The question remains - will Speaker Pelosi allow for the same in the House?  So far, House Democrat leaders are so unwilling to allow for votes on opening American energy resources that they’ve completely haulted the appropriations process.

 To view Jack’s speech, click below:

 For more information on Jack’s push to realize America’s fuel independence, click here.

Two editorial boards succinctly make this point today.

• New York Post: “ONE STEP CLOSER TO CHEAPER OIL”
   Congressional Democrats are now the only ones holding up exploration for an estimated 86 billion barrels of American coastal oil.

President Bush yesterday lifted an executive ban on offshore drilling that had been in place since 1990, leaving Congress - whose own longstanding ban is up for renewal later this year - the chance to make a dent in energy prices.

Fat chance of that, though.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi predictably denounced Bush’s move as a giveaway to “big oil” - you know, the folks who pump the oil that heats American homes and powers American cars.  (Click here for the full article)

•  Wall Street Jounal: ‘Free Our Oil’
  That was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s catchphrase last week as she continued to grope for an energy policy. One of her ideas was to request “a small drawdown” in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, no irony intended. At least President Bush has finally called the Speaker’s bluff by rescinding the 1990 executive ban on offshore energy exploration.

With Mr. Bush’s belated decision yesterday, Congress’s moratorium on offshore drilling is now the last major political barrier to increasing domestic oil-and-gas production. Yet Democratic leaders have refused to schedule even a single hearing on the topic. (Click here for full article)

In Jack’s speech, he notes that the nay-saying of House Democrats on opening up domestic resources means two things:

1. Even they admit that there are oil reserves available which we have not yet tapped.
2. They try to divert attention from that by talking about how long it would take to come up.  Not only are their timetables outrageously inflated but they do not consider that their one-size-fits-all approach of alternative vehicles has done nothing to solve this crisis.

In order to truly solve this energy crisis, we must take a three-legged approach.  First, is conservation - by using less oil we will bring down demand which will force down the cost of oil.  Second, we must explore our own domestic resources - America remains the only country in the world that restricts her domestic energy resources.  Third, we must us innovation to discover and produce more sources of alternative energy.

To view Jack’s speech, click below:

For more information on what Jack’s doing to combat high gas prices or to take his energy survey, click here.

In another push to deal with soaring gas prices, President Bush on Monday will lift an executive ban on offshore drilling that his stood since his father was president. But the move, by itself, will do nothing unless Congress acts as well.

The president plans to officially lift the ban and then explain his actions in a Rose Garden statement, White House press secretary Dana Perino said.

There are two prohibitions on offshore drilling, one imposed by Congress and another by executive order signed by former President Bush in 1990. The current president, trying to ease market tensions and boost supply, called last month for Congress to lift its prohibition before he did so himself.

But Perino said Bush no longer wants to wait. She pinned blame on the leaders of the Democratic Congress, noting that no action has been taken on this issue.

“They haven’t even held a single hearing,” Perino said. “So we are going to move forward, and hopefully that will spur action by the Congress.”

Asked if Bush’s action alone will lead to more oil drilling, Perino said, “In terms of allowing more exploration to go forward? No, it does not.”

The president, in his final months of office, has responded to record gas-prices with a series of proposals, including more oil exploration. None would have immediate impact on prices at the pump, according to White House officials, who say there is no quick fix. But starting action now would help, they say.

Bush’s proposal echoes a call by Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, to open the Continental Shelf for exploration.

Congressional Democrats have rejected the push to lift the drilling moratorium, accusing the president of hoping the U.S. can drill its way out a problem. (Source)

President Bush is expected to make the announcement at a 1:30 press conference in the Rose Garden.

Last week, Jack joined many of his colleagues in calling on the President to do just that.  For a copy of the letter, click here.

For those of who may be confused, this blog is not the energy section of Jack’s website.  For a look at Jack’s comprehensive energy position, please click here.

From the peice:

“You’d think something on which the Constitution is unambiguous (the First Amendment does say, ‘Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech’) would be settled beyond dispute, but history has proved otherwise…

“[T]oday’s politicians are too savvy to attempt this sort of full-frontal assault on speech.  Instead they’re employing a slightly different, more modern tactic - censorship in the name of diversity.”

To read the full article, click here.

Among other things, the article highlights Rep. Mike Pence’s efforts on the issue including an amendment to an appropriations bill that passed overwhelmingly last year and Speaker Pelosi’s refusal to bring up his “Broadcaster Freedom Act” to a vote for fear that it might pass.  For more information on the act from Rep. Pence’s office, click here.

Conducted March 29 through May 23 by Smith-Geiger LLC, the survey reported  88 percent of Georgia households were aware that full-power television stations  will be switching their broadcast signals and programming to an all-digital format.  Across the country, consumer awareness of the DTV transition is nearly universal at 90 percent.

An estimated 324,420 homes in Georgia rely exclusively on over-the-air television, meaning they watch free TV broadcasts using rabbit ear or rooftop  antennas. These households will need to take steps to receive a digital television  signal by February 17, 2009, when all full-power stations must begin
broadcasting only in digital.

Among the survey’s key findings in Georgia:

• 88 percent of households are aware television is switching to digital
• 33 percent of households correctly stated the date of the transition
• 69 percent of households recalled seeing DTV messages on TV

Led by NAB, broadcasters nationwide are focusing their efforts on educating Americans about the actions they need to take to be prepared for the switch.  Over-the-air viewers must either purchase a converter box or digital TV set, or
subscribe to a pay service, such as cable or satellite. Local television and radio stations will continue running spots that highlight the transition date and the government‘s converter box coupon program, as well as explain the benefits of DTV and the ways consumers can upgrade to digital.

DTVAnswers.com is the official Web site of the National Association of Broadcasters’ digital television (DTV) transition campaign. Launched in January 2007, the DTV campaign’s mission is to ensure that no consumer is left
unprepared, due to lack of information, for the February 17, 2009, federallymandated transition from analog to digital broadcasting.

To view the clip, click below:

For more information on what Jack’s doing to combat high gas prices, click here.�

That’s a pretty good indicator of the direction they’d like to see our government move yet, for some reason, it’s fallen on deaf ears here in Congress.  Just yesterday, Congressman John Peterson’s motion to do just this was voted down by Democrats in a subcommittee hearing (release here).

 It’s time to answer the call to open our domestic resources and bring down the price at the pump.  America is the ONLY nation in the world that restricts its domestic energy resources.  While we can’t drill our way out of this problem, we’ve got to start somewhere.

To see more about what Jack’s doing on energy prices, click here.  If you haven’t done so already, take Jack’s energy survey to show him what you’re willing to do to lower gas prices.

Washington and, indeed, America is shocked and saddened by the sudden loss of Tim Russert.  Mr. Russert was larger than life figure and the Kingston office’s thoughts and prayers go out to the Russert familiy.

NBC has launched a memorial of sorts on their website.  To view it, click here.

Sounds pretty logical right?  The problem is that Congressional Democrats don’t seem to understand this fact.  They refuse to increase domestic supply by drilling in ANWR or off shore and their only idea thus far to combat the high price we pay at the pump is a “windfall” profit tax on oil companies.

Sure, oil companies have a lower approval rating than Congress itself so they’re a pretty easy target.  There are just a few glaring issues with this rationale.  First, any American with a retirement plan or investments in a mutual fund is more than likely a stock holder in one of these companies.  Second, these profits are what funds the exploration and research that could prove to be a market-based way out of this crisis.  Finally, as Lesser points out, “unfortunately, by reducing supplies, a windfall profits tax will only lead to even higher prices.”

With Speaker Pelosi and congressional Democrats blocking all the other alternatives, what’s Lesser’s proposal?  Rationing:

“The next obvious step for our solons is to cap demand by rationing gasoline, and then gradually reduce the quantity of ration coupons.

“‘Trading’ in coupons would be encouraged to ensure gasoline is allocated to uses of only the highest value. So Congress could reserve quantities of ration coupons for key lobbyists and their clients. Environmentalists could buy up coupons and “retire” them, lowering gasoline sales even more. Refineries could continue to produce gasoline, but as consumer demand would be sharply limited (and declining), oil companies would be forced to reduce the prices they charge. No more windfall profits! And lower carbon emissions!

“For legislators and environmentalists – if not average citizens – this plan has other virtues: As ration coupons are reduced, consumers would increasingly clamor for more electric cars, cars that ran on French-fry oil, and ‘flex-fuel’ cars that burn everything from gasoline to garbage. Eventually, gasoline could just be banned, reducing prices to zero and eliminating all ill-gotten profits.

“And if Congress then had to tackle French-fry oil speculators and impose a windfall profits tax on Big Spud, well why not?”

Sounds bizarre right?  What Lesser does a good job of pointing out, however satirically, is that if Democrats are blocking the most logically solutions to our problem we’re just going to have to start thinking outside the box.

To weigh in with your thoughts on how to lower gas prices, take Jack’s energy survey by clicking here.

To read Lesser’s full article, click here.

 Jack took to the floor to drive home this message and remind Americans just what the extremists are blocking us from doing - realizing our Nation’s energy independence.

To see Jack’s speech, click below.

Jack recently returned from a fact finding mission to the Middle East and came back reinvigorated to fight for domestic exploration.  When Jack and the other members on the trip questioned oil leaders in the region they noted the lunacy of Americans blaming them for high oil prices when we don’t have the refinery capacity to accomodate additional input and we remain the only country in the world  that restricts our domestic supply.

Check out the section in US News and World Report here.

Jack believes we should open our domestic resources and invest the profits into developing alternative fuels, more fuel efficient vehicles, and to realize America’s Fuel Independence.

 For more information, on what Jack’s doing to combat high fuel prices, click here.

To take Jack’s energy survey, click here.

When Jack and the other members on the trip questioned the oil leaders, they highlighted the hypocrisy of asking them to increase demand when we won’t drill for oil at home or even build new refineries.  As they pointed out, oil production was increased in response to President Bush’s recent trip to the region but it won’t effect the prices here at home because we don’t have the refinery capacity to handle it.

Jack also reminded listeners that China and Cuba are drilling 45 miles off the coast of Florida while government regulations forbid us from doing so.

Keep in mind, America is the ONLY country in the world to restrict its domestic energy resources.

From today’s The Hill:

“I can’t support a budget, from either party, that raises taxes on the middle class,” Foster said in a statement posted on his website. “I campaigned on a platform of middle-class tax relief, and I was elected to Washington to bring about change. When asked to choose between my party and the people I represent, I will choose the families of the 14th district every single time.”

“I voted against [the budget] because it allows tax cuts to expire in 2010, raising taxes on most American taxpayers,” [Cazayoux] said in a statement given to The Hill. “I promised the people of the 6th district of Louisiana to vote with my party when they are right, and vote against them when they are wrong. My vote today was the right vote for my constituents.” (Full article here.)

This goes in exact opposition to what Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on the floor last Thursday:

“This year’s budget plan does not include a tax increase. It actually calls for a $340 billion reduction in revenues,” Pelosi said on the House floor Thursday afternoon. “The problem that our friends on the Republican side have is that these tax cuts are for the middle class, not just for their friends in the upper 1 percent bracket.”

So what is it?  Did Pelosi and her tax and spend friends pass the largest tax increase in history or are their newly elected members lying?

As part of his ongoing efforts to tackle this issue, Jack’s created a survey with several proposals to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil and to bring down gas prices.  To take the survey, click

For more information on Jack’s stance on energy issues, click here.

It’s time to open these resources, bring down gas prices, and realize America’s fuel independence.

Alaska is two times the size of Texas:

ANWR is the size of South Carolina:

In relative size, if ANWR was a basketball court the oil fields would be the size of a business card (that little red dot):

As Jack points out, this could prove to be significant legislation.  At the rate taxes are increasing, we could go Flintstones-style and start soapboxing our way around.  Since Speaker Pelosi took control of the House promising “commonsense solutions” to America’s energy crunch, gas prices have gone from an average of $2.33 to $3.99.  What are the Democrats doing about it?  Absolutely nothing.  They have ignored any serious legislation to address gas prices.

To see Jack’s floor statement, click below:

There’s a clear choice on energy policy - Jack and Republican members of the House want every option on the table to reduce our dependence on foriegn oil and to drive down the price we pay at the pump.  Democrats, however, don’t want anything on the table even as middle-class American families are struggle to make ends meet under the Pelosi Premium.

To view Jack’s comments, click below.

(Photo courtesy John Carrington/Savannah Morning News)

Yesterday, Major General Rick Lynch and the Special Troops Batallion of Fort Stewart were greated with a welcome home ceremony.  3rd ID troops were deployed as part of General Petraeu’s surge and did and excellent job.  According to General Lynch:

“We killed or captured 6,000 insurgents,” he said. “We went from 25 attacks a day to less than two … and we turned what was called the ‘Triangle of Death’ into a triangle of life.” (Savannah Morning News, 6/3/08)

The 3rd ID is the pride of Georgia’s First District and we’re all so glad to see them home.  Our thoughts and prayers remain for the safe return of the 2nd Brigade Combat Team and the 4th Brigade who continue their mission in Iraq.

General Lynch also notes the three biggest challenges facing progress in Iraq:

“Lynch said the three biggest threats to success in Iraq remain: Sunni extremists, traditionally affiliated with al-Qaida; Shiite extremists; and Iranian fighters influencing the insurgency.  ‘These are people who for whatever reason, are trying to stop progress in Iraq,’ Lynch said.”

“Key lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are resigned to the idea that few, if any, of the 12 FY09 appropriations bills will be separately enacted and fear they will be packaged into an ombibus measure…”

That means that, yet again, hundreds of billions of dollars will be rolled into a single bill no doubt drafted in the dead of night behind closed doors and that members will be forced to vote on a measure they haven’t even had a chance to read.  Take Rep. Marcy Kaptur’s feelings on the recently crafted supplemental appropriations bill (from the same article):

“Even some House Democrats are upset about how the appropriations process has been handled…’It is not the way I want to do business,” said veteran appropriator Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio.”

It’s time for Democrats to get in the drivers’ seat and take the wheel before we go any further off course than we already are.  The American people deserve better.

“While Washington’s attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran.”

“..[T]he rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments – and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the ‘this-war-is-lost’ caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).”

We’re making progress in Iraq and it’s time to stop handicapping our troops with defeatist messages and bickering here at home.

The full editorial can be found here.

On Friday, May 23, millions of Georgians were busy planning their Memorial Day weekends, writing letters and making phone calls to loved ones serving in the U.S. Armed Forces, and remembering family members and friends who paid the ultimate sacrifice in service to our country. That same day, the Democratic Party of Georgia (DPG) was busy on a different matter: filing a fourth lawsuit against the State attacking the voter ID law. This lawsuit is brought by the same lawyers who filed the first three. All three were dismissed – one by the plaintiffs voluntarily and the other two by the courts. The State must now spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars fighting the DPG’s baseless and repetitive claims.

Ironically, a month ago, the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Indiana’s more stringent photo identification requirement by a 6-3 margin. In the majority opinion, written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who is one of the Court’s most liberal members, the Supreme Court concluded that Indiana’s photo identification law is “justified by the valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.” Georgia, of course, shares that same interest.

Justice Antonin Scalia concurred, adding, “To vote in Indiana, everyone must have and present a photo identification that can be obtained for free. The State draws no classifications, let alone discriminatory ones, except to establish optional absentee and provisional balloting for certain poor, elderly, and institutionalized voters and for religious objectors.”

In Georgia, the photo identification requirement also applies equally to every voter, but in Georgia, any voter can vote an absentee ballot. No excuse is needed to request an absentee ballot, and no photo identification is required to vote an absentee ballot by mail. A Georgia voter who does not have an acceptable form of photo identification when voting in-person can also cast a provisional ballot at the poll and then has 48 hours to return to his or her county registrar’s office with an acceptable form of identification to have that ballot count.

Justice Stephen Breyer, a President Clinton appointee, dissented but specifically acknowledged the marked differences between Indiana’s and Georgia’s photo identification requirement:

“By way of contrast, two other States – Florida and Georgia – have put into practice photo ID requirements significantly less restrictive than Indiana’s…Georgia restricts voters to a more limited list of acceptable photo IDs than does Florida, but accepts in addition to proof of voter registration a broader range of underlying documentation than does Indiana.”

Justice Breyer also cited U.S. District Court Judge Harold Murphy’s 2007 ruling upholding Georgia’s photo identification requirement and praising the State’s outreach and education program:

“Moreover, a Federal District Court found that Georgia ‘has undertaken a serious, concerted effort to notify voters who may lack Photo ID cards of the Photo ID requirement, to inform those voters of the availability of free [State-issued] Photo ID cards or free Voter ID cards, to instruct the voters concerning how to obtain the cards, and to advise the voters that they can vote absentee by mail without a Photo ID.’”

In the span of the last year, the Georgia Supreme Court dismissed the state court challenge because there was no proof that any voter was harmed by the voter ID law. U.S. District Court Judge Murphy also upheld the law, concluding that there was no proof any voter was harmed, that free voter IDs were and are readily available, and that the Georgia Secretary of State Office’s multi-phase outreach and education effort had resolved any complaints related to lack of education about how to get a photo ID. Even a U.S. Supreme Court Justice who voted to strike down Indiana’s law lauded the Georgia law.

The DPG’s lawsuit reads as if none of these rulings exist. The DPG complains that Georgia’s photo identification requirement means the Georgia Democratic Party must expend its resources to resolve three problems that the DPG imagines to exist: “identifying those of its supporters who are affected by the Act, assisting those supporters in obtaining Photo IDs and getting to the polls those of its supporters who would otherwise be discouraged by the new law from voting.” Try as they might, these same lawyers have been unable to identify - in over three years and three separate cases - any person with any of these difficulties.

By now, some may question whether this is even about the voter ID law any longer. Are the opponents of the ID law more concerned with the law itself or are they trying to put into place a mechanism to challenge the legitimacy of an unfavorable election result? After all, these same opponents have failed to produce a single adversely affected voter out of the millions who have cast votes with the law in effect.

A 2005 study by political scientists at the University of Miami and California State University - Northridge may shed some light onto the real motivations of the law’s opponents. The professors found that since the 2000 presidential election, pre-election litigation has essentially become a presidential election strategy. Prior to the 2000 presidential election, 48 cases were filed in state and federal courts, mostly by smaller political parties to secure ballot access for their candidates. Prior to the 2004 presidential election, 114 cases were filed in state and federal courts.

Most of the cases filed in 2004 focused on voter access and registration issues, such as automatic restoration of felons’ right to vote. The challenge to voter ID laws is simply the next step in this strategy, and the DPG seems intent on continuing its quest to disrupt Georgia’s elections process through any means available and at considerable cost to Georgia’s taxpayers.

The opponents of Georgia’s photo ID requirement have now lost in the Georgia Supreme Court and the U.S. District Court. In upholding the Indiana law, the U.S. Supreme Court even commented favorably on Georgia’s law. As Georgians, we know that the right to vote is too precious and too hard-fought to tolerate vote dilution and election fraud. We will not stand idly by as opponents of this common-sense law seek to undermine our vote and our elections through their pursuit of frivolous litigation. Georgians can be assured that this Secretary of State will continue to fight for Georgia’s photo ID requirement – and its implementation in this year’s elections – because I have sworn to protect our voters and the integrity of our elections.

Karen C. Handel
Georgia Secretary of State

According to the poll:

“Frustrated by political deadlock and inaction, Americans are beginning to consider some more drastic efforts to control the surge in gas prices at the pump.  For example, a majority of Americans now support drilling in U.S. coastal and wilderness areas.”

Increasing domestic energy production has been a staple of Jack’s proposal to help alleviate the energy crisis and to help America realize her energy independence.  It’s also a key element of the energy plan introduced by House Republicans last week. If we’re going to solve this energy crisis, we need to do everything in our power - from promoting alternative energy, opening up domestic supply, and increasing our use of clean and reliable sources of energy like nuclear and new coal technologies.  A key way to do this is to increase tax incentives to encourage Americans to take up new technologies and energy sources (a key provision of Jack’s DRIVE Act). 

Six in ten Americans support Republican policies to alleviate the energy crisis - how long with Democrats remain out of touch and continue to block the road to energy independence?  Oh wait, their idea is to nationalize the energy industry and bring Hugo Chavez style policies to our shores.

America’s strength is in our capitalist, free market economy.  Something must be done about oil prices but do we really want the famously ineffecient bureaucracy in charge of oil?  The real solutions will be found in conservation, exploration, and innovation.

Video available here.

Today’s CQ Today reports:

“Robert Menendez, D-N.J., invoked Senate Rule 16 on the floor, which requires that provisions in amendments to appropriations bills be relavent to the underlying legislation…”

That move struck provisions including expanded visas for immigrant agricultural workers, expansion of the federal telework program, and the prohibition of the establishment of a monument or protected area in the Gulf of Mexico - all of which have no place in an emergency supplemental appropriations bill.  Sounds good, right?

The article continues:

“Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., subsequently replaced the Appropriations Committee’s amendment with a new version written by leadership which does not include many provisions the committee added”

So, while they cleaned up some of the stuff, expanded veterans’ educational benefits, extension of unemployment insurance, and the delay of new Medicaid rules are all considered worthy of an emergency spending bill as is war policy provisions including a timeline for withdrawal.

As Jack said last week on C-SPAN, these are all things that may merit a debate in regular order.  They are not emergencies and should not be airdropped on the floor.

Last Thursday, House Republicans protested Democrat efforts to tie defeatist policies and a $54 billion tax increase on small businesses to troop funding - a move that will force their hands and require them to come back to the table.

Stay tuned as we’ve got to do something or troops won’t recieve their paychecks come after June.  Hopefully, the Democrats will come to their senses and fund the men and women who protect us every day.