Fossil Fuels Using House Dems Introduce “Keep It In The Ground”

I wonder how many of these Democrats have taken contributions from fossil fuels companies, to go along with their own use of fossil fuels? These are questions not asked by Samantha Page at Joe Romm’s George Soros funded Climate Progress

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA) introduced the Keep It in the Ground Act on Thursday. Under the bill, there would be no new leases for extraction of fossil fuels — such as coal, oil, and gas — on all federal lands. It would also stop new leases for offshore drilling in the Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico and prohibit offshore drilling in the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans.

“This is a response to a real outpouring of support for this cause that I have seen, not just from my constituents on the north coast of California, but really from all over the country,” Huffman told reporters during a call Thursday. “We’ve got to get much more aggressive in this fight against climate change, because we know what we put off today will only make the cost and the damage greater for our children tomorrow.”

The bill has 17 Democratic cosponsors in the House and is a companion bill to one introduced in the fall in the Senate. “I think the only remaining climate deniers in America are my Republican colleagues in the United States Congress,” Huffman quipped.

A goodly chunk of Huffman’s major contributors are in businesses that require lots of fossil fuels to operate, such as the Teamsters and Airline Pilots Association. His #1 donor for 2014 was PG&E Corp, a big user of fossil fuels.

During the call Thursday, Huffman also mentioned the recent Supreme Court decision to stay the Administration’s Clean Power Plan rule, saying that despite the court’s action, more and more people are advocating for action on climate and catalyzing change.

“I hope [the stay] will only be a speed bump,” Huffman said. “I think it will underscore the importance of all of our other efforts.”

More and more people? The issue is typically down at the bottom of what Americans are concerned over, and attempting to reduce the availability of inexpensive power sources will only serve to raise the cost of living for Americans, seriously damaging the lives of the middle and lower classes.

And, if so many are concerned, why only 17 cosponsors? Anyhow, in the press release cited in the first excerpt we read

“Our nation’s capacity to transition towards clean energy sources is expanding at a record pace,” said Huffman. “However, there is still much to be done to break our unhealthy dependence on fossil fuels. Our oceans and our public lands-including the fossil fuel deposits beneath them- belong to the American people, not to the oil and gas industry, and it’s time that the law reflects that fact. There is an urgent need to keep fossil fuels in the ground if we want to protect the planet for future generations. The ‘Keep It in the Ground Act’ represents a crucial step that the federal government can take to protect the public, prevent carbon emissions, and fight climate change.”

When will he give up his own dependence on fossil fuels? You can bet he’s not riding a bike or driving a non-fossil fueled vehicle across the country from California to Washington, D.C.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “Fossil Fuels Using House Dems Introduce “Keep It In The Ground””

  1. Jeffery says:

    Huffman’s major contributors are in businesses that require lots of fossil fuels to operate, such as the Teamsters and Airline Pilots Association. His #1 donor for 2014 was PG&E Corp, a big user of fossil fuels.

    And yet Huffman proposed a bill contrary his donor’s wishes! Would that some Republican show such courage.

    It’s interesting that you used data from the previous election cycle and not the current one (which was also itemized on the website you furnished).

    How much did Pacific Gas and Electric donate in 2015-2016? $0. And actually PG&E is a producer, more than a user.

  2. alanstorm says:

    “despite the court’s action, more and more people are advocating for action on climate and catalyzing change.”

    He MEANT to say “fewer and fewer”. He just got confused. But, hey, he’s a liberal. They’re BORN confused.

  3. Dana says:

    You can count on some major corporations to support “keep it in the ground,” as the excess supply of petroleum has caused oil prices to decline, and the stock market has fallen along with it. The drop in oil prices ‘leading’ stocks lower could be a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, in that we had been in a bull market for almost eight years, but that’s the accepted wisdom. The thinking is that if the supply can be reduced, stock prices will rise again, reversing some of the losses.

    Thing is, that’s upper-class thinking again. Yeah, I’ve lost money as well as stocks have fallen, but I’ve gained money on the other end, as heating oil and gasoline prices have declined. I don’t keep track of my gasoline usage, but my last tank of heating oil was at $1.440 per gallon, where I averaged $3.515 per gallon two winters ago.

    This comparison isn’t quite apples and oranges, more lemons and oranges (both being citrus fruits!), but I have spent $770.36 so far this winter on fuel (heating oil and wood), where in the winter of 2013-2014 I had spent $2568.26 on heating oil as of February 19th. That’s a savings of $1797.90, which is less than I have lost (a paper loss only) on the stock market this year, but if I had factored in the much lower cost of gasoline, I’d be very close to my gains balancing my losses.

    Our good friends on the left would never look at it that way.

  4. Jeffery says:

    And don’t forget that Iran has doubled their oil exports since the sanctions were lifted, putting even more downward pressure on oil prices.