If they're both Senators then why not now?

[moreno]

If Obama and McCain are both US Senators, then why can't they lead the charge and work on creating new bills for some of the stuff they promise us NOW instead of waiting until after they win the White House?

Obama and McCain are trying to outdo each other on Energy where they both claim to work on passing new Legislation for tighter regulation of Oil Market Speculators if either is elected President. But, they're both Senators now. Obama is in the leading party. I'm sure he could corral some of his buddies in the Democratic Senate to work on that Bill now, right? McCain (funny I want to type McCracker for some reason) is also a Senator. Can't he also do the same?

The same goes for oil exploration and drilling within the US and off-shore.

My gut feeling tells me both are the same shit. Both are playing with our heads. Vote for me, I'll lower your gas prices, tax the rich, save our jobs from going overseas, end the war on Iraq, etc. But once either is voted into office then it's back to the same shit.

Any takers? Am I wrong with these assumptions?

 

[QueEx]

Am I wrong with these assumptions?

Can't tell. You've stated your opinions but no factual background (with regard to prior actions of Senators Obama and McCain) to show how they are likely to act now and/or in accordance with your opinions. So, there's no way to test your mere, assumptions.

QueEx

 

[moreno]

Can't tell. You've stated your opinions but no factual background (with regard to prior actions of Senators Obama and McCain) to show how they are likely to act now and/or in accordance with your opinions. So, there's no way to test your mere, assumptions.

QueEx

Here's one: Obama's Enron Loophole plan

Here's another: McCain's off-shore drilling

I don't get your come back. They're talking about doing things after they're elected. Why not work on those bills now? This is what I'm referring to.

Ending poverty, giving everybody health care, reducing unemployment and education, securing our borders, those are things I would expect a presidential candidate to sell to us. However, we have a gas crisis right now. Senators telling us they'll do something about fixing an urgent problem after they're elected for president is kind'a fucked up if you ask me. They have more power now as Senators than they will as President. They can put together bills now and bring them to committee, especially Obama since the Democrats are in power in the Senate and lead all of the committees there. Hell, being the Presidential candidate for their party with a hell of a good chance of winning the race gives them even more clout with their party and more of a chance of these bills to be looked at.

Is it that they don't want to give this lame duck President the Bill to sign? They can whip up a Bill really quickly with stupid gun law after a kid or someone is killed but they can't do the same to rein back speculators or start off-shore drilling? I'm sick of the same Washington rhetoric and BS from both sides!

 

[QueEx]

I don't get your come back. They're talking about doing things after they're elected. Why not work on those bills now? This is what I'm referring to.

In your earlier post you talked about McCain and Obama working on bills BEFORE they are elected, then you stated and asked this:

My gut feeling tells me both are the same shit. Both are playing with our heads. Vote for me, I'll lower your gas prices, tax the rich, save our jobs from going overseas, end the war on Iraq, etc. But once either is voted into office then it's back to the same shit.

Am I wrong with these assumptions?

And I said, I can't tell whether either would act on their promises once elected because you didn't give me anything where they have failed to act on promises in the past which would act as an indicator that either would do the same once elected president.

<center>___________________________________________</center>


But, to get to your point: interesting question. Perhaps, there are a number of reasons why neither are proposing bills NOW that match their campaign musings: the opposing party in congress would simply try to wreck the legislation because it might give the other side a precieved advantage; if a candidate takes too much time off to work on the legislation, he couldn't give proper attention to the campaign; they sponsored or co-sponsored bills several months ago that they wanted to point to during the campaign -- but, circumstances have changed since then and that legislation doesn't jibe with the current problems; or people would simply say you're doing it right now tryiing to get elected knowing that the legislation either will not solve the problem or will not get pass the other side (even though democrats are a majority, the republican president could cause big problems by vetoing legislation.

Of course, the real reason could be they don't have the answers - or - the real answers/legislation will require sacrifice and a change of life styles that the electorate is will not willing accept, voluntarily. A candidate would be foolish to propose legislation under either of these two circumstances in the midst of an election.

Now, given that there are other possibilities, what do you think?



QueEx

 

[moreno]

Good points and they all make sense, specially the President veto possibility. Although, W did ask for off-shore drilling and also drilling in Alaska ( Bush Proposes Off-Shore/Alaska Oil Exploration/Drilling) last week and has been talking about it for a while now so I don't think that, should a bill ever hit his desk, he would simply veto it. It would depend on what other items are on that bill that the Congress would attach to it.

It's really frustrating watching these actors in Congress with the power to prevent a catastrophe here just sit around and play politics as usual. I also want to blame the environmentalists for this problem we have now but I can't. I really think the media and the powers that be want to make us think they are to blame for us not using our own hydrocarbon resources. I suspect big oil and other special interests in this country and worldwide (maybe even OPEC) are keeping this Government from doing something about the energy policy or even alternative energy vehicles.

I can see your point where neither wants to stick their neck out this late in the game on the risk of having a bill shut down or not even make it out of committee or spending too much time on it when they can be out there showing their polished faces to the camera. You know, I almost want to challenge that response from you but I'm afraid it's true.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the winner does about it once he eventually wins.

 

[QueEx]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the winner does about it once he eventually wins.

In the meantime, lets watch closely the proposals they make and consider: are they realistic in the short term, i.e., what "real Help" would they be; what real difference would they make in the long term and whats the real benefit; and with all of them, what are the downsides and what is the cost-benefit analysis, i.e., does the means justify the ends.

I suspect that the reason we haven't seen more is: (1) for a crisis, its relatively new; and (2) the answers require tough choices that few of us really want to deal with.

QueEx