They want us to beilieve that there isn't any reason to give the Republicans anything in the conference committee.
May 28, 2014
It's almost comical watching the left bend over backwards to try to frame the debate prior to the conference committee on emergency drought legislation passed by both the House and Senate. Republicans are saying practically nothing except they're happy the Senate has finally passed their bill, regardless of what's in, or not in it. The Democrats, on the other hand, are almost gasping for air pretending to be aghast at Dianne Feinstein's bill. If you listen to them you would have to believe it actually does something.
Here are a few comments from the left:
Congressman George Miller: "We strongly caution our Senate colleagues from accepting any aspects of the destructive Valadao-Nunes bill, which does not provide any solutions to end water shortages, will irreparably damage the Bay-Delta..."
Congressman Mike Thompson: “I don’t think there’s a reason for a bill,” Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., said Wednesday, adding that a House and Senate conference will “make a bad bill worse.”
"The truth is, she's won. There isn't any need to go forward with the legislation, which could be hijacked by some of our House colleagues and create bigger problems."
But, if you read what Senators Boxer and Feinstein actually have proposed, you see something entirely different.
Senator Barbara Boxer: "She (Boxer) says environmentalists got “almost everything they wanted.” The greater danger, she says, is what happens when the measure faces a conference committee and House Republicans start adding riders.
Senator Dianne Feinstein: Feinstein says she hopes negotiations can "proceed quickly and bypass many of the controversial issues that have been raised in the past."
“We have to operate the system with more flexibility to be able to provide the water.”
Senator Dianne Feinstein (prior to passage): “This is meant to be a modest bill...to be able to work something out that can pass both houses,” Feinstein said Wednesday. “We need to have a vehicle.”
So, environmentalists got almost 'everything' they wanted. It's a modest bill. It's about flexibility. The 'greater danger' is the conference committee.
This is all about positioning or framing the debate prior to the conference committee. The left would have us believe their proposal is the moderate one, the 'modest' proposal. The Republicans are the radical ones, those who would destroy the Delta ecosystem and river ecosystems everywhere. They want us to believe that there isn't any reason to give the Republicans anything in the conference committee. They're trying to stop any further compromise before it even starts. Let's be clear: the Feinstein proposal is 'modest', as a matter of fact so 'modest' it doesn't add anything new that isn't already being done.
The San Francisco Chronicle did their part in perpetrating the sham with their editorial "Oppose Sen. Dianne Feinstein's drought legislation" where they say (with a straight face) "The House's Valadao-Nunes bill, a particularly destructive piece of legislation, would give water for fish to Central Valley irrigators at cheap federally subsidized prices."
The left, as usual, lays it right on the table. They're telling us their strategy. Just read their own words. The right, Republicans, are saying very little. Do they have a strategy or will they be rolled again? Stay tuned.
One more thing: if the Feinstein bill is all we get
Get the 10 most recent items from our RSS feed.