 million online in the last seven years.

===

GGL 8 26

AI Overview

U.S. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise is a staunch ally of the National Rifle Association (NRA), consistently earning a top A+ rating from the organization for his legislative support of Second Amendment rights. [1, 2]

Key Positions and Actions

NBC

Oct. 8, 2017,

By Kailani Koenig

WASHINGTON — House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who is still recovering from his wounds after a gunman opened fire on Republican members of Congress in June, told Chuck Todd in an exclusive interview for “Meet the Press” that he still stands behind the unlimited right to bear arms.

“Our Founding Fathers believed strongly in gun rights for citizens," said Scalise, R-La.

Instead of passing new regulations in the wake of the Las Vegas mass shooting, which thrust the country’s lawmakers into the center of the debate over gun control, existing ones should be enforced, he said.

“Don't try to put new laws in place that don't fix these problems," said Scalise, who was gravely wounded on June 14 when a shooter opened fire on the GOP's congressional baseball team as members practiced in Virginia. "They only make it harder for law-abiding citizens to own a gun.”

When asked if he believed the right to bear arms was "unlimited," Scalise said: "It is, it is."

Full Interview: After Being Shot, Scalise Still Opposes More Gun Control

20:18

During the shooting in June, Scalise was hit in the left hip but managed to drag himself into the outfield and was then rushed to a Washington hospital. The gunman was himself shot dead, while Scalise sustained grave injuries and required several operations. He returned to the House on Sept. 28 for the first time since the shooting, earning an emotional standing ovation from his colleagues.

Since the Las Vegas massacre, some top Republicans — including President Donald Trump, House Speaker Paul Ryan, and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy — have indicated that they are open to looking at banning “bump stocks” — devices that enable semi-automatic weapons to fire like machine guns. The National Rifle Association backed new regulations on bump stocks after a dozen of the devices were found in the Las Vegas shooter's hotel room.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the sponsor of a bill aimed at banning bump stocks, called on Americans to consider the fate of those killed in Las Vegas.

“Every American can look at, should look at those pictures and say, ‘Do we want more of this?’” she said on "Meet the Press." “This is one simple thing that stops the making of a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun.”

Image: Ethan Avanzino grieves beside a white cross

Ethan Avanzino grieves beside a white cross for his friend Cameron Robinson, one of 58 victims of the Las Vegas mass shooting.Robyn Beck / AFP - Getty Images

She admitted that she was not sure which specific laws would have prevented the shooting, however.

For his part, Scalise said he did not want Congress to examine the issue of bump stocks.

“Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi already said she wants it to be a slippery slope,” he said. “She doesn't want to stop at bump stocks. They want to go out and limit the rights of gun owners.”

FORSUBSCRIBERS

Tupac Shakur trial recalls violent era of rap rivalries

He said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives should revisit their 2010 decision that legalized bump stocks — a request also made by the NRA.

“A week ago… most people didn't know what a bump stock was,” he said. “So to think that we're now all experts and know how to write some ... panacea law — it's fallacy. Let's focus on the facts. Let's get the facts and let's go focus on some of the problems.”

Scalise also said he was opposed to limits on the number of firearms a person could purchase during a given time.

“It’s dangerous for the concept that the federal government would have some kind of list of who has guns and what they have,” he said.

When asked whether he agreed with laws banning automatic weapons, the congressman said that existing regulations hadn't resulted in a reduction of violence.

“Some of the weapons that [current laws] included in there aren't really automatic weapons,” said Scalise. “You haven't seen a decrease in gun violence with those laws on the books. So go and enforce the laws that are there.”

Scalise also said people across the country used firearms to protect themselves from criminals — an argument consistently used by gun rights advocates.

Image:

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Tex., and other members of the Republican Congressional softball team stand behind police tape of the scene of the shootings in Alexandria on June 14.Cliff Owen / AP

A member of the U.S. Capitol Police detail shot the gunman who opened fire on Scalise and his colleagues.

During his “Meet The Press” interview, Scalise said much good had come from the shooting, which he called "a bad act."

"The love, the support, the prayers from people all around the country — it touched me and my wife Jennifer in a way that, you know, maybe we never would've imagined, because it was so overwhelming," he said. "And such a good sign of America that you don't see a lot, but we felt it directly.”

-=-=

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise on Sunday criticized proposed legislation to ban so-called bump stocks as a “rush to judgment” in the wake of last week’s mass shooting in Las Vegas.

In an interview on “Meet the Press,” the Louisiana Republican, who was seriously injured in a shooting targeting a GOP congressional baseball practice in June, expressed skepticism about Democratic calls for a ban on bump stocks, a modification that allows semi-automatic rifles to fire like fully automatic weapons. Several guns the Las Vegas gunman had in his hotel room were modified with bump stocks.

“If you talked to anybody about a week ago, most people, including myself, didn’t even know what a bump stock was,” Scalise said. “So now we’re finding out about it. There are people that want to rush to judgment. They’ve got a bill written already.”

“It’s a little bit early for people to say they know what to do to fix this problem,” Scalise said.

Scalise, however, endorsed a review of regulations on bump stocks. The National Rifle Association called for the review last week. Democrats such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), however, have countered that a ban needs to be codified into law so it remains in place.

“They want to go out and limit the rights of gun owners,” Scalise said of Democratic proposals, specifically naming House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who argued for wider gun control measures beyond bump stocks.

“I would first say that we’ve had a gun control debate for a long time,” Scalise said, citing the NRA’s endorsement of Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s vocal support for stricter gun control laws.

Scalise instead argued for enforcement of “limits that are already in place” and “laws that are on the books” and contended that Congress has acted to “address different components” of mass shootings, such as mental health.

“Frankly, let’s go out and enforce those laws,” Scalise said. “Don’t try to put new laws in place that don’t fix these problems. They only make it harder for law-abiding citizens to own a gun.”

-=-=

GGL AI Overview

The Fix NICS Act of 2018 is a federal law passed to enforce and improve reporting to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). It requires federal agencies and state governments to properly submit disqualifying records—such as criminal history and domestic violence convictions—into the background check database. [1, 2, 3]

Main Rules of the Law

Why the Law Was Made

-=-=

EVERYTOWN

Justice Department Report on Fix NICS Act Highlights Urgent Need to Close Loopholes in Background Check System

11.14.2019

Report Shows Increase in Records Submitted to Background Check System, but Recent Everytown Investigation Found It is Still Easy to Avoid Background Checks Altogether

Everytown Investigation Found Nearly 1.2 Million Ads on Armslist.com for Gun Sales Where No Background Check Was Required

U.S. Senate Has Failed to Act on a House Bill Requiring Background Checks on All Gun Sales for More Than 250 Days

NEW YORK – Everytown for Gun Safety, the country’s largest gun violence prevention organization, today released the following statement on U.S. Attorney General William Barr’s release of the first semiannual report on the Fix NICS Act. The report calls background checks a “critical tool” to keep firearms away from those legally prohibited from buying or possessing them, and reports that federal agencies and states have submitted more than 6 million new records to the background check system since the bill passed last year.

However, while federal law requires background checks for guns sold by licensed gun dealers, it does not require background checks for gun sales made by unlicensed dealers to strangers they meet online or at gun shows. A recent Everytown report, “Unchecked,” found nearly 1.2 million ads on the website Armslist.com for gun sales where no background check was required.

“This is an encouraging sign, but it doesn’t matter how many records are in the background check system when a loophole in the law allows a person to avoid a background check altogether,” said Rob Wilcox, deputy director of policy and strategy for Everytown for Gun Safety. “An effective background check system does three things: has all the records available, gives law enforcement enough time to do a check, and requires checks on all gun sales — the Trump administration and U.S. Senate have struck out on two of the three.”

Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund has researched the background check loophole and earlier this year released a report, “Unchecked,” which detailed an investigation into gun ads posted on Armslist.com in 2018. Armslist, the self-described “largest free gun classifieds on the web,” allows prospective gun buyers to find guns being sold by unlicensed sellers who are not legally required to conduct a background check on the sale. Some findings of the investigation include:

In February, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019, which would require background checks on all gun sales, including unlicensed sales between strangers who meet online or at gun shows, and H.R. 1112, the Enhanced Background Check Act of 2019, a bill that would address the “Charleston loophole” that allows licensed dealers to sell a gun after three business days even if a background check has not been completed. Thus far, the U.S. Senate has not taken up legislation that would require background checks on all gun sales or that would address the so-called “Charleston loophole.”

-=-=-=

OFF BS

Scalise: Trump, Republicans Working on Real Solutions to Stop Mass Shootings

August 14, 2019

Press Release

WASHINGTON, D.C.—House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) joined CBS's Face the Nation and Fox News' Fox & Friends to highlight the work the Republican Congress did to strengthen the existing background check system for gun purchases with the Fix NICS Act, and to call for more resources for the FBI and law enforcement to prevent mass shootings before they occur. Whip Scalise then condemned attempts by Democrat politicians to assign blame for these shootings to President Donald Trump and his supporters. As he knows from personal experience, the only ones responsible for these senseless acts of terrorism are the gunmen themselves.

Image removed.

Click here or on the image above to watch the interview.

Image removed.

Click here or on the image above to watch the interview.

Transcribed remarks from CBS's Face the Nation:

On President Trump's call for action from Congress to prevent mass shootings:

"First of all, I have supported [President Trump] on that. In fact, we got a bill to President Trump's desk last year, the Fix NICS bill, which truly does go after some of the real problems we saw where people were falling through the cracks and not getting into the background check system, like so many shootings, like Charleston, like others.

"The President said he wants to make sure, especially, that people with mental illnesses don't get guns. In fact, there were a lot of people that we were finding that weren't getting put into the system. We need to keep working on that and make the background check system work better. We passed a very bipartisan bill to do just that, and Donald Trump signed it into law just last year. Let's focus on making that work better, so a lot of these people that slip through the cracks don't slip through the cracks again or in future attempts where they might try to do that."

On flawed background check proposals from Democrats that would not prevent shootings and only penalize law-abiding citizens:

"Let's see what bills are being brought forward. I know what Nancy Pelosi called for the Senate to come back and vote on was a bill that they passed through the House, or two bills, that wouldn't have actually done anything to stop these shootings because the shooters in both, in El Paso and in Dayton, passed background checks. Her bill wouldn't apply to them, but her bill is very dangerous in a number of ways because of how it stops law-abiding people from being able to transfer guns, including if you loan your gun to your neighbor because she's afraid that her ex-boyfriend is going to come and beat her up. You loaning your gun to her would put you in prison for up to a year. That's what Pelosi's bill does. It wouldn't have stopped the shootings, but actually makes it harder for law-abiding citizens to do things that are currently legal, and, frankly, currently helping improve safety."

On making domestic terrorism a federal crime:

"I do, and, in fact, I applaud what's being done both at the FBI and with our new Acting Homeland Security Secretary. In his first week in office, he put in place a task force to go look at a lot of the online recruiting that's going on to radicalize people. We're seeing a very alarming increase in domestic terrorism. The FBI has been focused on that.

"Last month alone, they saw it was in the hundreds, the number of domestic terrorism cases that they're looking at. We need to make sure that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have the tools they need to go and root out, whether it's white supremacists, whether it's radicals from the left, that are committing some of these crimes. We need to make sure that they have the tools they need to root it out."

On improving the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) and the FBI's ability to prevent domestic terrorism:

"If you look at what the FBI just set up recently and what the Homeland Security Secretary just did recently to put a renewed focus on this, to put a new focus on what's going on online, the recruiting that we all know has been going on online. They're actually focusing on it. They do need more tools. They've asked for more resources. We have a budget process that's coming up when we return in September. Let's make sure that in the budget process that is a very high priority because right now it's not a high enough priority. We need to make sure it is."

On only assigning blame for these shootings to the people that commit the crime:

"My heart breaks as everybody's does when you see what happened. There's no place for it, whether it's somebody that's racist that hates a certain ethnic group. There's no place for those kinds of attacks and attacking people based on their ethnicity. But to try to assign blame to somebody else, I think, is a very slippery slope because the President's no more responsible for that shooting as your next guest, Bernie Sanders, is for my shooting. And [Bernie Sanders] is not, by the way, responsible. The shooter is responsible.

"What we need to do is find those people that have slipped through the cracks. We've seen it in shooting after shooting, Sutherland Springs, Charleston, even in Dayton. He had a hit list and a rape list and yet none of that was in the system. Let's make sure these background check systems work properly and are rooting out the people that shouldn't be able to legally purchase a gun, but currently are because the system hasn't worked."

…

"Well, first of all, the President was very clear just the other day that there's no place for this. He spoke out against racism. He spoke out against these kinds of attacks. And so, to try to assign blame, you know, go look at some of these presidential candidates who made some of the most ridiculous statements. I mean, Joe Biden just said that he was Vice President when the Parkland kids came and met with him. He wasn't Vice President. You know, so some of these things that are being said are beyond ridiculous.

"I know they're running for president, and they might not like Donald Trump's views, but stop this ridiculous assignment of blame to somebody other than the person who's responsible. And again, you know, you talk to other people who were motivators. Look at the Dayton shooter and what his motivations were. Is anybody asking about that? Anybody from the left who he was inspired by? There's no place for it.

"The shooter's responsible. Let's try to identify these shooters in a better way, which right now we're working on doing. Let's put more emphasis there."

On Democrats' failure to address gun violence despite claims that it is a top priority for the Party:

"The NRA has millions of supporters and people that are actual members just like any other group that can advocate for an issue. They're advocating for something that's in the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment. But let's look at some of the things that Michael Bloomberg has talked about. You know, he says he wants a better background check system, yet every single person that he defeated last year, that he spent over about $100 million of his money to defeat, voted to fix the background check system last year. What's his real motivation? I mean he literally spent about a $100 million of his money for members of Congress who voted ‘yes' to fix the background check system and close the background check system loopholes. Again, I mean, I'm sure he says certain things, but what is his real motivation when he spent that much money to defeat people who voted to fix the system?

"By the way, Margaret, name one single bill that Nancy Pelosi put on Barack Obama's desk when they had the House, Senate, and the White House to address any of these issues. There was not one bill she put on his desk.

"We put a bill on Donald Trump's desk last year to fix the NICS system, the background check system, and he signed it into law and is actually working to make it address those loopholes, the people that fell through the cracks. He banned bump stocks, which were used in the Las Vegas shooting. Those by the way were legalized when Barack Obama was president. Donald Trump is the one who said, ‘This shouldn't happen.' He banned bump stocks, and they're not legal anymore."

Transcribed remarks from Fox News' Fox & Friends:

On the work Congress has done to improve background checks:

"Well, you know, if you look at where we start with the red flag laws. There have definitely been some due process concerns that have been raised. Even in Connecticut when Sandy Hook happened, they had a red flag law on the books. Let's focus on actually what we can do to solve the problem and Congress has passed some things. Everybody wants to act like there's been nothing done. There are over hundreds, at least, of gun laws on the books.

"We just last year passed the Fix NICS bill. This is a bill that really went to the heart of a lot of the problems with the background check system, where you had people falling through the cracks, people with mental illnesses. You look at the Parkland shooting where he was going around telling people, ‘I'm going to be a professional school shooter.' The FBI had a file on him and decided not to follow it up. We need to fix those problems, and make sure that the bad people that we identify… In over 80% of mass shootings, somebody knew they were going to do it beforehand and, in many cases, alerted law enforcement or somebody else, and nothing was done.

"I think that's really what drives people crazy. Congress did come together on the Fix NICS bill. President Trump signed it into law by the way, and also President Trump did ban bump stocks. That's what was used in Las Vegas. It was Barack Obama who legalized bump stocks. It was Donald Trump who said, ‘No, we're going to stop this,' and it's now banned."

On condemning Democrats' attempt to assign blame to President Trump and his supporters for the recent mass shootings:

"And what's [Rep. Joaquin Castro's] real objective? Of course, ironically, there were some people he put on that list that also contributed to him. So what is he really suggesting? When you see people trying to personalize and blame somebody else other than the shooter, that's the real concern I have.

"Look, you saw almost every presidential candidate immediately trying to assign blame to Donald Trump. …First of all, even in my shooting, nobody was to blame but the shooter. Clearly it was politically motivated, but whoever was the motivation that the shooter used is not to blame. It's the shooter that's to blame. We shouldn't have other people, especially politicians that have their own agenda, trying to immediately after a shooting, instead of praying for the victims and trying to find out what really happened, they are trying to propose and talk about their bill that they filed and promote their political agenda. There's no place for that."

On the importance of giving law enforcement the tools they need to stop shootings before they occur:

"I think you've got to look at the people that are working to really solve the problem. Look at the Department of Homeland Security. Literally, in his first week, the new acting secretary put together a task force to focus on a lot of the recruiting that's being done, and the radicalization that's being done online on social media, where they're literally trying to go and find people and they're being successful, unfortunately, at growing and kind of brewing this homegrown domestic terrorism. We need to focus more on rooting that out. The FBI, actually, has been focusing some new resources there. Let's make sure they've got the tools they need because again, the telltale signs are there too many times before a mass shooting and nothing's done about it. After, they say, ‘Let's go in and limit the rights of law-abiding citizens.'"

Issues:2nd AmendmentNational Security

-=-=-=

By Rachael Bade06/14/2017

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, the Louisiana Republican shot in the hip at a congressional baseball practice Wednesday morning, is always on the move as the third-highest ranking member of the House of Representatives.

The 51-year-old fifth-term congressman, a New Orleans native, is the top vote counter for House GOP leadership, a tough job in an increasingly divided Washington.

He’s known on the Hill for his jovial attitude and for being a huge Pelican State enthusiast: passing out trinkets from Louisiana, scribbling lists of top-notch restaurants to visit for Hill staff or reporters vacationing on his home turf, or taking members of Congress to visit a Gulf of Mexico oil rig to learn his state’s economy.

First elected in 2008, Scalise has risen through the ranks to become the chamber’s top whip counter. He developed a taste for politics at a young age, when he would ride a red, white and blue-decorated bike around his neighborhood and encourage anyone who would listen to head to the polls and vote, according to a “Politics in America” almanac profile.

Scalise registered as a Republican the day he turned 18 and joined College Republicans at Louisiana State University, where he also volunteered for George H.W. Bush’s 1988 campaign.

Local Republicans recruited Scalise in 1995 to run for the Louisiana House of Representatives, where he went on to serve for 12 years. After spending a few months in the state Senate, Scalise ran for Congress, where for a time he was considered one of the more conservative members of the House.

He quickly developed a reputation as a big supporter of the National Rifle Association. He even led a fight in the late 1990s against a New Orleans mayor who had sued several gun manufacturers in an attempt to recoup the city’s costs for curbing violent crime, according to a CQ profile. Scalise wrote a bill barring cities from taking businesses to court over what their customers did after purchasing products.

NEW YORK, NY - DECEMBER 12: U.S. House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) speaks to the media after a meeting at Trump Tower on December 12, 2016 in New York City. President-elect Donald Trump continues to hold meetings with potential members of his cabinet at his office. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Scalise remains in critical condition after mass shooting

By Louis Nelson, John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman | June 14, 2017 08:19 AM

Scalise also used his perch on the Hill to advocate for Louisiana in 2010 after the BP oil rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico, the largest oil spill in U.S. history. He sponsored legislation giving fines related to the spill to coastal states to rebuild.

At the end of 2012, Scalise ran and was elected to lead the Republican Study Committee, defeating Tom Graves despite the Georgia Republican’s endorsement from former RSC chairmen. He steered the group, which includes more than 160 members from the more conservative half of the conference, into supporting legislative positions to rein in federal spending, sometimes at odds with leadership. He also used his post to rail against then-President Barack Obama for advocating what Scalise called a “radical” left-wing agenda.

In June 2014, then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) unexpected primary defeat by conservative challenger Dave Brat triggered a leadership scuffle that landed Scalise on his current trajectory.

When then-Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) ran for Cantor’s position, Scalise likewise jumped into the race to replace McCarthy, defeating senior Republican Peter Roskam of Illinois, who many considered the favorite, and conservative Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.).

Republican Southerners, who had no representation in leadership, were particularly excited to install one of their own near the top.

Scalise found himself engulfed in a controversy when a Louisiana blogger reported that Scalise had given a speech in 2002 to the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, a white supremacist group founded by former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

Scalise apologized and said he regretted that decision, explaining that he was there to drum up support for a tax bill in the state legislature — not to support the group’s cause. Leadership backed him, curbing any political fallout. But ultimately it was his longtime friendship with Louisiana Democratic Rep. Cedric Richmond, a black lawmaker who had served with Scalise in the state House, that saved Scalise. Richmond vouched for him.

Scalise is married and has two children.

Jonah Goldberg: Republican voters are driving the GOP's gun agenda, not the NRA

By Jonah GoldbergColumnist

May 31, 2022

In 2020, Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana was the top recipient of money from members of the “gun rights” industry. According to Open Secrets, his campaign received a total of $142,653 for the 2019-2020 cycle. That put the so-called gun lobby at 33 on the list, far behind other industries like real estate and accounting. Health professionals alone gave roughly seven times more money to Scalise ($1,072,904) than the gun lobby. Meanwhile, individuals who simply put down “retired” instead of any industry at all, gave 100 times more, just shy of $14 million.

Scalise’s corporate-connected and PAC donors tell a similar story. The largest donors were associated with Votesane PAC. They gave $106,500. Below that were the PACs and employees of various banks, airlines, military contractors and other businesses, all with contributions of less than $50,000. You won’t find on that list the National Rifle Assn., Smith & Wesson or anybody else from the “gun lobby.”

And yet, Scalise often touts his A+ rating from the NRA. For some opponents of gun rights, this is shocking since Scalise was gravely wounded in 2017 by a mass shooter. The brush with death, Scalise would say a few months later (in the wake of another mass shooting), only “fortified” his support for gun rights.

Say what you will about Scalise’s views on guns, they weren’t “bought and paid for” by the gun lobby. The same holds for the Republican Party generally. In 2020, the NRA gave less than $1 million directly to candidates — putting it 996th on the list of top donors. It spent $5.4 million on lobbying, making it the 169th-most lavish lobbyist.

As Stephen Gutowski, founder of the Reload, a site focused on gun issues and politics, wrote in the Atlantic, since 2012, “the NRA’s highest contribution ranking has been 294th, and its highest lobbying ranking has been 85th.”

And yet, this claim that politicians like Scalise, and the GOP generally, are “owned” by the gun lobby is an article of faith for many. When some Republicans made the questionable choice of speaking at the NRA convention in Texas, just days after the horrific mass shooting in Uvalde, the New York Times declared, “There is no better manifestation of the gun lobby’s total capture of so much of the G.O.P.”

This gets the political reality backward: The “gun lobby” is the tail, not the dog. Indeed, the NRA is a hot mess, and has probably never been weaker. It’s even tried to declare bankruptcy. Whatever you think of its policies, the GOP is not captured by puppet masters who have its “balls in a money clip,” in Jimmy Kimmel’s colorful phrase. The Republicans are following the will of their voters, or at least the voters who reliably turn out and vote on gun issues, particularly in GOP primaries.

Indeed, there’s something cowardly, lazy and undemocratic about blaming everything on the gun lobby. Politicians and activists have a tendency to pick fights with the opponents they want, rather than the ones they have. By demonizing a few unaccountable villains pulling the strings behind the curtains, advocates for tighter gun laws don’t have to confront the reality that millions of Americans simply disagree with them. A Pew Research Center survey in 2021, for instance, found that around half of Americans don’t believe that stricter gun ownership laws will lead to fewer mass shootings.

The truth is that special interests, like the NRA (or for that matter, Planned Parenthood), can have influence on policy by helping to motivate and mobilize voters.

Some blame the Senate’s structure because it gives a boost to red states. Thanks to trends like polarization and sorting, support for guns is much stronger in red states where gun ownership is higher. But ultimately, neither the filibuster nor the Senate are the source of the stalemate, voters are. And if your strategy for passing sweeping new legislation requires getting rid of the Senate, then you don’t have a strategy.

All of this may change because of the horror in Uvalde and I certainly hope lawmakers find some workable reforms, even if comprehensive solutions are unlikely. But if Uvalde does break the logjam, it won’t be because the gun lobby loosened its grip. It will be because voters changed their minds.

@JonahDispatch

-=-=

AN 11 24

COMM DR

Government watchdogs on Wednesday said they are "not going anywhere" and will continue pushing for U.S. President-elect Donald Trump to face accountability for his 34 felony counts and other alleged crimes, even as the Republican and his allies threatened the special counsel who has been prosecuting him.

"Trump will still be sentenced for the 34 felony counts on which he has been convicted, and other pending legal proceedings must

also move forward," saidRobert Weissman and Lisa Gilbert, co-presidents of consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, which spent Trump's first term exposing corruption and unethical profiteering in his administration.

The group pledged to "mobilize Americans to resist Trump's agenda of cruelty and corruption" as it was reported that Special Counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents and his role in the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, was in talks with the DOJ to wind down the federal prosecutions.

Under DOJ policy, a sitting president cannot face prosecution while in office.

Smith filed charges against Trump over the allegations, but the cases were thrown into uncertainty by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in July that held presidents have legal immunity for "official acts" while in office.

In legal filings that were unsealed last month, Smith argued Trump should not be entitled to immunity from prosecution because he "resorted to crimes" when he attempted to overturn the 2020 election results.

Trump said in recent weeks that he would fire Smith "within two seconds" if he won the presidency.

His allies, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), have also demanded an end to what they call "lawfare" against Trump, with Scalise sayingWednesday that the election results proved American voters want federal and state officials in to "immediately terminate the politically motivated prosecutions of President Donald Trump."

Graham wrote on the social media platform X on Wednesday, addressing Smith and his team, that "it is time to look forward to a new chapter in your legal careers as these politically motivated charges against President Trump hit a wall."

Trump was convicted of 34 state felony counts in New York for falsifying business records related to a hush-money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. He is currently scheduled to be sentenced on November 26, but his lawyers are likely to ask for an indefinite delay. There's also state case in Georgia stemming from Trump's attempts to reverse his 2020 loss.

The work of ensuring Trump is "not about the law," said Weissman and Gilbert, "will continue in earnest [and] will be more important in 2025 than ever before."

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said Trump's victory "is making the urgency of accountability and checks on the presidency clearer than ever before."

"We're going to keep standing up against corruption and authoritarianism," said CREW, "as we have been for years."

Public Citizen was among more than 200 groups that announced a virtual eventcalled "Making Meaning of the Moment," planned for November 7 at 8:00 pm. More than 20,000 people had registered as of Wednesday evening.

===

an 9 24

no twt?

In the hours after far-right **U.S. Rep. Clay Higgins** posted a racist tweet attacking Haitian immigrants, top Republicans including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, moved to protect their fellow Louisiana Congressman.

Zeteo media correspondent Justin Baragona posted a screenshot of Higgin’s widely-condemned tweet, which read: “Lol. These Haitians are wild. Eating pets, vudu, nastiest country in the western hemisphere, cults, slapstick gangsters… but damned if they don’t feel all sophisticated now, filing charges against our President and VP. All these thugs better get their mind right and their ass out of our country before January 20th.”

Higgins’ comment about “our President and VP” referred to Republican nominees Donald Trump and JD Vance, who are facing criminal charges for “pet-eating” lies attacking Haitians in the state of Ohio.

MSNBC host, legal contributor and correspondent Katie Phang remarked: “Higgins doesn’t try to hide the racism or the xenophobia. Instead, he decides that full bore ’round ‘em up and string ‘em up’ energy was the way to go.”

Congressman Higgins has not apologized, and appears unrepentant.

READ MORE: ‘Hostile Takeovers’: Trump Says Immigrants Are Using ‘Massive Machine Gun-Type Equipment’

“Despite the backlash and ultimate decision to take down the post after he said he prayed on it, Higgins told CNN he stood by his demeaning comments,” the news network reported.

“It’s all true,” Higgins said of his post. “I can put up another controversial post tomorrow if you want me to. I mean, we do have freedom of speech. I’ll say what I want.”

“It’s not a big deal to me. It’s like something stuck to the bottom of my boot. Just scrape it off and move on with my life.”

House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries issued a strong statement condemning Higgins, his remarks, and “extreme MAGA Republicans.”

“The disgusting statement by Clay Higgins about the Haitian community is vile, racist and beneath the dignity of the United States House of Representatives,” Jeffries’s statement begins. “He must be held accountable for dishonorable conduct that is unbecoming of a Member of Congress. Clay Higgins is an election-denying, conspiracy- peddling racial arsonist who is a disgrace to the People’s House. This is who they have become. Republicans are the party of Donald Trump, Mark Robinson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Clay Higgins and Project 2025. The extreme MAGA Republicans in the House are unfit to govern.”

Saying he had “heard about” the tweet, Speaker Johnson told reporters, “Clay Higgins is a dear friend of mine and a colleague from Louisiana, and a very frank and outspoken person. He’s also a very principled man. And, I think, he tweeted – I didn’t even see it but he tweeted something today about Haitians.”

The Speaker appeared to dismiss a reporter when she interjected that Rep. Higgins had “told them to get out of the country by Jan 20th.”

IFrame Content

“Well, OK,” Johnson responded, seemingly irritated by the reporter’s remark. “He was approached on the floor by colleagues who said that was offensive. He said he went to the back – I just talked to him about it – he said he went to the back and he prayed about it, and he regretted it, and he pulled the post down. That’s what you want a gentleman to do. I’m sure he probably regrets the language he used. But you know, we move forward. We believe in redemption around here.”

IFrame Content

U.S. Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV), the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, quickly moved to have the House censure Congressman Higgins, but House Republican Majority Leader Steve Scalise, also from Louisiana, defended Higgins.

READ MORE: ‘Ain’t Taking Anybody’s Jobs’: Trump Blasted Over Haitian Lies, This Time in Pennsylvania

Scalise, who reportedly once boasted he was “David Duke without the baggage“—a reference to the former KKK Grand Wizard whom Higgins reportedly supported in a Louisiana gubernatorial race—stood on the House floor and opposed the motion to censure Higgins.

“First of all, the tweet has been deleted already, and removed, but I object to the motion,” Scalise said, as roars of anger from the House grew loud. “And if we want to go through every comment, tweet from the other side, we’ll be happy to do it.”

Scalise was interrupted, as he had not been recognized to speak on the floor.

“You would be appalled by some of the things that have not been removed,” Scalise continued, after his microphone appeared to be cut off.

IFrame Content

U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), who last year was in the running to be Speaker of the House and this year rumored to have been on Donald Trump’s vice presidential shortlist, and U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-TX), tried to minimize the impact of Higgins’ attack on Haitians.

“Both Reps. Byron Donalds and Wesley Hunt said they don’t think Higgins’s post hurt Donald Trump with Black voters,” Semafor’s Kadia Goba reported.

Congressman Hunt told her, “Everybody knows who they’re going to vote for at this point.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

---

an 6 23

no lnx

Freedom Caucus failed to cause an economic catastrophe by forcing the nation into default. They couldn’t get organized enough to challenge Kevin McCarthy’s speakership, partly because no one else wants the job. So they’ve resorted to the one thing they can achieve: They shut down the House of Representatives. The procedural stunt they pulled on Tuesday kicked off a rebellion that has prevented the House from doing anything of substance for the remainder of the week. A defeated McCarthy gave in Wednesday evening, sent everyone home for the weekend, and worsened his leadership crisis by blaming the whole mess on his number two, Majority Leader Steve Scalise. He’s made a very big mess for himself.

On Tuesday, 11 of the rebels pulled their surprise, voting with Democrats to defeat the procedural vote that set the rules for a couple of bills that were supposed to come to the floor. This is always a party-line vote. The minority always unanimously votes against it, the majority always unanimously votes for it, by rote. This was the first time in 21 years that a rule vote was defeated. Since then, the group has dug in and refused to agree to allow any bill to move to the floor until they get concessions from McCarthy.

McCarthy’s self-proclaimed great “victory” on the debt ceiling is now history. His effort Wednesday to try to gloss this over as a spat that would make his next wins even bigger and better has been exposed as so much hot air. He made everything worse by turning on his own leadership team. “The majority leader runs the floor,” McCarthy told reporters, insinuating that Scalise had screwed up.

It’s Scalise’s fault, he insists, pointing to one of the beefs the maniacs brought up as a cause for their rebellion. Rep. Andrew Clyde, Georgia, has a controversial gun bill that Scalise has agreed to bring to the floor. According to Scalise, he’s been whipping it but hasn’t found enough votes. According to Clyde, Scalise threatened to never allow a vote on the bill if Clyde didn’t support the team on the debt ceiling.

The real problem, according to Scalise, is the promises McCarthy made to the extremists to get to be speaker. The maniacs say McCarthy broke those promises with the debt ceiling bill. The reality—and Scalise points this out, too—is that no one but McCarthy and that crew know what those promises were. Not having it in writing, not having it in public, and not even cluing anyone else in leadership in on the deal means that the Freedom Caucus can make up any damned thing and say McCarthy promised it.

“So I still don’t know what those agreements were. Whatever they are, [conservatives] feel that the agreements were broken. That’s got to get resolved. Hopefully it does,” Scalise said. So either McCarthy dealt in total secrecy, not even telling his leadership team the constraints they were operating under with the extremists, or the relationship between these two is so bad Scalise would lie about it.

McCarthy also created this mess by telling everybody what they wanted to hear back in April, to get the House’s original debt ceiling bill passed. The bill was essentially the Freedom Caucus’ wish list for American dystopia, and plenty of regular Republicans didn’t like it. McCarthy essentially told them that this bill was just symbolic, that it was important for the team to get something passed to force President Joe Biden into negotiations with them. It would never become law, he said. Meanwhile he was telling the Freedom Caucus that he would hold tough on their bill, and not agree to a “watered-down version.”

:{:{}:

}:

The problem here is no one can be trusted to be operating in good faith. McCarthy has clearly lied to get what he wanted—first the speakership and then a debt limit deal. The Freedom Caucus people will lie about anything and everything just because. The rest of the Republicans can’t trust the maniacs, but McCarthy has also proven that they can’t trust him either. Neither can his own leadership team. That leaves the House in chaos. As it stands, nothing can move forward until the handful of extremists allow it.

McCarthy has two choices: He can cave and give the Freedom Caucus total control of the House, or he can try to form a coalition government with the Democrats. If he chooses the former, he’s opening himself up to more extortion. His second choice, to appeal to the more moderate voices in his conference and work with the Democrats, depends on whether the Democrats are willing to help him out. They shouldn’t do so without some guarantees locked in, because by now everyone knows McCarthy can’t be trusted.

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

DC insider predicts what will happen in the biggest battle between House GOP and White House ›

House GOP quickly removes its ‘Commitment to America' shortly after making it public online ›

House GOP 'whistleblower' suspended by FBI for leaking classified info: report ›

RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB

House GOP drops plan to hold FBI director in contempt ›

House GOP tees up contempt vote for FBI director as Biden probe ... ›

Tensions simmer in House GOP as party leaders squabble over ... ›

---

---

https://www.alternet.org/2022/06/steve-scalise-banning-airplaines-911/

so no ban gun after uvalde; interesting, he has to spk b/c he got shot? ecosys niche?

---

5 22

scalise:

just sent this letter to Biden demanding he end his anti-American energy agenda.He needs to: 1. Remove red tape for energy infrastructure 2. End the drilling moratorium on federal land 3. Approve pipelines & LNG export permits 4. End woke climate activism by federal agencies

:{:{}:

}:

:{:{}:

}:

retweet by MB MD

president Biden MUST listen to

@HouseGOP

 and #FliptheSwitch [drake, tiktok some kinda coattail effect?]tounleash American energy independence.

5 22

scalise:  march 2022?

just sent this letter to Biden demanding he end his anti-American energy agenda. He needs to: 1. Remove red tape for energy infrastructure 2. End the drilling moratorium on federal land 3. Approve pipelines & LNG export permits 4. End woke climate activism by federal agencies

Gary Palmer on Twitter: "American energy independence ...https://twitter.com › USRepGaryPalmer › status

American energy independence makes America stronger and the world safer. ... It's time to #FlipTheSwitch and unleash American energy production.

Michael Burgess, MD on Twitter: "President Biden MUST listen ...https://twitter.com › michaelcburgess › status

and #FliptheSwitch to unleash American energy independence. Quote Tweet ... Just sent this letter to Biden demanding he end his anti-American energy agenda.

E&C Republicans Urge Biden to Flip the Switch for More ...https://republicans-energycommerce.house.gov › news

Mar 21, 2022 — Rep. John Joyce, M.D. (R-PA): “It's time to return not only to American energy independence, but American energy dominance. It's time ...

https://republicans-energycommerce.house.gov/news/ec-republicans-urge-biden-to-flip-the-switch-for-more-american-energy/

---

no twt vid

BLOG

E&C Republicans Urge Biden to Flip the Switch for More American Energy

03.21.22

:{:{}:

}:

Energy and Commerce Republicans continue to lead and urge President Joe Biden toflip the switch and boost American energy production to lower costs, create jobs, and strengthen America’s geopolitical power.

Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA): “Energy is foundational to everything we do.

[…]

“With an all-the-above strategy, we can again say ‘yes’ to America’s global leadership and lower energy prices. I continue to urge my colleagues across the aisle to work with us.Let’s flip the switchon American energy to ensure a better life and more secure future for all.”

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA):“President Biden wants to ‘build back better.’ What he doesn’t realize is that, first, we must be able to build. Many otherwise ‘shovel-ready’ infrastructure projects get trapped in bureaucratic gridlock for years.

“Developers routinely find themselves navigating environmental reviews that require up to over 60 authorizations from as many as 13 different federal agencies.”

Rep. Larry Bucshon, M.D. (R-IN):

“This administration is asking countries like Iran and Venezuela to compensate for the ban on Russian imports and ignoring American energy producers.”

“I urge the administration toflip the switch and reduce our dependence on foreign energyby increasing production of oil and gas at home. We can do this!”

Rep. John Joyce, M.D. (R-PA): “It’s time to return not only to American energy independence, but American energy dominance. It’s time to get to work for the American people.”[ gridlock aka GOP obstructionism/ polarization]

Check out these highlights of Energy and Commerce Republicans exposing what’s behind the pain at the pump in our joint forum with the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Select Climate Committee:

Rep. Michael Burgess, M.D. (R-TX): “By the stroke of a pen on his first day in office, President Biden weakened America’s energy independence by rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, killing the Keystone XL pipeline, and unlawfully blocking new energy development on federal lands.

Rep. David B. McKinley (R-WV):“The Biden Administration admits the quickest way to lower the price of gas is increasing production. Yet they still prioritize ending the use of fossil fuels over providing relief at the pump for Americans.”

Rep. Neal Dunn (R-FL):“We cannot deflect the blame to Russia’s inhumane invasion purely. Gas prices were already skyrocketing thanks to President Biden completely ending fossil fuel projects on day one.”

Rep. John Joyce, M.D. (R-PA):“This energy crisis is one of the most important issues we need to be addressing right now in the House of Representatives. Inflation is surging, gas prices are skyrocketing, and the Biden administration refuses act.

:{:{}:

}:

“It’s time for Biden to take the responsibility for what his policies are doing to hardworking American citizens. It’s time for Biden to care more about families in Pennsylvania than he does the Green New Deal. It’s time to drill American oil.”

Rep. Larry Bucshon, M.D. (R-IN): “We have the example in Europe (Germany) of what happens to a country when they get so far ahead and so much more worried about where they’re going on clean energy and they fail to look at the timeline of what’s doable and how that impacts their economy.”

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA): “I asked my constituents…how are high gas prices impacting you? Here are some are the responses I got.

“Mark can’t visit his grandkids…Amanda is worried she will have to quit her job in home health because the commute is too expensive.”

Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-ND): “Two days ago, Secretary Granholm was celebrating that she issued two permits…but apparently that wasn’t good enough because yesterday she started talking about gouging.”

Rep. Gary Palmer (R-AL): “The House Progressive Caucus this week offered ideas to the Biden administration calling on the President to declare a ‘national climate emergency’ and to ban fossil fuel leases. We’ve got the administration bragging about 9,000 permits but you’ve got the progressive caucus calling for a complete ban on fossil fuels.”

SUBCOMMITTEES Energy (117th Congress)

ISSUES Energy Infrastructure

---

The real way to support Ukraine is to flip the switch ... - The Hill  https://thehill.com › congress-blog › energy-environment

Mar 3, 2022 — One of the best ways for the U.S. to apply pressure while promoting peace is to unleash American energy production.

It's Time To Unleash American Energy Independence - The ...https://www.theintelligencer.net › opinion › 2022/04 › i...

Apr 2, 2022 — At peak capacity, the pipeline would deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day to American refineries. The president also put a moratorium on new ...

Missing: #fliptheswitch

The Time Is Now for US Energy Independence - Citizens ...https://www.cagw.org › thewastewatcher › time-now-us...

Mar 23, 2022 — U.S. energy independence will stabilize and lower fuel prices for ... XL pipeline would not have resulted in the release of oil right now, ...

Members of Alabama's GOP congressional delegation urge ...https://yellowhammernews.com › Politics

Mar 8, 2022 — President Trump knew the importance of energy independence and made ... It's time to #FlipTheSwitch and unleash American energy production.

Rob Wittman column: We must unleash American energy ...https://richmond.com › opinion › columnists › rob-wittma...

3 days ago — Russia's barbaric and unprovoked attack on Ukraine highlighted and elevated the need for American energy independence — but it did not create ...

Missing: #fliptheswitch

President Biden's continued assault... - Rep. Larry Bucshon https://www.facebook.com › RepLarryBucshon › videos

PREVIEW

1:20

President Biden's continued assault on American-made energy has killed jobs, ... Biden to #FlipTheSwitch and unleash American energy ⬇️.

Facebook · Rep. Larry Bucshon · Mar 17, 2022

The HEAT Report - Republican Whip - Steve Scalise  https://www.republicanwhip.gov › news › the-heat-repo...

introduced the American Energy Independence From Russia Act, which would immediately approve the Keystone XL pipeline, unleash U.S. LNG exports to boost natural ...

---

---

an 3 22

One Republican lawmaker is facing criticism for his attempt to rewrite the history behind former President Donald Trump's so-called "perfect call."

The latest fact-check is in response to a press conference on Tuesday, March 8 where Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) was asked to recall what transpired during Trump's 2019 phone call to Ukrainian President and "consider what 'rethinking' he had done on Trump withholding of foreign aid in hopes of luring the nation to announce an investigation of the Biden family."

In response to that statement, Scalise said:

"Zelensky had called President Trump to thank him for the leadership that he provided. In fact, when Zelensky got elected, he said he modeled his campaign after President Trump's -- and ultimately he got the relief money he was asking for."

CNN's Chris Cillizza analyzed what actually transpired during the call which the former president described as "perfect," noting the first words during the call were made by Trump, not Zelensky. "Congratulations on a great victory," Trump said to Zelensky at the time. "We all watched from the United States, and you did a terrific job. The way you came from behind, somebody who wasn't given much of a chance, and you ended up winning easily. It's a fantastic achievement. Congratulations."

So, according to Cillizza, Scalise's remarks are flawed. Zelensky did not place a call to Trump to "thank him for the leadership he provided."

During the call, Zelensky also noted that saying, "The first time you called me to congratulate me when I won my presidential election, and the second time you are now calling me when my party won the parliamentary election. I think I should run more often so you can call me more often, and we can talk over the phone more often."

Cillizza also pointed out other notable Trump quotes during the call:

During the call, Trump repeatedly reminded Zelensky of how much the United States has done for Ukraine, and according to Cillizza, "and how little, comparatively -- Ukraine does for the US."Then, Trump went in for the kill asking Zelensky to "look into the Bidens' activities in Ukraine."

Although the call was criticized at the time, Cillizza notes that it is far worse today.

---

https://www.alternet.org/2021/10/big-lie-2655289409/

---

key in killing carbon tax

---

https://www.alternet.org/2021/10/exxonmobil-climate-tax/

no lnx

The truth behind ExxonMobil’s claims to support a carbon tax

Elliott Negin and Independent Media Institute October 13, 2021

When then-ExxonMobil lobbyist Keith McCoy conceded in a secretly recorded video in May that the oil giant voiced support for a carbon tax only because it assumed it would never happen, ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods said the company was "shocked by these interviews" and stood by its "commitments to working on finding solutions to climate change."

Wood's reaction was reminiscent of Captain Louis Renault feigning surprise to discover gambling at Rick's Café in the 1942 film "Casablanca." After quietly pocketing his winnings, Renault justifies closing down the nightclub by exclaiming, "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!"

Woods was shocked? Really? Just one look at his company's financial records would show that despite claiming to endorse a carbon tax—initially in a cynical attempt to derail a cap-and-trade bill that was under consideration in 2009—ExxonMobil has funneled millions of dollars over the last decade to lawmakers who staunchly oppose the idea.

Backing Climate Science Deniers

One tried-and-true way corporations ensure access to Congress is by making campaign contributions. Although there may not be a verifiable quid pro quo, donations guarantee access, and access guarantees influence.

So, given ExxonMobil's professed support for a carbon tax, one might reasonably assume that the company's political action committee (PAC) and employees would back lawmakers who sponsor such legislation and, over time, withdraw their funding for senators and representatives who stand in the way.

In fact, the opposite is true.

During the video interview, McCoy—who at the time was ExxonMobil's senior director of federal relations—compared lobbying Congress with fishing.

"When you have an opportunity to talk to a member of Congress," he said, "I liken it to fishing, right? You know you have bait, you throw that bait out…. And… [then you start to] reel them in…. They're a captive audience. They know they need you. And I need them."

The goal, he explained, is to develop a close relationship with legislative staff. "You want to be able to go to the chief… and say, look, we've got this issue, we need Congressman So-and-So to be able to either introduce this bill, we need him to make a floor statement, we need him to send a letter," he said. "You name it, we've asked for everything."

Not quite everything. ExxonMobil apparently has not asked for a carbon tax, notwithstanding the fact that the company was one of the founding members of the Climate Leadership Council (CLC), a bipartisan, industry-supported group, which was formed in 2017 to promote a carbon tax, and a year later, the company pledged to give $1 million over a two-year period to Americans for Carbon Dividends(AFCD), the council's lobbying arm. Over the last decade, members of both houses have voted on a handful of carbon tax-related amendments and nonbinding resolutions. In every case, a sizable majority who received donations from ExxonMobil's PAC and employees rejected the idea. For example:

In March 2015, the Senate voted 58 to 42 to pass a budget amendment prohibiting a carbon tax. Thirty of the 40 senators who had received ExxonMobil campaign contributions since 2010, including amendment sponsor Roy Blunt (R-MO), voted in favor of the prohibition.

In June 2016, the House passed a resolution introduced by Steve Scalise (R-LA) stating that a carbon tax "would be detrimental to American families and businesses" by a 237 to 163 margin. Eighty-five percent of the House members who voted for the resolution had received ExxonMobil political donations since 2013. By contrast, only 26 of the representatives who voted against the resolution—16 percent—had received ExxonMobil money.

In July 2018, the House passed another Scalise-sponsored resolution asserting that "a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy," this time by a 229 to 180 vote. During the 2018 election cycle, 75 percent of the representatives who gave the resolution a thumbs up received ExxonMobil donations. Only 23 percent of the 180 who voted against it got ExxonMobil funding.

The disparity between ExxonMobil's PAC donations to supporters of the July 2018 Scalise resolution and its opponents is even more telling, given that PACs—which can contribute as much as $10,000 to a candidate per two-year cycle—more accurately represent a company's agenda than that of individual employees. The ExxonMobil PAC contributed more than $935,000 to 74 percent of the resolution's supporters, but only $109,500 to opponents during the 2018 election cycle. Scalise, the resolution's sponsor, and 37 of his 48 resolution cosponsors received ExxonMobil PAC contributions.

The most recent congressional carbon tax vote took place in the Senate in February during a round of votes on the pandemic relief bill. John Hoeven (R-ND) sponsored an amendment that would have prohibited such a tax. It was rejected on a strict party-line vote: All 50 Republican senators voted for the amendment; all 50 Democratic senators voted no.

ExxonMobil PAC donations to those senators are mostly party-line, too. Twenty-seven of the 50 Republicans collectively have received $233,000 during the 2018 and 2020 election cycles. Over that same time frame, the PAC contributed just $62,000 to 11 of the Democrats.

Snubbing Carbon Tax Proponents

In January 2018, ExxonMobil Vice President of Public and Government Affairs Suzanne McCarron reaffirmed the company's support for a carbon tax, the Paris climate agreement and other related climate policies in a blog post on the company's website. ExxonMobil, she maintained, is "committed to being part of the solution."

Nevertheless, during the 2018 and 2020 election cycles, ExxonMobil employees and its PAC donated nearly $834,000 to 28 of the 30 senators and 90 of the 109 representatives currently in Congress who, according to the Center for American Progress, still reject the scientific consensus that global temperatures are rising and that burning fossil fuels is largely to blame. The company's PAC funded 16 of the climate science deniers in the Senate and 81 in the House.

Lawmakers sponsoring carbon tax legislation, meanwhile, have enjoyed considerably less support. Over the last two election cycles, climate science deniers in the 117th Congress received six and a half times more from ExxonMobil than carbon tax proponents.

Two carbon tax bills have been introduced in the Senate this session, both by Democrats: one sponsored by Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, which has nine cosponsors, the other by Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin. Three carbon tax bills have been introduced in the House: one sponsored by Pennsylvania's Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick with one cosponsor, another by Connecticut's Democratic Rep. John Larson with two cosponsors, and a third by Florida's Democratic Rep. Theodore Deutch with 84 cosponsors.

Since 2017, ExxonMobil employees and the company PAC have donated only $127,692 to these carbon tax proponents: $35,486 to eight of the 11 sponsors and cosponsors in the Senate and $92,206 to 33 of the 90 sponsors and cosponsors in the House. The PAC contributed to only three of the senators and 12 of the representatives.

Despite this decidedly lopsided funding pattern, McCoy insisted during the interview that ExxonMobil wants to work with lawmakers on carbon tax legislation. "Put forth a bill and we'll show you that we'll support that bill, we'll help you work on that bill," he said. But, he added, "Nobody wants to do that because it's not politically expedient to put forth a tax for people, it just isn't."

In fact, a number of lawmakers have "put forth a bill" to establish a carbon tax in successive congressional sessions, but the company has shown no support, and neither McCoy nor ExxonMobil's other in-house lobbyists have broached the topic with members of Congress since 2018—the same year it announced its $1 million donation to the Climate Leadership Council's lobbying arm, AFCD—according to ExxonMobil's quarterly lobbying reports.

Staffers working for Rep. Larson and Sen. Whitehouse, who both have been sponsoring carbon tax legislation for years, recently verified that ExxonMobil has not expressed support for their respective proposals. Larson introduced a bill in 2009, the same year that ExxonMobil announced that it favored the policy, while Whitehouse first sponsored one in 2014 and has reintroduced a version of it in every session since.

Out of frustration, Whitehouse and his fellow bill sponsor, Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, sent a letter to ExxonMobil in August 2016 criticizing the company for its indifference.

"Regarding ExxonMobil's alleged seven years of support for a carbon fee, we've seen no meaningful evidence of that," the senators wrote. "None of the top executives that make up ExxonMobil's management team has expressed interest in meeting with any of us to discuss the Whitehouse-Schatz proposal or any carbon fee legislation."

Five years later, nothing has changed on that front. A Whitehouse spokesperson says his office is not aware of ExxonMobil supporting any carbon pricing legislation, let alone the senator's.

But McCoy's revelations did have consequences: The Climate Leadership Council kicked ExxonMobil out of the organization in August; the Union of Concerned Scientists and other public interest groups cited McCoy's comments in a "friend of the court" brief filed in Minnesota's climate science deception lawsuit against ExxonMobil; and the House Committee on Oversight and Reform asked McCoy to testify about his company's campaign to mislead the public "about the dangers of fossil fuels and their role in causing global climate change."

As for McCoy's job status, an ExxonMobil spokesperson told E&E News in late September that "McCoy no longer works for the company."

If McCoy does wind up testifying before Congress, he would serve as the opening act for a hearing that the Oversight Committee plans to hold on October 28 featuring his former boss Darren Woods and top executives from other major oil and gas companies. Finally, under oath, Woods and his colleagues will have to answer questions about their decades-long effort to block government action on climate.

Elliott Negin is a senior writer at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

McConnell 'prays' for Manchin and Sinema to help him defeat Biden ... ›

New report details a 'massive lobbying blitz' against Biden's agenda ... ›

'We've asked for everything': Top oil lobbyist caught on tape ... ›

RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB

ExxonMobil gives $1 million to promote a carbon tax-and-dividend ... ›

Exxon's carbon tax proposal: there's a big catch - Vox ›

ExxonMobil lobbyists filmed saying oil giant's support for carbon tax ... ›

---

---

https://www.alternet.org/2021/10/gop-mitch-mcconnell/

corp tax hike?!

salon

After being closely aligned for decades, it appears that Republicans and top business lobbying groups are having a very public falling-out over conservative lawmakers' lack of support for a bipartisan infrastructure deal currently languishing in Congress.

According to digital politics site The Hill, every major business group in Washington, D.C. — including Business Roundtable and the National Association of Manufacturers, among others — has expressed some measure of support for the bill, which was crafted by a group of lawmakers in both parties alongside the White House.

Business groups have long been a key constituency for Republicans, who worked closely with K Street lobbyists to craft a 2017 tax cut that offered hefty benefits to both corporations and the wealthiest Americans. Yet no more than a small handful of Republican members of Congress have agreed to vote for the legislation favored by these groups this time around.

In a conference call with reporters last month Michael Johnson, CEO of the National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association, a longtime conservative-leaning lobby that stands to gain heavily if the bill passes, seemed flabbergasted by Republicans' refusal to vote for such a popular piece of popular piece of legislation, which polls well across most demographics, including conservatives.

"That's why it boggles the mind that the progressives in the House have decided to take a very popular hostage and Republican leadership has decided to not rescue that very popular hostage when they easily could," Johnson said.

So what's behind this right-wing change-of-heart?

Neil Bradley, the executive VP and chief policy officer for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, blamed "misinformation" surrounding the bill during an interview with CQ Roll Call last month — adding that some House GOP members have privately told him that they'd like to vote for the infrastructure deal but feared angering Trump and the new constellation of ultra-conservative groups that were empowered during his tenure.

"I think there are some unfortunate things going on, and I'm being generous with the term unfortunate," Bradley said.

"If this vote today was occurring on the merits of the bill, the outcome wouldn't be in doubt and we'd have a supermajority," he added. "It's not the substance that people are disagreeing with here."

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce in particular has become a flashpoint of conservative ire after endorsing a small number of Democratic candidates in Congressional races last year. The group, along with a number of other influential pro-business organizations, also stopped PAC donations to hundreds of Republican lawmakers who voted to overturn the 2020 election results on the evening of Jan. 6.

Following that news, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has taken to saying the U.S. Chamber "sold out" and that he no longer considers it an ally.

"I didn't even know the Chamber was around anymore," McCarthy told the political newsletter Punchbowl News.

The feud reached a head this week when Republican leaders kicked representatives for the U.S. Chamber off its conference calls.

Brett Horton, the chief of staff for House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., didn't hold back when asked about Republicans shunning the pro-business group.

"People care what their local Chambers of Commerce and business owners have to say, not the U.S. Chamber," Horton told The Hill. "If the U.S. Chamber sent me a meeting request right now, I wouldn't even staff that meeting out to an intern, and I don't see that changing."

In response to being iced out of the Republican inner circle, Axios reported this week, the group abruptly reversed its support for the bill. The Chamber disputed the report by arguing that it still supports the bill "as a stand-alone bill unlinked to the proposed tax and spend reconciliation bill" that it has been linked to from its inception — which makes its support for the infrastructure package merely theoretical.

In addition to the Republicans' beef with business groups over the pending infrastructure legislation, the two sides also clashed over their differing opinions on raising the U.S. debt ceiling this past week. Business groups saw the writing on the wall if Congress decided to default on the country's sizeable debts, and feared catastrophic consequences if the limit was not raised.

But most Republican lawmakers, especially Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, instead concluded that their responsibilities to their constitutents lay in obstructing the Democratic agenda — no matter what.

"Democrats have the full ability to raise the debt ceiling as a part of reconciliation," Cruz told POLITICO on Thursday. "They want political cover."

After a last-minute deal brokered by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the debt ceiling was ultimately raised Thursday night — though only for a few months. McConnell said Saturday that he does not intend to make another deal come December, when the deal will likely expire — regardless of what business groups say.

McConnell's justification for the obstruction appeared to be rooted in a statement Sen. Chuck Schumer made after the Thursday vote, blasting Republican efforts to stymie any change to the debt ceiling.

"I am writing to make it clear that in light of Senator Schumer's hysterics and my grave concerns about the ways that another vast, reckless, partisan spending bill would hurt Americans and help China, I will not be a party to any future effort to mitigate the consequences of Democratic mismanagement," McConnell said in a statement.

---

---

stivers, scalise

https://www.alternet.org/2021/01/house-metal-detector

no lnx twt

Republican lawmakers throw a fit over new metal detectors at the House chamber

Cody Fenwick January 13, 2021

Following the brutal assault on the U.S. Capitol last week by supporters of the president hoping to overturn the election, Congress is stepping up its security. And on Tuesday night, multiple Republican lawmakers expressed their outrage at new metal detectors placed at the entrance of the House chamber.

Officials seem to believe these measures are necessary following the attempted insurrection, especially in light of the fears that Republican members, some of whom have bragged about wanting to bring guns onto the House floor, may have been supportive of the mob.

"There are concerns about the gun-toting members, but also we don't know who they're going to bring to the inauguration who can bypass the metal detectors," on Democratic representative told CNN. "Until there's an investigation and until we understand our colleagues' level of complicity in the attack we don't know how involved they really were. Until we have answers I don't think we should trust them – not all of them of course, but some of them."

Perhaps further raising suspicions, Republicans were furious when they had to enter the chamber on Tuesday.

"Congresswoman Lauren Boebert, who has bragged about her desire to carry a weapon on Capital Hill is currently in a standoff with Capitol Police at the newly installed Metal Detectors outside the chamber doors," CNN's Ryan Nobles reported on Tuesday evening. "Boebert walked through with her bag which set off the mags. She refused to offer the bag over to be searched and is now in a standoff with Cap Police."

He added: "Capitol Police won't let her in until Boebert shows them what is in her bag, she won't and is now standing by the entrance of the chamber. She is respectful but defiant."

On Twitter, she objected to the new policy:

Boebert has been of particular concern because she tweeted out that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had left the chamber in the middle of the Jan.6 invasion by the pro-Trump mob, even though members were told not to share this kind of information for security reasons. Some believe she may have been intentionally trying to give the mob information about one of its targets. Boebert has previously expressed her support for the conspiracy fiction QAnon, though she subsequently said she was not a "follower." She has reportedly been tied to other extremist groups.

She wasn't the only one objecting to the new security measures on Tuesday, other reporters revealed.

Republican Rep. Debbie Lesko of Arizona also complained about the change on Twitter, provoking many critics to point out that metal detectors are accepted at many other parts of life, such as in airports and some schools.

For members of Congress to enter the floor of the U.S. House, we now have to go through intense security measures, on top of the security we already go through. These new provisions include searches and being wanded like criminals. We now live in Pelosi’s communist America!

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

'An act of mass surveillance': India's use of facial recognition tech ... ›

Separate from Those Scanners, Intrusive Airport Pat-Downs Are Par ... ›

'Absolutely chilling': House Democrats briefed on disturbing ... ›

RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB

House installs metal detectors to check lawmakers after Capitol riots ›

Metal detectors installed outside House floor as Democrats express ... ›

Metal detector installed for U.S. House chamber | PBS NewsHour ›

---

---

https://www.mediamatters.org/donald-trump/pro-trump-disinformation-efforts-could-tilt-entire-election-if-media-outlets-and-tech

In January 2017, my colleague Matt Gertz wrote a piece titled “What Journalists Can Do When The President Is A Liar” in which he urged the press to rethink the way presidents are covered in the context of President-elect Donald Trump:

Journalists typically treat presidential statements as both newsworthy and generally trustworthy until proven otherwise. Trump is hardly the first president to dissimulate. But unlike his predecessors, Trump does not lie strategically or rarely. He lies habitually, on matters great and small. By following their typical practice and reporting the president-elect’s comments as both factual and significant, reporters are doing a disservice to their audience, which is left with the impression that what Trump has said is both true and substantive.

Since taking office, Trump has continued to lie about all manner of things, whether it be his false claim that The New York Times sent a letter to subscribers apologizing for negative coverage of his campaign, his wild exaggerations on the size of the crowd at his inauguration, or the more recent and much more consequential laundry list of lies he’s shared about the COVID-19 pandemic this year. The Washington Post’s count of Trump’s lies as president crossed the 20,000 mark on July 9.

Trump was not changed by the office upon his swearing-in, and unfortunately, neither was the press.

Throughout all of this, mainstream media organizations have continued to offer the same level of deference to Trump as they have previous presidents, boosting his objectively false statements on social media and in stories, often without noting that what he said wasn’t true. This is precisely what Gertz was warning against in his 2017 post. Now, this uncritical amplification of Trump’s misinformation comes at a time when the press needs more than ever to shore up its standing as society’s fourth estate, a bulwark against antidemocratic authoritarianism. Instead, this failure of the press has enabled a truly destructive reelection campaign strategy.

With Trump’s potential reelection just weeks away, he and his supporters have ramped up disinformation efforts well aware that there’s no one willing to stop them.

In March, for the first time, Twitter slapped a “manipulated media” label on something tweeted by White House social media director Dan Scavino and retweeted by Trump. The tweet included a video of Democratic nominee Joe Biden making what seemed to be an accidental endorsement of Trump.

“Excuse me. We can only reelect Donald Trump,” Biden says in the edited clip, omitting the second half of his statement. “Excuse me. We can only reelect Donald Trump if in fact we get engaged in this circular firing squad here. It’s got to be a positive campaign,” he says in the full video.

On August 29, Trump ally and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) shared a video on Twitter that edited the words said during an interview with Biden by activist Ady Barkan, who has amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and uses assistive technology to speak. Scalise added the words “for police” to a question Barkan asked about funding things that might mitigate crime such as social services and mental health counseling. The goal of Scalise’s deceptive editing was to make it seem as though Biden was in favor of defunding the police, a position he has repeatedly said he does not support.

Twitter again added a “manipulated media” flag to Scalise’s tweet following backlash. Scalise later took the post down, but stood by the video.

On August 30, Scavino shared another edited clip. In this one, the clip superimposed an image of Biden over footage from a 2011 interview between a Bakersfield, California-based news show and actor Harry Belafonte. This was edited together with a snoring sound effect to make it look as though Biden had fallen asleep in the middle of a TV appearance, though this obviously was not true. Twitter again applied the “manipulated media” flag to the post, leaving it up. It wasn’t until the video’s copyright holder filed a takedown request that Twitter removed the post altogether.

Belafonte said of Scavino’s use of that clip, “They keep stooping lower and lower. A technical glitch in an interview I did 9 years ago now becomes another one of their lies, more of their fake news. I beg every sane American-please vote them out. I knew many who gave their life for the right to vote. Never has it been so vital to exercise that right.”

On August 31, Trump’s campaign tweeted a clip of Biden saying, “You won’t be safe in Joe Biden’s America,” a complete distortion of what Biden actually said: “Since they have no agenda or vision for a second term, Trump and Pence are running on this, and I find it fascinating. 'You won't be safe in Joe Biden's America.’ And what's their proof? The violence we're seeing in Donald Trump's America.”

Yet again, Twitter slapped the “manipulated media” label to the post, but not before the video had racked up hundreds of thousands of views. Later, the campaign defended the post, tweeting, “To all the triggered journalists who can’t take a joke about their candidate, it’s not our fault Joe Biden was dumb enough to say this on camera.”

The press and tech companies need to incentivize truthfulness, and that means ensuring that the political and social cost of lying outweighs the benefits.

Would the Trump campaign have posted the deceptively edited clip of Biden if there was a chance that its entire account would be suspended from the platform? Would Trump have repeatedly claimed that just 6% of COVID deaths were actually because of COVID if newspapers and nightly news broadcasts insisted on doing more than just quickly noting that what he said wasn’t true and moving on?

It used to be treated as a scandal when the public learned of an instance of the president lying to the American people, but now it’s just an accepted fact of daily life that something the president says to us today will likely turn out to be untrue. If the press had taken Trump’s candidacy seriously, holding him to the same standards as other candidates, it’s possible he wouldn’t have ever become president. Had journalists stopped offering Trump the benefit of the doubt, he would have been forced to either lie less often or face a barrage of nonstop criticism for his dishonesty. Fact-checking is important, but we’re beyond the point of simply being able to correct our way out of the situation the world is in. Fact checks can’t simply be something brought up in a single segment squeezed between hours of uninterrupted lies, and it cannot be something that gets siloed into its own separate section of news coverage.

The many lies of Trump’s presidency have been enabled by the press and by social media companies afraid to take real action to stop the spread of false information. As November’s election approaches, it’s become clear that disinformation is no longer a tactic for his campaign, but the tactic. The extent to which that tactic will be successful will depend on whether the press is willing to cover his campaign the way it should have all along, and if tech and social media companies are willing to hold him and his allies to the same standards as every other user.

In July, Trump wrongly claimed that Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) issued a document outlining a plan “to abolish our police departments.” In June, he shared a deceptively edited video made to look like a CNN segment. In May, he lied about a “rogue Secretary of State” in Michigan sending 7.7 million absentee ballots to voters across the state. This is who he is, who he’s always been, and who he will always be.

Trump and his allies keep telling lies, and they will continue to do so as long as the benefits of lying outweigh the costs. It’s because of a deferential news media and timid social media companies that the cost of telling blatant lies remains so low. If the worst thing to come of a manipulated Twitter video is a tiny label applied to a tweet long after its engagement has already peaked, it makes perfect sense to continue to spread increasingly brazen false claims and deceptive footage in hopes of influencing voters’ actions.

Once you’ve hit 20,000 lies, what are a few more on the pile?

---

---

---

https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/democracy-wilts-on-the-vine-trump-campaign-resorts-to-lies-conspiracy-theories-and-disinformation-as-biden-leads-in-the-polls/

Reporter Ashley Parker, in an article published in the Washington Post over Labor Day Weekend, discusses some of the ways in which President Donald Trump’s campaign and its allies have been aggressively promoting disinformation — from “doctored and misleading videos” to bogus conspiracy theories.

For example, Parker notes, Trump recently “retweeted footage of a black man violently pushing a white woman on a subway platform under the caption, ‘Black Lives Matter/Antifa’ — but the man was not affiliated with either group, and the video was shot in October (2019).” And according to Parker, “White House Social Media Director Dan Scavino shared a manipulated video that falsely showed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden seeming to fall asleep during a television interview, complete with a fake TV headline.”

In addition to those things, Parker notes that House Minority Whip Steve Scalise — a Louisiana Republican and Trump ally — “released a video splicing together quotes from activist Ady Barkan — who has Lou Gehrig’s disease and uses computer voice assistance — to falsely make it sound as if he had persuaded Biden to defund police departments.”

Whitney Phillips, a communications professor at Syracuse University, told the Post, “When you have this disinformation and it’s introduced to one side of the forest, for example, it can travel so quickly through so many different communities and does so many unintentional things before you can even do a fact-check. He’s able to muddy the waters so thoroughly that democracy wilts on the vine."

trump, Parker points out, has “repeated a false claim that just 6% of the nation’s death toll” in the coronavirus pandemic “was actually caused by the novel coronavirus itself — part of his ongoing effort to portray the virus as less deadly or pervasive than it actually is.” That conspiracy theory has been promoted by QAnon and has no basis in reality, but that hasn’t prevented Trump and other Republicans from promoting it.

Trump is hardly the first candidate to play hardball during a presidential race. From President Lyndon B. Johnson’s infamous “daisy ad” of 1964 to President George H.W. Bush’s racist Willie Horton ad of 1988 to the Swift Boat Veterans ads that helped President George W. Bush defeat Democrat John Kerry in 2004, presidential candidates — both Democrats and Republicans — have dealt some harsh blows to their rivals over the years. But Lily Adams, a Democratic National Committee senior adviser, argues that Trump’s campaign is taking disinformation to another level.

Adams told the Post, “Spin has been something that folks in politics have come to expect, but this is the invention of a totally new reality. Because they can’t run on the reality that every American is seeing, they’re inventing a new one.”

==

==

https://www.alternet.org/2020/08/gops-steve-scalise-could-be-in-ethics-trouble-for-violating-rules-of-not-posting-deep-fake-videos/

a  January 2020 memo to all House members from the Ethics Committee may mean that Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) is in trouble for the deep-fake video that he posted online this weekend.

Scalise was outed for doctoring a video of ALS healthcare activist Ady Barkan and using computer audio to change the comments Barkan said in a video with Vice President Joe Biden.

As the Washington Post‘s Dave Weigle pointed out, Barkan uses a voice assistance device to speak. He commented about Vice President Joe Biden’s comments about “re-directing” public safety funding to social workers and mental health experts, something police have actually requested because it typically isn’t crime-related, and they aren’t trained to handle such mental health crises

@SteveScalise doctors video from @AdyBarkan for political exploitation. He should consider resigning. Please follow @RebeccaCokley on this and all things related to the disability community. https://t.co/efHkGVdJg3 https://t.co/jElvOp4uMl

— Jesse Lee (@JesseCharlesLee) August 30, 2020

AD REMOVED FOR SUBSCRIBED USER

Deep fakes are against the ethics rules in Congress, and posting it will likely mean an ethics investigation.

“However, intentional distortions of audio and/or video representations can be far more damaging. Members have a duty, and First Amendment right, to contribute to the public discourse, including through parody and satire. However, manipulation of images and videos that are intended to mislead the public can harm that discourse and reflect discreditably on the House. Moreover, Members or the staff posting deep fakes “could erode public trust, affect public discourse, or sway an election.” Accordingly, Members, officers, and employees posting deep fakes or other audio-visual distortions intended to mislead the public may be in violation of the Code of Official Conduct. Prior to disseminating any image, video, or audio file by electronic means, including social media, Members and staff are expected to take reasonable efforts to consider whether such representation are deep fakes or are intentionally distorted to mislead the public.”

Hey @SteveScalise–who is your ethics lawyer?  pic.twitter.com/H6smicnOPv

— Marc E. Elias (@marceelias) August 30, 2020

Early next week, Americans will likely learn if there will be an investigation of Scalise over the deep fake video from the Ethics Committee.

---

https://www.alternet.org/2020/08/conservative-writer-warns-the-gop-is-increasingly-embracing-the-utter-lunacy-of-qanon/

no lnx twt vid?

Conservative writer warns the GOP is increasingly embracing the ‘utter lunacy’ of QAnon

Written by Alex Henderson August 14, 2020

On Tuesday, August 11, the QAnon conspiracy cult enjoyed a major victory when far-right QAnon supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene won a Republican primary in Georgia’s 14th Congressional District and was congratulated by President Donald Trump — who wasn’t the least bit troubled by her pro-QAnon views. And veteran conservative pundit/author Mona Charen, in an article published in The Bulwark on August 13, laments the willingness of prominent Republicans to endorse those who embrace the “utter lunacy” of QAnon.

The QAnon cult believes that Trump was elected president to combat an international pedophile/child sex ring that operates within the U.S. government and that an anonymous figure named “Q” is providing updates on Trump’s battle. Greene, in a 2017 video that has been posted on YouTube, expressed her solidarity with QAnon. And considering how deeply Republican her district is, Greene has a very good chance of defeating the Democratic candidate, tech worker Kevin Van Ausdale, in November and taking a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in January 2021.

Charen explains: “Pizzagate morphed into the QAnon conspiracy in which Q followers wait for signals from their leader that a vast conspiracy of Satanic child abusers, run by the ‘Deep State,’ George Soros, the Supreme Court, and God knows who else is about to be unmasked. Did I mention that they think Beyoncé is only pretending to be black? It’s a hydra-headed thing, this conspiracy, and contains multitudes. But the one common thread is this: the great deliverer will be Donald J. Trump.”

QAnon, Charen writes, is a “paranoid conspiracy (theory that) has gathered momentum at the Republican grassroots.”

Greene is not an anomaly: support for QAnon has been growing in the Republican Party.

“No fewer than 60 current or former congressional candidates have expressed interest in or support for the QAnon conspiracy,” Charen laments. “One of them, Jo Rae Perkins, got the Republican nomination for Senate in Oregon. And now, Marjorie Taylor Greene seems almost certain to be going to Congress.”

Charen notes that although some prominent Republicans condemned Greene — including Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise — Trump and others have embraced her.

“Greene received backing from the House Freedom Fund, an arm of the House Freedom Caucus,” Charen observes. “Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and former Rep. Mark Meadows, now Trump’s chief of staff, also backed Greene.”

To make matters worse, Charen adds, Greene critics like Kinzinger are being slammed by Trump supporters for speaking out against her.

Voters in Georgia’s 14th Congressional District, Charen points out, could have chosen her GOP primary rival, Dr. John Cowan — who she describes as a “gun-rights-supporting, anti-abortion Trump loyalist” — to run against Van Ausdale. Instead, they went with someone even further to the right: a QAnon extremist.

“It’s odd that Republicans, who pride themselves on their practical understanding of life — incentives matter, money doesn’t grow on trees, personal responsibility is essential to a well-ordered society — should display such a marked weakness for utter lunacy,” Charen laments. “I don’t offer an explanation, just a warning. This disordered thinking is no longer just a fringe phenomenon.”

---

---

https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/here-are-5-huge-lies-republicans-are-telling-about-the-new-report-on-the-russia-probe

no lnx

Here are 5 huge lies Republicans are telling about the new report on the Russia probe

Written by Cody Fenwick December 10, 2019

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s new report on the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, commonly called the Russia investigation, blew up many of the right wing’s favorite talking points and conspiracy theories about the FBI. At the same time, it exposed real failures of procedures meant to protect American citizens against undue surveillance and exposed the need for serious law enforcement reforms.

But most Republicans seem unfazed that the report undercuts President Donald Trump’s repeated accusations of “treason” and a “witch hunt,” and they show no genuine interest in pushing policy to generally make law enforcement more responsible. Instead, they’re trying to pin the blame on the Obama administration and bias against Trump,  even though these claims actually distract from the genuine problems uncovered.

So instead of grappling with the complicated facts of the report, Republicans are just lying about what it says. Here are five huge lies you should be on the look out for, and why they’re false:

Aaron Rupar

@atrupar

Trump on the IG report: "It is incredible. Far worse than I ever would've thought possible. It's an embarrassment to our country, it's dishonest. It's everything that a lot of people thought it would be, except far worse."

Embedded video

This is absolutely not true. Trump has accused the FBI of “treason” for its investigation of members of his campaign, an accusation that was always ludicrous. Obviously, the report didn’t find anything “far worse” than treason — the worst finding seems to be that an FBI lawyer falsified a piece of evidence in an application for surveillance, making Carter Page’s activities look more suspicious than they otherwise would. This is quite bad, if true, but it’s far milder than much of what the FBI’s critics have claimed.

And in contrast to what Trump has been saying for more years now, the report said: “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open” investigations of Trump associates.

Ronna McDaniel

@GOPChairwoman

The mainstream media cannot dispute this fact:

Comey’s FBI repeatedly misled the FISA court and omitted key facts about the phony Steele Dossier, which launched the 2-year, $35M Russia investigation.

This should have never happened!

In fact, the media can dispute this fact, because it’s not true. The work of Christopher Steele did not “launch” Crossfire Hurricane, as Horowitz made perfectly clear. It explained that the officials working on the investigation “did not become aware of Steele’s election reporting until weeks [after the investigation began] and we therefore determined that Steele’s reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening.”

Senator John Cornyn

@JohnCornyn

It confirms that the Obama Justice Department spied on an American citizen by misleading the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court into issuing 4 separate warrants. https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1204151940202020864 …

also scalise BS

It’s true that, as the report says, the standards for predication are low. But it’s possible for the predication to fail to meet the standard — it can’t simply be that FBI agents have a “hunch.” Having concerning, first-hand information from a friendly foreign government — which public reporting indicates was Australia — that implicates national security is not “the thinnest of suspicions.” And Barr is just wrong to say that the report supports the idea that it is.

Steve Scalise

@SteveScalise

?? BREAKING ? The IG report proves Obama officials abused their FISA power to trigger an investigation into @realDonaldTrump's campaign.

Just more evidence Dems will break any rule or law to rig an election against Trump.

These crooked bureaucrats must be held accountable!

Yet again, this is blatantly wrong and grossly misleading about the underlying facts. The investigation was not of the campaign more broadly but of four distinct individuals tied to the campaign. And the fact that the report found no evidence to support the idea that there was political motivation behind the investigation refutes the claim that it is “more evidence Dems will break any rule or law to rig an election against Trump.”

And Scalise lied about the opening of the investigation, which preceded the decision to apply for FISA surveillance by several months. Again, there’s no evidence in the report that the investigation was opened improperly, even though it says that there were serious problems in the FISA process.

Cody Fenwick is a senior editor at AlterNet. He writes about politics, media and science. Follow him on Twitter @codytfenwick.

==

with jim jordan, drafted to support nunes on impeach defense, led sciff storm pizzagaetz

w/ cole tried to change rules

==

https://www.thedailybeast.com/chris-wallace-accuses-gop-rep-steve-scalise-of-very-badly-mischaracterizing-impeachment-testimony

no lnx

‘WITH ALL DUE RESPECT’

Chris Wallace Accuses Top Republican of ‘Very Badly’ Mischaracterizing Impeachment Testimony

“No, sir, they are career foreign service officers and these are people who worked in the Trump administration,” Wallace snapped back at Scalise.

Justin Baragona

Contributor

Published Nov. 17, 2019 11:31AM ET

Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace repeatedly confronted House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) on Sunday over the top Republican’s characterization of last week’s impeachment testimony, accusing congressman of “very badly” misrepresenting the witnesses’ positions.

Wallace pressed the Trump-boosting Louisiana lawmaker on the upcoming testimony of U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sonldand, asking Scalise if it was possible Sondland could “blow a hole in the president’s defense” if he testifies that the president told him Ukraine aid was being held up unless the Ukrainian president publicly announced an investigation into the Bidens.

“Well, the president’s defense is that those things didn't happen,” Scalise responded. “And it’s not just the president's word. President Zelensky himself said that the aid wasn’t conditioned and there was no pressure.”

“The real bottom line is he got the money,” the GOP representative added, reiterating a key party talking point. “Ukraine got the money.”

Wallace, however, pointed out that a dozen people listened in on the now-infamous July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky, noting that many of them became immediately upset that Trump pressed Zelensky on investigating a Ukrainian gas firm that Vice President’s Joe Biden’s son worked for.

“Those were [House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam] Schiff's witnesses,” Scalise insisted.

“No, sir, they are career foreign service officers and these are people who worked in the Trump administration,” Wallace retorted, adding that an aide to Vice President Mike Pence recently testified that Trump’s call was “inappropriate.”

“You had Tim Morrison, who was on the NSC staff, who said that he—alarm bells immediately went off for him,” the Fox News host continued. “Alexander Vindman immediately went to see—these are all people, you say they are Schiff's witnesses—they all were working in the Trump administration.”

Scalise attempted to pivot to the whistleblower at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, claiming the Intelligence Community inspector general said the whistleblower had political motivations. Wallace, meanwhile, snapped back: “We are not talking about the whistleblower!”

After saying that he didn’t want to answer “hypothetical” questions about Sondland’s upcoming testimony, Scalise then asserted last week’s impeachment witnesses—senior State Department official George Kent, top Ukraine envoy Bill Taylor, and former U.S. Amb. to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch—essentially said Trump did nothing wrong.

“All three of them were asked, did you see any impeachable offenses” he declared. “Did you see any bribery? Any of that? Not one of those things were mentioned. Not one person said they saw a crime committed.”

“With all due respect—with all due respect, that very badly mischaracterizes what they said,” Wallace pushed back. “They were asked, William Taylor, for instance, the acting ambassador to Ukraine, was asked whether or not these were impeachable offenses. He said I’m there as a fact witness. I’m not there to pass judgment, but he made it clear what he thought about what the president was doing.”

RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE

Fox News Anchor: Bill Taylor Was ‘Very Damaging’ to Trump

Tapper Rips Into Graham: Impeachment Stance Is ‘Confusing’

Fox Reporter: ‘Witness Intimidation’ Not in Constitution

Wallace would then go on to play a clip of Taylor’s testimony, further noting that Taylor said that withholding aid to Ukraine to help Trump’s presidential campaign was “crazy.”

This wasn’t the only time that Wallace left Scalise stumbling in Sunday morning’s interview. When the Louisiana congressman dismissed concerns about the July phone call by brushing off “third-hand” accounts while pointing to the Ukrainian foreign minister’s claim there was no link between aid and investigations, Wallace retorted that the foreign minister “was not on the call either.”

==

Rep. Steve Scalise: Trump impeachment inquiry requires the ...

https://www.foxnews.com › opinion › trump-impeachment-inquiry-truth-wh...

3 days ago - Steve Scalise questions why House Democrats are investigating a Ukraine call that neither party felt was inappropriate. President Trump was ...

'Soviet-Style' Impeachment: Steve Scalise Spreads Nonsense ...

https://www.esquire.com › news-politics › steve-scalise-soviet-style-impeac...

Oct 31, 2019 - Steve Scalise thinks Stalin could've been impeached lol ... or any of the other characters from the Trump Conspiracy Cinematic Universe.

Democrats engineer multiple chances to make the case for ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com › powerpost › 2019/11/08

Nov 9, 2019 - Democrats engineer multiple chances to make the case for Trump's impeachment ... whistleblower at the center of President Trump's impeachment Nov. .... investigation, in the words of House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (La.) ...

White House expects impeachment, press secretary says; Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2019/11/01

Nov 1, 2019 - ?As Trump moves to bully witnesses and derail impeachment, ..... Vice President Pence echoed Scalise's sentiment about 30 minutes later.

Scalise: Trump wouldn't have sold Ukraine missiles if he only ...

https://thehill.com › homenews › sunday-talk-shows › 470814-scalise-trum...

2 hours ago - on Sunday pushed back against claims by witnesses in the House's impeachment inquiry that President Trump's only concern in Ukraine was ...

---

mma

We rarely see television news discuss the climate crisis at all, and when we do, it's often milquetoast both-sides type coverage that leaves the viewer poorly informed. But Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) was confronted with something very different on CBS This Morning while promoting his book.

Co-host Dokoupil refused to let Scalise get away with denying climate science, starting off with how much land Louisiana is losing to the sea now, and then grilling the congressman about his approach to the climate change and how it contradicts what scientists have said. Dokoupil even highlighted the absurdity that Scalise's plan to fight climate change is to drill more in the Gulf of Mexico.

We sometimes hear that it's hard to cover climate change. This interview proves otherwise.

==

scuttles carbon tax as part of leadership play?

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/19072018/anti-carbon-tax-resolution-house-vote-climate-solutions-caucus-curbelo-scalise-koch-influence-congress

U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday passed a resolution denouncing the idea of a U.S. carbon tax as detrimental to the economy, one week before a Republican-sponsored bill to create a carbon fee is set to be introduced.

It was a win for a coalition of groups funded by the petrochemical billionaire Koch brothers and other wealthy, right-wing opponents of climate action. And it revealed weak resolve for bucking GOP leadership among most of the 43 Republican members of the Climate Solutions Caucus.

If the bipartisan caucus had held firm, the resolution would have been handily defeated.

Instead, only six Republicans—four of them caucus members, including Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida, who plans to unveil the carbon fee measure next week—joined most Democrats in opposing the resolution. Seven Democrats voted with the GOP.

The 229-180 vote marked a slight erosion in the GOP wall of opposition to climate action. In 2016, an identical measure passed the House 237-163with no Republicans opposed. Such resolutions are meant to express the views of the chamber and have no real-world impact, but with a different Congress in place now, carbon tax foes wanted a new vote.  The American Energy Alliance (AEA), the Heartland Institute, and 18 other conservative advocacy groups had urged House Speaker Paul Ryan earlier this month to bring the resolution to the floor.

AEA president Thomas Pyle said in an interview with InsideClimate News that the impetus was not the prospect of Curbelo's bill, but an effort to put members on the record before November. The groups put it this way in their letter to Ryan: "As we approach the 2018 midterm election, American voters need to know whether their elected representatives support the implementation of a new tax on the energy they rely on every single day."

The House's affirmation of a fossil fuel-friendly agenda comes in a week when President Donald Trump's administration did the same on multiple fronts.

The Environmental Protection Agency's new administrator, former coal lobbyist Andrew Wheeler, finalized a plan to ease requirements for handling the toxic coal ash from power plants—rules developed by the Obama administration after costly spills in Tennessee and North Carolina. The Treasury Department announced it would scrap requirements that certain tax-exempt nonprofits disclose their donors, helping to cloak a key avenue for campaign contributions used by the Koch brothers and other wealthy political benefactors.

2 Views on How Climate Solutions Caucus Voted

The House vote showed the flimsiness of the Climate Solutions Caucus, the bipartisan coalition that Curbelo and others have sought to build behind the concept of a market-based solution for curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

RL Miller, president of the advocacy group Climate Hawks Vote, said the caucus' credibility is in tatters after its GOP members, whom she has frequently criticized for their weak environmental voting records, failed to hold off a resolution that strikes at the heart of their purported purpose.

"It would be a joke were the subject not so serious. The caucus has no credibility, and no ability to do anything," Miller said. "The climate is changing far more quickly than Republican attitudes. That's why we do not hold faith in bipartisan solutions."

But Steve Valk, spokesman for the Citizens Climate Lobby, a grassroots advocacy group that favors a carbon tax and that helped bring together the caucus, noted the non-binding resolution has no real effect. Valk said he did not expect that its members would go out on a limb against such a measure, especially since it was sponsored by House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), the No. 3 Republican in the chamber and a potential successor to Ryan, who is retiring.

"Anybody who votes against this resolution—it's going to be a mark against them in the eyes of the leadership, which decides what assignments you get, whether or not you're on the committee you want, and who's chair," Valk said. "There's a lot of calculations that go into a decision like this. We're willing to look at that and say, yeah, it's not a simple choice for them.

"In my mind, if you can get a handful of Republicans to vote no on this, that's a victory."

The Conversation Is Shifting: Republicans Consider Carbon Pricing

Other carbon tax advocates expressed glass-half-full optimism, arguing the mere push for a vote by fossil fuel allies betrays their concern about the increasing support for the idea of putting a price on carbon to fight climate change.

"They feel that the momentum is shifting as the conversation commences, and they are trying to beat down any thoughtful analysis with a tribal drum that they are nervously beating louder," said former Rep. Bob Inglis, a Republican from South Carolina and founder of a conservative carbon tax advocacy group republicEn.

"If we were able to discuss this, we'd find that this is something that could bring conservatives and progressives together," he said.

Conservative advocates for a carbon tax have been trying to make their case in Washington since the start of the Trump administration with little success. Trump's former chief economic advisor, Gary Cohn, reportedly earned the derisive nickname "Carbon Tax Cohn" in the West Wing for giving a hearing to a revenue-neutral tax plan proposed by prominent Republicans, including former Secretary of State James Baker and former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

But since then, other groups have popped up. The nuclear-heavy energy company Exelon, the American Wind Energy Association and First Solar are funding a coalition called Americans for Carbon Dividends, which has hired former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican, to lobby on the issue. Twenty-two college Republican groups came together earlier this year to form Students for Carbon Dividends. Its founding president, Alex Posner, an American history major at Yale, says the plan they favor would address international competitiveness and jobs creation and would look nothing like the carbon tax described in the Scalise resolution. "We want to see a plan that's pro-growth and pro-environment while shrinking the size of government," he said.

Pyle, of the American Energy Alliance, argues that no matter the design of a carbon tax program, consumers are worse off. "There's revenue generated, and then you haggle over how to spend it," he said. "It's no different than other taxes and fees. If you're giving back some to low-income households, it's a still a redistribution. And since poorer people pay a higher percentage of their incomes on energy, they are worse off."

A series of four reports released this week by Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy calls that argument into question, however, and provides ammunition for carbon tax advocates. The reports analyze various carbon tax legislation scenarios and conclude that they would increase government revenue by hundreds of billions of dollars a year and drive down U.S. emissions, far more than current policy, with minimal effects on the U.S. economy, families or businesses, or even on oil and gas production and consumption.

Curbelo: Resolution Presented 'a False Choice'

For now, the House vote preemptively throws cold water on Curbelo's planned introduction next week of legislation that would impose an escalating tax on carbonemissions, while pausing federal regulations on climate change. Although Curbelo would not discuss details of his plan, reports said the revenue generated would be directed into infrastructure and in helping communities adapt to sea level rise and other impacts of climate change.

Curbelo did not speak on the House floor during the one-hour debate allotted for the Scalise resolution. But when asked by InsideClimate News to comment, he criticized the measure in an emailed statement.

"The resolution presents a false choice," Curbelo said. "While I agree a carbon tax on its own would not be the best way forward and could have negative effects on the economy, there are smarter, more innovative solutions that would not only reduce carbon emissions and mitigate for the effects they have on our planet, but also grow the economy and provide opportunities for American workers and businesses at home and abroad.

"I look forward to engaging with my colleagues on this topic next week, and sharing my own proposal in the near future," he said.

Curbelo, who represents the southern tip of Florida, one of the regions of the country most vulnerable to climate change impacts, is seen as one of the most vulnerable House Republicans. Cook Political Report and other political odds-makers call his race a toss-up.

With Democrats expected to gain between 20 and 35 seats in November, and just 23 needed for them to retake the majority, Inglis argues that Scalise wasn't doing his own party any favors by forcing a carbon tax showdown. "Steve, what are you doing, running for minority leader?" asked Inglis. "He's putting people at risk for an idea that is clearly going to become very passé and very retro looking."

The House Debate

During the House debate on the measure, Republicans urged a stand against carbon taxes while taking pains to assert that they were not denying the science of climate change.

"I'm not a climate denier. I'm not a science denier. I'm a climate thinker," said Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) "And real science isn't just about assessing costs only. It's about looking at benefits as well. ... Coal provides cheap, plentiful, reliable energy over the long term. We should not want the most carbon-free energy, but the best energy."

Democrats used up much of their 30 minutes of time attempting to change the subject from the anti-carbon tax measure to spotlight Trump's controversial meeting this week with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), managing the resolution for the GOP, repeatedly refused.

A handful of Democrats, most of them members of the Climate Solutions Caucus, offered full-throated defense of carbon taxes.

"For decades, economists from across the ideological spectrum have argued that a carbon price is the most efficient way to discourage the use of fossil fuels and the best way to encourage energy efficiency measures and market decisions on everything from housing to transportation," said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.). "The science continues to accumulate in prodigious amounts that the pollution is changing our Earth and the cost is staggering into the billions. Carbon pricing is the most market-oriented policy we can take to combat this."

Rep. Earl Blumenauer, (D-Ore.) said the resolution "encapsulates what's wrong with the Republican management of this Congress. It is a cartoon that doesn't deal with the underlying issues," he said. "We could have a debate about real legislation that would satisfy their answers and be able to deal with what our responsibilities are to the future. ... Instead, we're dealing with empty gestures."

In addition to Curbelo, Republicans voting against the resolution were Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Mia Love of Utah—all members of the Climate Solutions Caucus—and Reps. Trey Hollingsworth of Indiana and Francis Rooney of Florida. The Democrats who joined the GOP in voting for the resolution were Reps. Sanford Bishop of Georgia; Henry Cuellar and Vincente González of Texas; Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania; Stephanie Murphy of Florida; and Tom O'Halleran and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.

PUBLISHED UNDER:

REGULATION

CLIMATE CHANGE

---

AN 119

...That’s right. According to Scalise, the problem isn’t that the GOP elected a president who grabs women by the pussy, or that they put an accused rapist on the Supreme Court, or that they oppose everything from birth control coverage to paid family leave. The realproblem is that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) won’t allow Republican women to win congressional races. The GOP’s failure to recruit women can only be blamed on … a woman!

There are a few things that get in the way of Scalise’s attempt to pass the buck onto Pelosi. For one thing, Republicans aren’t actually running as many women as Democrats in the first place — 356 women filed to run in Democratic House primaries last year, versus just 120 for Republican House primaries. Of those filers, 183 women won Democratic nominations, and just 52 won Republican nominations. For another thing, polls show not only that women voters overwhelmingly prefer Democrats, but that Republican voters, both men and women, do not believe electing women is as important as Democratic men and women.

There is no doubt Pelosi is a politician of prodigious skill. But she can’t claim all the credit for Republicans’ loss of women from their ranks. They did that largely on their own.

==

Oil & Gas $351,174 $132,200 $218,974

Insurance $161,600 $24,500 $137,100

Health Professionals $155,600 $15,100 $140,500

TV/Movies/Music $141,350 $5,850 $135,500

Real Estate $136,300 $53,300 $83,000

Electric Utilities $132,750 $18,750 $114,000

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $125,700 $9,200 $116,500

Lobbyists $119,850 $113,850 $6,000

Sea Transport $119,349 $69,449 $49,900

Lawyers/Law Firms $100,600 $52,850 $47,750

==

Edison Chouest Offshore $119,400 $119,400 $0

2 Entergy Corp $33,750 $18,750 $15,000

3 Cajun Industries $27,600 $27,600 $0

4 Koch Industries $25,200 $5,200 $20,000

5 AT&T Inc $20,000 $0 $20,000

5 Marathon Petroleum $20,000 $0 $20,000

5 United Parcel Service $20,000 $0 $20,000

5 General Electric $20,000 $0 $20,000

5 Indep Insurance Agents & Brokers/America $20,000 $0 $20,000

5 National Assn of Realtors $20,000 $0 $20,000

5 National Beer Wholesalers Assn $20,000 $0 $20,000

12 Comcast Corp $18,500 $0 $18,500

13 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $18,250 $750 $17,500

14 Southern Co $17,500 $0 $17,500

15 Verizon Communications $16,500 $1,500 $15,000

16 Microsoft Corp $15,500 $0 $15,500

16 Bollinger Shipyards $15,500 $15,500 $0

16 Clark, Geduldig et al $15,500 $15,500 $0

19 American Resort Development Assn $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 National Multi Housing Council $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Pfizer Inc $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Google Inc $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Lockheed Martin $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 American Bankers Assn $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Union Pacific Corp $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 CSX Corp $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Time Warner Cable $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 CenturyLink $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Cox Enterprises $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 National Auto Dealers Assn $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Humana Inc $15,000 $0 $15,000

19 Home Depot $15,000 $0 $15,000

33 Blue Cross/Blue Shield $14,500 $0 $14,500

34 Altria Group $14,000 $0 $14,000

35 Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America $13,500 $0 $13,500

36 Eatel Inc $13,000 $13,000 $0

37 Citigroup Inc $12,500 $0 $12,500

37 American College of Radiology $12,500 $0 $12,500

37 Chicago Bridge & Iron $12,500 $0 $12,500

37 American Dental Assn $12,500 $0 $12,500

37 New York Life Insurance $12,500 $0 $12,500

42 National Rifle Assn $12,400 $0 $12,400

43 JPMorgan Chase & Co $12,000 $0 $12,000

43 College of American Pathologists $12,000 $0 $12,000

45 Geocent LLC $11,300 $11,300 $0

46 Nucor Corp $11,000 $0 $11,000

46 Bertucci Construction $11,000 $11,000 $0

46 FedEx Corp $11,000 $0 $11,000

46 DirecTV $11,000 $1,000 $10,000

50 Edison Electric Institute $10,500 $0 $10,500

51 Svendson Companies $10,300 $10,300 $0

51 Gray Insurance $10,300 $10,300 $0

53 Chevron Corp $10,250 $250 $10,000

54 Dawson Farms $10,200 $10,200 $0

54 Hailey McNamara $10,200 $10,200 $0

54 Zito Companies $10,200 $10,200 $0

57 NOLA Motorsports Park $10,100 $10,100 $0

57 Jackson Kearney Group $10,100 $10,100 $0

57 Woodvine Group $10,100 $10,100 $0

60 American Cable Assn $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 American College of Surgeons $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Friedkin Group $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Chesapeake Energy $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Deloitte LLP $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Associated Builders & Contractors $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Credit Union National Assn $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 PricewaterhouseCoopers $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Wiley Rein LLP $10,000 $10,000 $0

60 National Rural Electric Cooperative Assn $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Prudential Financial $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Capital One Financial $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Desert Caucus $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 American Waterways Operators $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Boeing Co $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 AFLAC Inc $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 National Assn of Insurance & Financial Advisors $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Border Health $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Norfolk Southern $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Facebook Inc $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Valero Energy $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Northrop Grumman $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Real Estate Roundtable $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 UBS AG $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Ernst & Young $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Every Republican is Crucial PAC $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Exxon Mobil $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold $10,000 $0 $10,000

60 American Sugar Cane League $10,000 $0 $10,000

89 Advantage Capital Partners $9,800 $9,800 $0

90 National Ocean Industries Assn $9,750 $1,750 $8,000

91 National Amusements Inc $9,500 $0 $9,500

91 General Dynamics $9,500 $0 $9,500

91 Abbott Laboratories $9,500 $0 $9,500

91 Textron Inc $9,500 $0 $9,500

95 Honeywell International $9,055 $0 $9,055

96 Wal-Mart Stores $9,000 $0 $9,000

96 Goldman Sachs $9,000 $0 $9,000

96 Merck & Co $9,000 $0 $9,000

96 International Council of Shopping Cntrs $9,000 $0 $9,000

100 Jones Walker LLP $8,500 $1,500 $7,000

100 Berkshire Hathaway $8,500 $500 $8,000

100 Amgen Inc $8,500 $1,000 $7,500

100 Metlife Inc $8,500 $0 $8,500

100 American College of Emergency Physicians $8,500 $0 $8,500

100 General Motors $8,500 $0 $8,500

100 Halliburton Co $8,500 $0 $8,50

==

This week, House Majority Whip Steve Scalise held a “Meet Team Scalise” event to introduce Washington insiders to his staffers and his fundraising team. Given the massive outcry over Scalise’s speech to David Duke’s white supremacist organization, and new revelations that, in 1996, Scalise voted against a formal apology for slavery,1 it would be reasonable to assume that attendance was low.

According to a report by Politico, nearly 300 hundred people attended the event, including lobbyists for Comcast and American Airlines.2

It’s not terribly surprising that Republicans in the House, who have refused to fix the Supreme Court’s gutting of the Voting Rights Act and have stood solidly in the way of any kind of real immigration reform, are happy to be led by someone who has kept company with white supremacists.

But it’s astonishing that major U.S. corporations would legitimize, and continue to fund, Scalise.

“Steve Scalise voted against apology for slavery in 1996,” Luke Brinker, Salon, 1/13/2015.

“Nearly 300 K Streeters flock to meet Steve Scalise,” Anna Palmer, Politico, 1/13/2015.

Potential donors crowded into the third floor of the Capitol Hill Club to hear from the Louisiana Republican, who welcomed everyone and thanked them for their support. His chief of staff, Lynnel Ruckert, and his political staff followed, laying out his new fundraising program. Several Scalise staffers were on hand, including his policy director Bill Hughes, member services director Eric Zulkosky and personal office chief of staff Charles Henry.

One of the attendees described it as a “locker room” style rally and related that staff said they were “looking forward to a good year.”

A source close to the Scalise political operation said the event was a kickoff and introduction to his fundraising operation. The leadership political action committee is Louisiana-themed, but will raise money to give broadly to the conference.

Dozens of K Streeters were at the event, including Sam Lancaster of Comcast, Adam Peterson of T-Mobile, Jay Cranford of Clark Geduldig Cranford & Nielsen, Cliff Riccio of NTCA, Mike Ference of the S-3 Group, Megan Bell of NOIA and Mike Wascom of American Airlines.

No one brought up or addressed the continuing fallout from a 2002 speech Scalise gave to a white supremacist group.

More race-related news came out Tuesday when The Hill reported that Scalise voted against a resolution apologizing for slavery when he was in the statehouse.

Scalise’s office declined to comment.

Political director Tyler Daniel said last week that Scalise’s fundraising had not been affected by the news reports.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/steve-scalise-114234.html#ixzz3PIFwlRvs

Steve Scalise, Top 100 Contributors, 2013-2014, Open Secrets.

==

Steve Scalise, a Louisiana congressman and the number three Republican in the House,admitted on Monday that as a state representative, he addressed former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke's European-American Unity and Rights Organization in 2002. Unsurprisingly for any group affiliated with Duke, the organization is classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The story was first brought to light on Sunday night by the Louisiana-based blog Cen Lamar.

Scalise's allies anonymously told Robert Costa of the Washington Post that the congressman was poorly staffed at the time, and did not really know who he was talking to. Scalise's camp is also saying that he had no idea that he was addressing a hate group. As Lamar writes, Duke himself was not present at the conference. However, as a former Senate and gubernatorial candidate, Duke was (and still is) an incredibly well known figure in Louisiana politics. If it was clear that Scalise was talking to a Duke group, it will be hard for him to plead ignorance.

Costa tweets that House GOP leaders know about the story and are keeping an eye on things. Scalise's own staff is reportedly looking at what Scalise told the group. Needless to say, Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy are hoping that Scalise can prove he did not in fact know what was going on around him. We'll see what else, if anything, comes to light.

==

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise got some help interviewing potential new hires for his press shop from an unlikely source: a federal lobbyist.

Quinn Gillespie & Associates’ John Feehery sat in on and participated in multiple official interviews with job candidates last month for the new majority whip’s press operation. Scalise has not yet announced who he will name as his communications director.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/steve-scalise-staff-john-feehery-109739.html#ixzz39eUVgA00

==

Carbon-tax proposals aregoing nowhere in Congress, but the Koch brothers aren’t taking any chances.

A few non-office-holding Republicans and a few actual-office-holding Democrats are calling for a carbon tax, but the current Congress would never pass one, and even the Obama administration has said it doesn’t want one.

Still, a grandstanding Republican representative, Steve Scalise of Louisiana, is pushing a House resolution declaring that “a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy” and “to American families and businesses,” and that it would “fall hardest on the poor, the elderly, and those on fixed incomes.” (Never mind that many carbon-tax proposals are designed specifically to ease burdens on low-income Americans. Facts are not of interest here.)

The billionaire oil-mogul Koch brothers — who’ve convinced many politicians to sign a “No Climate Tax Pledge” — have now hired a gang of lobbyists to push Scalise’s pointless resolution, The Hillreports.

Just how would a tax on carbon pollution hurt American families and businesses? Well, it might take a bite out of the Koch family’s coffers and the Kochs’ businesses.

Still, the Kochs really are concerned about the poor. In fact, Charles Koch is pushing his own plan for lifting people out of poverty; one key component is eliminating the minimum wage.

---

Click here for 9 full quotes on Energy & Oil OR background on Energy & Oil.

Voted YES on opening Outer Continental Shelf to oil drilling. (May 2011)

Voted YES on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. (Apr 2011)

Voted NO on enforcing limits on CO2 global warming pollution. (Jun 2009)

Voted NO on tax credits for renewable electricity, with PAYGO offsets. (Sep 2008)

Voted NO on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (May 2008)

Bar greenhouse gases from Clean Air Act rules. (Jan 2009)

Signed the No Climate Tax Pledge by AFP. (Nov 2010)

Member of House Committee on Energy and Commerce. (Mar 2011)

No EPA regulation of greenhouse gases. (Jan 2011)

Steve Scalise on Environment

Click here for 7 full quotes on Environment OR background on Environment.

Full funding of 100-year flood protection. (May 2008)

Voted NO on $2 billion more for Cash for Clunkers program. (Jul 2009)

Voted NO on protecting free-roaming horses and burros. (Jul 2009)

Voted NO on environmental education grants for outdoor experiences. (Sep 2008)

Voted NO on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013. (Jun 2008)

Repeal requirements for compact fluorescent bulbs. (Jan 2011)

Rated 0% by HSLF, indicating an anti-animal welfare voting record. (Jan 2012)

==

This article is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

Steve Scalise is currently the Republican representative for the 1st Congressional District (map) of Louisiana and an incumbent candidate in the 2008 congressional elections. On May 3, 2008, he defeated Gilda Reed (D) in a special election to replace former Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-Lou.), who vacated his seat to become Governor.[1] On November 4, 2008, Scalise defeated Democratic challenger Jim Harlan by a comfortable margin.

Contents

[hide]

1 Positions, record and controversies

2 Bio

2.1 2008 elections

3 Money in politics

4 Committees and affiliations

4.1 Committees

4.2 Affiliations

5 More background data

6 Contact

7 Articles and resources

7.1 Related SourceWatch articles

7.2 Sources

7.3 External resources

7.4 External articles

Positions, record and controversies

Bio

2008 elections

On May 3, Scalise defeated Gilda Reed (D) in a special election to replace former Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-Lou.), who vacated his seat to become Governor. As an incumbent, Scalise is seeking the Republican nomination to retain his seat in the November general election.[2][1]

Money in politics

Information on this candidate's 2010 fundraising is not yet available.

Committees and affiliations

Committees

Affiliations

More background data

Contact

DC Office:

429 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515

Phone: (202) 225-3015

Fax: (202) 226-0386

Web Site

Web Email

Articles and resources

Related SourceWatch articles

2008 U.S. congressional elections

2008 U.S. congressional election dates

Portal:Louisiana and the U.S. Congress

Sources

? 1.0 1.1 J. Taylor Rushing, "Dems add to majority with Cazayoux win in La.", TheHill.com, May 4, 2008.

? 2008 Race Tracker page on Louisiana’s 1st Congressional District

External resources

External articles

Categories: Louisiana and the U.S. Congress | Members of the U.S. Congress from Louisiana | Congresspedia | Stubs | Republican Party (USA)

==

...

Now, Muller said,  he's going a step further: "Humans are almost entirely the cause," Muller wrote.

Scalise said Muller's new position isn't persuasive.

"One Berkeley professor flip-flopping his opinion on global warming doesn't create any kind of consensus on this issue, and there's still vast amount of disagreement throughout the scientific community on the causes of climate change. In fact, recent scientific data shows that the earth is currently in a cooling period, and it's predicted that it will continue to cool over the next 20 years," Scalise said.

At a 2009 House hearing, Scalise challenged Gore, arguing that there isn't anywhere near the overwhelming evidence for global warming cited by the former vice president. He accused Gore of championing solutions that would put many Americans out of work while enriching people and businesses that were close to him.

Still, the National Academy of Sciences concluded in 2011 evidence is overwhelming that "climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems." There have been warnings about rising sea levels that would pose a serious threat to coastal communities like New Orleans, as well as more intense storms and elimination of key habitat for a wide range of fish and animals.

Muller said studies he and his research colleagues have conducted can lead to no other conclusion than that global warming is real and caused by human activities.

"Our results show that the average temperature of the earth's land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years," Muller wrote. "Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases."

Still, Muller won't go as far as some climate change researchers.

"I still find that much, if not most, of what is attributed to climate change is speculative, exaggerated or just plain wrong," he wrote. "I've analyzed some of the most alarmist claims, and my skepticism about them hasn't changed."

"Hurricane Katrina cannot be attributed to global warming," Muller said. "The number of hurricanes hitting the United States has been going down, not up; likewise for intense tornadoes. Polar bears aren't dying from receding ice, and the Himalayan glaciers aren't going to melt by 2035."

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/08/former_climate_change_skeptics.html

==

Rep. Steve Scalise leads GOP attack on global warming regs

Published: Wednesday, February 09, 2011, 1:25 PM     Updated: Wednesday, February 09, 2011, 2:07 PM

By Bruce Alpert, Times-Picayune

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans Wednesday mounted an attack on the Obama administration's plan to regulate greenhouse emissions with predictions it would stymie job creation.

John McCusker/The Times-PicayuneU.S. Rep. Steve Scalise

/

As is his custom, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, was among the most aggressive critics, asking Environmental Protection Administration Administrator Lisa Jackson whether she agrees with then Sen. Barack Obama who once predicted cap and trade legislation would substantially raise utility costs.

"Yes or no?" he pressed during the hearing by the House Energy and Commerce Committee on a GOP bill to bar EPA from imposing new carbon emission standards under the Clean Air Act.

Jackson said that her agency isn't implementing cap and trade legislation, which failed to pass the Senate in the last session. The new EPA regulations, she said, would not adversely impact jobs and likely would save companies money by making them more energy efficient.

Scalise said he was very disappointed that Jackson, in arguing why the nation needed to come to deal with carbon emissions that lead to climate change, suggested "global warming" was a factor in the flooding caused by Hurricane Katrina when Scalise said everyone knows that the real damage from that storm was caused by failed federal levees.

Jackson said she had done no such thing, but was simply pointing out what many scientists have said -- that global warming leads to rising water levels and increased storm surge that can have devastating impact on flood-prone areas such as "my hometown" of New Orleans.

Scalise and other Louisiana lawmakers have raised particular concern about the regulation's effect on oil refineries that are a large part of Louisiana's economy.

Scalise's tough questions drew a rebuke from Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who last year said he likes Scalise despite their differing views on environmental issues. Waxman said Scalise wasn't giving Jackson a chance to reply, though Waxman has been accused of that same thing in the past.

Under EPA plans, industries that are large emitters of carbons linked to global warming, would be required to implement energy efficient measures when they build new facilities or make major modifications in existing plants.

Cap and trade, the policy mentioned by Scalise that was rejected by the Senate, would set mandatory caps on reducing emissions, though industry would have the flexibility to reach the goals by getting credits from businesses that exceed the new standards.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, said that the EPA regulations would put the "economy in a straitjacket" at a time when President Obama says creating jobs is the nation's No. 1 priority.

But Waxman, who chaired the panel until the GOP recaptured the House majority in the 2010 elections, said Republicans are ignoring overwhelming scientific evidence that global warming is real and a major threat. The GOP bill, which would block EPA from regulating gashouse emissions, is called the Energy Tax Prevention Act, but "that is total nonsense, Waxman said.

'"What this bill should be called is the Big Polluter Protection Act," Waxman said.

Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., who once famously called global warming the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," told the House Energy and Commerce Committee that even if he is wrong the new regulations won't be effective. U.S. businesses, he predicted, will flee he new regulations by relocating operations to China, India and other nations that won't impose tough regulations.

Jackson said there's no doubt global warming is real.

"Eighteen of America's leading scientific societies have written that multiple lines of evidence show humans are changing the climate, that contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science, and that ongoing climate change will have broad impacts on society, including the global economy and the environment," Jackson said.

==

Quotes by Steve Scalise vs What the Science Says

"they are trying to actually change our economy in the United States in a way that would run millions of jobs out of this country."

8 March 2011 (Source)

The benefits of a price on carbon outweigh the costs several times over.

"we saw in Climategate, they used a trick to hide the decline."

8 March 2011 (Source)

The 'decline' refers to a decline in northern tree-rings, not global temperature, and is openly discussed in papers and the IPCC reports.

"there is dispute over this claim that man is the cause of global warming."

8 March 2011 (Source)

Multiple sets of independent observations find a human fingerprint on climate change.

"I think it is clear that the science is not settled."

8 March 2011 (Source)

That human CO2 is causing global warming is known with high certainty & confirmed by observations.

---

Fact Check from Climate Hearings: Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)

By Heather Shelby | Bio | Published: May 21, 2009

This bill would give the "global warming Gestapo" the power to throw senior citizens out of their homes, if the homes are not up to energy-efficient building standards. "A senior citizen whose home is destroyed by a tornado .. and she wants to rebuild .. if she doesn't rebuild according to the rules in this bill .. she is declared an unlawful occupant of her own home." –  Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA-01)

First of all, state and local laws already require construction to meet current codes when homes are built or re-built. So, there's nothing new here.

And it's a good thing — it's how we make sure homes are safe, healthy, livable and efficient. It's also how we make sure senior citizens (and everybody else) aren't taken advantage of by shoddy or unscrupulous builders.

What the Waxman-Markey bill does is set some broad national efficiency targets for new construction. The bill leaves it up to cities, states and building code associations to decide how to meet them — based on local weather and climate, cost-effectiveness for the region and local preferences.

In other words — pretty much the same system we've got now.

More importantly, the national efficiency targets require that code changes are cost effective and save people money on their power bills. Senior citizens would appreciate lower utility bills at least as much as anyone else. They would be unlikely to argue strenuously against a provision that will immediately reduce their monthly expenses and will ultimately put more money in their pocket.

As for "global warming Gestapo" .. we don't think cute alliteration justifies anything that offensive.

This entry was posted in 395. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

---

Paul Ryan Voted To Block The USDA From Preparing For Climate Change. In 2011, Ryan voted in favor of the Scalise (R-LA) Amendment to the FY12 Agriculture Appropriations bill, to bar the U.S. Department of Agriculture from implementing its Climate Protection Plan. [Roll Call 448, 6/16/11]

Paul Ryan Voted To Eliminate White House Climate Advisers. Ryan voted in favor of Scalise (R-LA) Amendment 204 to the 2011 Continuing Resolution, to eliminate the assistant to the president for energy and climate change, the special envoy for climate change (Todd Stern), and the special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation. [Roll Call 87, 2/17/11]

---

Scalise: Worth a Study

By Quin Hillyer on 1.7.11 @ 6:08AM

A new conservative communicator you'll be hearing from.

For years, the Republican Study Committee has been Command Central for true conservatives in the House -- a sort of internal think tank for those more interested in ideas than in careerism. It will be chaired this year by rising star Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio -- and its new head of communications will be Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, who is perfectly suited for the task. Scalise also has been making a name for himself as an aggressive and effective advocate for energy exploration and development. In a relaxed interview on the Gulf Coast during the Christmas break, he had plenty of interesting things to say, including a clever and accurate way to turn around an epithet the Democrats and establishment media (forgive me for repeating myself) like to hurl at Republicans.

Forget Republicans being the "Party of No," says Scalise. It is Barack Obama who risks becoming "The President of 'No'." It is Republicans who are pushing a thoughtful and popular agenda, and the president vetoes or otherwise blocks that agenda at his own political peril.

==

1 Edison Chouest Offshore $22,900 $22,900 $0

2 AT&T Inc $12,500 $0 $12,500

2 Comcast Corp $12,500 $0 $12,500

4 United Parcel Service $11,500 $0 $11,500

5 Chailland Business Services $11,000 $11,000 $0

5 Liberty Media $11,000 $0 $11,000

7 B&G Food Enterprises $10,411 $10,411 $0

8 American Dental Assn $10,000 $0 $10,000

8 Linfield, Hunter & Junius $10,000 $10,000 $0

8 Mac-Re LLC $10,000 $10,000 $0

8 Koch Industries $10,000 $0 $10,000

8 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $10,000 $0 $10,000

8 Time Warner Cable $10,000 $0 $10,000

14 Zito Companies $9,900 $9,900 $0

15 Morris & Dickson $9,700 $9,700 $0

16 Verizon Communications $9,000 $0 $9,000

17 Bollinger Shipyards $8,650 $8,650 $0

18 Adams & Reese $8,500 $0 $8,500

19 Stirling Properties $8,400 $8,400 $0

20 Bertucci Contracting $7,500 $7,500 $0

20 Chevron Corp $7,500 $0 $7,500

20 Woodvine Group $7,500 $7,500 $0

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k24pdO1HSCo sect 201 lowrs bldg standards?! would prvent ppl from using stronger windows? global warming police (feds can charge you for inspection too) Gestapo

May 20, 2009: Debating the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (HR 2454), Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) argues establishing federal building energy efficiency standards would create a "global warming gestapo" and violate the third and tenth amendments.

Without irony, Scalise argues that fighting global warming would threaten the health and safety of Lousianans in danger of hurricanes, floods, and tornadoes. He ignores the difference between energy efficiency building codes and fire and safety codes, and the fact that the legislation does not affect local efficiency codes that meet or exceed the national standard.

SCALISE: Here, with really no debate, we're creating a federal code that trumps all of the states' codes and in some cases would actually lower the standards that states have for building.

And if you go back to why we have building codes and why states have done this, the purpose typically is to protect safety and health. Safety and health have always been the main driving factors behind a building code. What this bill does in Section 201, it's literally taking global warming, and using global warming to trump safety and health. Because now, if I'm in South Louisiana, and I want to rebuild after hurricane damage -- which by the way we had 120,000 homes in Louisiana that had more than 50 percent damage due to Hurricane Katrina -- under this bill in section 201, when people are rebuilding those 120,000 homes, they would have to follow the federal building code, and in many cases that would mean they can't use the same types of strength that they might want to use in their windows. They might want to use stronger windows because they don't want the storm to blow out their windows. But under this bill, a federal standard could say their windows are out of the federal code.

And then what does that mean? Let's go to the bill and look at the penalties. Because there are actually civil penalties in this bill. We're actually creating a global warming police. To page 235: "The Secretary may set and collect reasonable inspection fees to cover the costs of inspections required." So number one, they can come in, the federal government can come in and inspect your house and send you the bill. And if they find that you're out of compliance with this new federal code, "The Secretary shall assess a civil penalty for violations of this section." And then further to page 236: "Each day of unlawful occupancy shall be considered a separate violation." We're setting up a global warming gestapo that can literally come in and now this new term, "unlawful occupancy." Now living in your home is considered unlawful under this bill.

This is ludicrous.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sH0Ryek7rHk&feature=related

infowars

Al Gore Caught lying!! Denies that Ken Lay, Goldman Sachs CEOs Helped Develop C02 Trading 'Scheme'

Credit:urWURLDnow

http://www.youtube.com/user/urWURLDnow

After insisting once again that there is a consensus on Man-made Global Warming (while paradoxically comparing those not in consensus with those who deny the moon landing), Al Gore denies, downplays and refuses to discuss the role that CEOs played in crafting his Cap-and-Trade C02 trading schemes.

Rep. Scalise points out that Gore met with Ken Lay, of ENRON-fraud fame circa 1998, as well as top members of Goldman Sachs-- all of which Al Gore obscures and denies.

In point of fact, Al Gore's founding partner in the sustainability-investment firm Generation Investment Management, LLC is none other than David Blood, CEO of Goldman Sachs' asset-management division until 2003. Gore-Blood founding their Carbon-trading Corp. in 2004.

http://www.generationim.com/citizenship/partnerships.html

Although Gore refuses to address the issue, Rep. Scalise makes a direct point in the fact that many of the people and associated firms that caused our current and widespread economic crisis were involved in developing this and other related proposals.

How then, could such people be trusted? Gore's only response is to question whether Scalise means to consider him 'guilty by association.

---

Steve Scalise at CPAC: Climate Change Is a Myth Because Obama Was Cold at the Inauguration

SUBMITTED BY: Brian Tashman, Friday 03/15/2013, 3:50pm

At CPAC today, Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) argued that climate change is a myth and doesn’t need to be addressed, noting that President Obama was cold during the inauguration. “He talked about global warming at his inauguration, I found it ironic that the President was wearing a trench coat it was so cold but he’s talking about global warming,” Scalise said. He also noted that a snow storm later cancelled a congressional hearing on climate change, “you can’t make this stuff up.” Of course, climate change is actually leading to more incidences of... MORE >

Rep. Scalise: Obama Is Attacking Freedom, History Has Redeemed Bush Tax Cuts

SUBMITTED BY: Brian Tashman, Friday 02/15/2013, 12:00pm

Congressman Steve Scalise (R-LA) appeared on Washington Watch with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday to discuss the State of the Union address where he pushed the standard right-wing canards that President Obama is leading an attack on freedom and trying to exploit “tragedies that he uses to his own benefit.” Perkins: There’s not been an administration that’s been more hostile to our first freedom, our fundamental right of the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion. Scalise: Right, look, just go in order. Right after that, he’s... MORE >

Rep. Steve Scalise Says Republicans Were the Real Winners of the 2012 Election

SUBMITTED BY: Brian Tashman, Monday 01/07/2013, 4:20pm

Apparently, Republicans were the big winner of the 2012 election! Or so says Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), who on Friday told Family Research Council president Tony Perkins that conservatives in the House won a “mandate” in 2012. “I think if you look at the country, even in the results of this election, we’re still a center-right nation,” Scalise said in the interview, “the House and the House conservatives did win and we’re there with a mandate to fight for the values that we believe in." That’s right, losing the White House by a 332-206... MORE >

---

Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana is the new face of the conservative movement in the House of Representatives. At least according to the Republican Study Committee, a caucus representing the right wing of the party.

The RSC elected Scalise to be their new chairman Thursday, taking over from Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio. Scalise beat Rep. Tom Graves of Georgia for the position, despite the fact that the committee’s founders and past chairmen came out in support of Graves.

“From the beginning I felt like this ought to be a member-driven organization and the members should decide who’s the next chairman,” Scalise told the Alley.

Scalise said that Graves ran a great campaign for the position and that the major differences between the two of them was not in policy but in leadership style.

“The American people chose the Republican House to serve as the only line of defense against Barack Obama’s liberal agenda, and the RSC must stand tall as the conservative rudder, steering the House towards more conservative solutions as we work to get our country back on the right track,” he said in a statement.

---

n the end, of course, Boehner won handily, with barely enough people voting against him to make it into the double digits. However, those who did vote against him were among the House’s most stalwart conservatives, and almost without exception, their votes – for candidates such as Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Eric Cantor (R-VA) – went to candidates who were members of one little known, but highly influential group: The Republican Study Committee, or RSC.

Meet Steve Scalise, Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, and New Conscience for House Conservatives

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Photo Credit: AP)

For those with knowledge of the inner workings of Congress, this fact should surprise no one. The RSC, which is known in many circles as the voice of committed conservatives within the House of Representatives, boasts an impressive 170 members of Congress, all Republicans, in its ranks. In other words, while Republicans control the majority in the House, the RSC controls the majority of the Republicans. This may explain why the last minute fiscal cliff deal, which garnered opposition from House conservatives generally, and the RSC especially, passed thanks to the votes of Democrats, rather than Republicans. Such is the pull of this little known group.

Meet Steve Scalise, Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, and New Conscience for House Conservatives

Paul Weyrich, founder of the RSC (Photo Credit: AP)

The history of the RSC reads in some ways like a who’s who of conservatism. Founded in 1973 by conservative organizing giant Paul Weyrich, who would later go on to found the Heritage Foundation as well, and in whose name a weekly lunch is still held for conservatives. The RSC was explicitly designed to keep a handle on Republican congressional leaders and prevent them from moderating too aggressively. Given that 7 of 9 members of the current Republican leadership in the House are themselves members of the RSC (Speaker Boehner and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy being the lone exceptions), this mission is presumably much easier in the present climate.

It is not difficult to see why ambitious politicians would flock to this group. Among its past members are two former Vice Presidents (Dan Quayle and Dick Cheney), as well as seven sitting Senators and three sitting Governors. Of those Governors, Mike Pence, the current Governor of Indiana, and a man who many floated in the last election as a Presidential prospect, and no doubt will be floated again in 2016, spent two years as leader of the RSC. Jim Jordan, who until this year was the chair of the RSC, earned more than a few feathers in his cap by nearly passing a budget that outpaced even Rep. Paul Ryan’s in fiscal conservatism, and acting as one of Boehner’s lead internal critics on the debt ceiling deal two years ago.

Meet Steve Scalise, Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, and New Conscience for House Conservatives

Speaker John Boehner (left) and Rep. Jim Jordan (right) (Photo Credit: AP)

Here’s Jordan explaining his opposition to making “deals” over taxation:

However, now that Jordan has stepped down, a new face has assumed control of the group, and with it, the position of “conscience” for House conservatives. That new leader is Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, who was described by the American Spectator this way prior to his election:

In just four years, Scalise has forged a reputation as an intelligent bulldog with an appetite for chomping away at big government. Consider several of his high-profile accomplishments.

First, Scalise authored an amendment that made it all the way into law, despite objections from President Obama, that eliminated four of Obama’s unaccountable policy “czars.”

Second, while everybody else in a committee hearing seemed to be kowtowing to the supposed moral authority of former Vice President Al Gore on cap-and-trade legislation, Scalise effectively raked Gore over the coals, as can be seen in this video link. (He did much the same to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, calling him to account for Chu’s earlier advocacy of high gas prices as a good idea and blasting him for his role in the Solyndra scandal.) Indeed, Scalise has made himself perhaps the “go-to guy” for all House conservatives when it comes to energy policy.

Third — and this one was fun — Scalise almost single-handedly stopped Barack Obama from being the Grinch who taxed Christmas trees. Obama tried to assess a 15-cent tax on trees as a “fee,” but Scalise got wind of it and, as Fox News noted, raised such a stink that Obama was forced to reverse himself.[...]

His conservative interest-group ratings are strong, too: 97 lifetime from the American Conservative Union, 100 lifetime from National Right to Life, 100 lifetime from the National Federation of Independent business, and an A+ from the National Rifle Association.

Meet Steve Scalise, Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, and New Conscience for House Conservatives

Rep. Steve Scalise (Photo Credit: AP)

Scalise won election to his position by a close vote against Rep. Tom Graves of Georgia, and is already generating buzz. Said one Senior GOP aide, “RSC Chairman Jim Jordan is a hard act to follow, but it looks to most folks I know that Chairman Scalise is doing it. He’s already pushing back against leadership, advancing some conservative ideas, and banking some wins.”

Here’s Scalise talking about the necessity for serious solutions after the 2012 election on CBS:

To find out how Scalise himself plans to keep “banking wins,”  TheBlaze interviewed him via email about his view of the future of the conservative movement broadly and the Republican Study Committee specifically:

TheBlaze: What do you see as the key issues for the conservative movement in the present climate?

Scalise: The primary issue for the conservative movement is preserving the American Dream for our children by cutting spending and getting us on a path to balance the federal budget. I have two young children and every vote I take I think about the impact it will have an their ability to have the same opportunities I enjoyed when I grew up. Washington needs to work towards solutions that will reduce our debt and deficit so that we can get our economy back on track and future generations are not burdened by our mistakes today.

TheBlaze: In the past, you have stated that the RSC “needs to actually focus on implementing conservative solutions.” What conservative solutions do you think should be offered, and to which issues? Will you be introducing legislation on these issues?

Scalise: There is a place for conservative solutions to all the big problems that are currently facing America and I plan for the RSC to continue bringing legislation forward to solve those problems from a conservative perspective. One example of legislation RSC will be promoting involves health care, where our Members have bills not only to repeal Obamacare, but also to replace it with conservative solutions that will lower costs for families by promoting competition and innovation without the taxes and mandates in the President’s law.  We also plan on bringing an RSC jobs bill that focuses on economic growth by lowering tax rates, increasing American energy production, and rolling back the radical regulations that are killing jobs and stifling growth.

RSC members have and will continue to produce conservative legislation.  The latest conservative solution that is being embraced by leadership is achieving a balanced budget in 10 years, which was has been a hallmark of the RSC’s budget.

TheBlaze: Given that you control a majority of House Republicans, including 7 of the 9 current members of leadership, how closely do you expect to work with the leadership to push the RSC’s goals?

Scalise: The job of the RSC is to be the conservative rudder of the House, and that means we should fight to promote conservative legislation to our nation’s problems and push our leadership to bring those bills to the House Floor, but we also stand ready to pull our leadership back to the right when they veer off course.

TheBlaze: You’ve stated in the past that it is necessary for Republicans to “unite as conservatives if we’re going to get things done.” How far does the necessity to unite extend? Will you still push back on leadership?

Scalise: With more than 165 members, the RSC is a powerful bloc of votes in the Republican conference, and I intend to unify the RSC around conservative solutions as we present common sense alternatives to the problems facing our nation. House Republicans have been most united when we are fighting for conservative principles, whether it was our support for the RSC-proposed “Cut, Cap, and Balance” legislation, or our united opposition to the failed stimulus and Obamacare. There will be times when we are in agreement with our leadership’s approach to the challenges we face, but there will also be times when we disagree with our leadership. During those times when we disagree with our leadership, we will work to pull them back to the right, but also stand ready to fight any proposals that violate our conservative principles.

TheBlaze: What areas of public policy do you think conservatives have ignored to their detriment?

Scalise: Conservatives have not paid enough attention to getting our agenda enacted into law. We have come up with great solutions to America’s problems, but have been largely unsuccessful at getting conservative policy enacted.  A bill that does not get passed, no matter how great the bill is, does not help American families who are struggling under the weight of Obama’s failed agenda, and this Congress I hope to work with the RSC to pass bills that will help preserve the American Dream, put us on the path to a balanced budget, and finally cut spending so we can reduce the mountain of debt that has been piled on the backs of our children and grandchildren.

TheBlaze: The RSC was founded by Paul Weyrich, who was never elected to Congress. Do you foresee grassroots activists and other outsiders being able to influence Congress so directly in the future?

Scalise: I see the grassroots as an important part of the RSC, and in fact just Wednesday I spoke at the Weyrich lunch.  The RSC would not be the powerful force we are today without this strong grassroots influence, and I look forward to continuing to work with conservative outside groups to help us achieve our shared beliefs and goals so we can advance the conservative movement.