It started when the Washington Post’s Dana Millbank published a story entitled “Republican’s Vote Against Moms; No Word Yet on Puppies and Kittens.” This article was then picked up by two of Montana’s lefty bloggers who used it’s finer points to argue that Montana Representative Denny Rehberg didn’t vote to support mothers. But their argument leaves a lot to be desired.

First off, the bill honoring Mother’s Day was H. Res. 1113. According to the Library of Congress, Rehberg voted for H. Res. 1113. In fact, the resolution passed 412-0. Which would suggest that every Member who voted, supported the Mother’s Day resolution.

So, where did the Montana bloggers and Millbank get the idea that House Republicans didn’t support the resolution? Because after the vote was complete, Rep. Tiahrt (R-Kans.) moved for a “motion to reconsider.” A motion supported by 178 House Republicans. But despite the motion’s name, Rehberg’s support for the motion doesn’t undo his support for the Mother’s Day resolution.

According to the House Rules Committee’s website, a motion to reconsider:

Under Rule XVIII, the motion to reconsider is available to any Member who votes on the prevailing side of a question and who wishes to move reconsideration on the same or succeeding legislative day. This normally only occurs when Members (usually Minority party Members) determine there is a need to slow down the legislative process.

So, why would Millbank and the lefty bloggers insinuate that this motion showed the Republicans disdain for mothers and Mother’s Day? Because it makes Rehberg sound like the Big Bad Wolf. Nevermind the fact that the motion to reconsider doesn’t change the fact that H. Res. 1113 passed unanimously.

Rehberg is on the record supporting Mother’s Day, as are 411 of his House Colleagues. His vote for the motion to reconsider doesn’t change that. But why let a little thing like the facts get in the way of a catchy headline?

____ “‘A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,’ warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”

____ “Perhaps 10 or 20 per cent of the world’s land surface would remain within the agriculturally productive zone.”

____ “The first casualties would be populations of animals, wild and domestic, since the competition for productive land surface would be quickly felt by mankind.  The raising of food animals would be too inefficient in an era of land scarcity, and humanity would have to exist on a vegetarian and synthetic diet.”

____ “The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.”

____  “Even if temerature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries - the U.S., Canada, Australia - global food shores would be sharply reduced.  University of Toronto Climatologist Kenneth Hare, a former president of the Royal Meteorological Society, believes that the continuing drought and the recent failure of the Russian harvest gave the world a grim premonition of what might happen.  Warns Hare: “I don’t believe that the world’s present population is sustainable”

____ “Meanwhile, the rest of the world has been enduring more serious and probably more significant changes.  The African drought, threatening to turn a wide swath of sub-Saharan Africa into an extended desert, has caused thousands of deaths by famine and related diseases, while millions are kept alive by emergency food alone.  Similar dry weather patterns have been observed in a heavily populated “drought belt,” extending through the Middle East to India, South Asia, and Northern China.”

____ “Without disciplined world-wide planning, half of the world’s population could die through war, fighting on smaller scale, starvation or cold.”

____ “The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it.”

____ “If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.”

____ “But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies.”

First, they claimed that Rehberg is a puppet for President Bush, even though his voting record tells a different story.

Then they complained that he didn’t support an important and popular bill, even though he voted for it.

Now, Jack at Western Word points out that they are accusing him of not supporting the G.I. Bill even though he’s signed on as a cosponsor.

Of course, it did not take long for Montana Democrats to use veterans, once again, as a political tool. They sent out a “Demo Digest” e-mail telling folks that Rehberg did not support the bill “last year.” According to Senator Webb’s website, the bill in the House, H.R.5740, was only introduced in the House on April 9, 2008. Rehberg signed on as a co-sponsor April 24. Also, according to Senator Jim Webb’s website, the same bill in the senate, S-22, introduced on 01/04/07 was not co-sponsored by Senator Baucus until June 12, 2007, and by Senator Tester until March 22, 2007. So, it took Rehberg only 15 days to sign on as a co-sponsor of the bill, where it took Tester about 77 days and Baucus about 159 days.

Undoubtedly, Max Baucus’ army of campaign workers is digging through the thousands of votes looking for anything they can find to attack Rehberg. The best they can find so far, apparently, is that he doesn’t support the bills he votes for and cosponsors.

Attention Montana Democrats: Please stop lying to the people you hope to represent.

____ “Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars worth of damage in thirteen U.S. states.”

____ “But they are almost unanimous in teh view that the trends will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.”

____ “By blocking moisture-bearing equatorial winds and preventing them from bringing rainfall to the parched sub-Sahara region, as well as other drought-ridden areas stretching all the way from Central America to the Middle East and India, the polar winds have in effect caused the Sahara and other deserts to reach farther to the south.  Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones.”

____ “The probability of climatic change makes the concern for energy much greater than the ‘energy crisis’ has implied.”

____ “Consider the fact that the last 40 years have seen a rapid growth in world populations with a corresponding rise in the ability of farmers to feed the great mass of people.  Although relying heavily upon inputs of fertilizer, the highly productive food-producing areas are delicately adjusted to the prevailing climatic conditions.  The difference between a bumper crop and a meager one often rests on minimal weather differences.”

____ “Man, too, may be somewhat responsible.”

Recently, the Governor’s compulsive need to get his likeness in the press overcame the pesky requirement to abide by Montana law. I’ve already blogged about this lapse in ethics, but there’s another aspect to this story that hasn’t been covered - one that’s even more revealing. A double-standard has emerged - one that seems to signify the presences of impropriety on another rather important matter.

(more…)

____ “Given the amound of literature available concerning climates of the past, it is really quite startling to realize that it has been only a little more than 100 years since the enormity of climatic changes was first realized.”

____ “The relationship between food production and changing climates has recently been examined by a number of climatologists. Generally, they all reach the same conclusion - namely, that we should prepare now for the possible contingencies of climatic change and resulting food shortages.”

____ “In the past few years, odd and unpleasant weather has plagued New England and the world, as droughts, floods, heat waves, and bitter cold have hit unexpectedly with surprising power. Locally, weather-watchers have observed four unusually mild winters in a row, including last year’s, the warmest since 1948.”

____ “If the world populations of men and animals were large, a large proportion would have to die even if they were mobile. This is dictated by geography and climatic phenomena.”

____ “To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading.”

We thought things were bad when gas prices were $2.33 for a gallon when the 110th Congress gaveled into session. Today, the national average is over $3.53 and rising. Why haven’t Democrats done anything?

They’ll never admit this - and they hope that we’ll all have goldfish memories - but high gas prices are just what Doctor Democrat has been ordering for years. See, while the working poor are important because they vote, environmentalists are even more important because they donate. A lot.

And for years, environmentalists have been complaining about the low price of gas. They complain because low gas prices prevent the market from adopting more expensive alternatives. They complain because low gas prices make gas-guzzling SUVs economically viable. They complain because low gas prices don’t account for what they call the environmental footprint of fossil fuels. And they still think gas prices are too high.

Economists feel that gasoline prices would need to double and remain there (i.e. $7-8/gallon) before behavior would really change, and advocate a gas tax to get us there. The externalities (accidents, smog, global warming, etc.) are simply not reflected in the current price of gasoline.

They have proposed carbon taxes, mileage taxes, gas taxes, energy taxes, congestion taxes and just about any other mechanism they could think up to make the price of a gallon of gasoline higher. The price we’re paying at the pump is the result of years of their efforts to prevent us from tapping our own energy supplies.

So when Americans wonder about the plan to lower gas prices, I am skeptical whether the Democrats would enact such a plan even if they had one. Given their record of fighting for higher gas prices, their promises in 2006 seemed hollow to me.

I written my thoughts before on what I think should happen with the student loan markets. But, transparency in government agencies is rarely a bad idea. It should be noted that the Montana Guaranteed Student Loan Program has been audited by the State Legislature each of the last two years according to the quick google search I put in (reports here and here). However, those reports only tangently mention MHESAC and SAF.

My one problem with the reporting this spring has been a lack of mention that the Montana student loan industry received a clean audit from the AG last fall. I mention this because I get the impression that Baucus, Tester and Schweitzer are accusing MHESAC/SAF of acting in an unethical, or unprofessional way. The distinction should be made that this is audit is a question of competence and judgment, not corruption. Given what came out of New York last year, I would think it important to make sure those are not the sort of allegations being made here.

All that said lets shine the light on these groups. At the very least it should be concerning that the same folks setting tuition rates are also in charge of the groups processing student loans.

Investigators will tell you the best way to find underhanded activities is to follow the money. Gaps in the money trail - unaccounted for sums, and unrecorded expenditures - are tell-tale fingerprints of shady activity. Governor Brian Schweitzer maintains an unregulated political account worth at least $46,000. Where the money came from and how he spends it are unknown because he has refuses to disclose. What is the Governor hiding?

(more…)