In ten or more stand-alone long-debated (Capitolhearings.org) bills since 1993, Republicans voted against the RES, (and before that when it was called the RPS)

The only Republicans who did vote with us were voted out of office: Lincoln Chafee, Smith, Coleman, Specter etc.

If there is any other Republican voter out there who would like to see an RES, or any clean energy policy, they REALLY need to let the Senate Republicans know that.

So pissed that you state, “Our clean energy policy that we had hidden in the tax bill was collateral damage. This is traumatic.” and then you say ,”We can’t actually come right out and have a grownup discussion with these people and pass clean energy and climate policy like other countries. We have to hide it. That’s the only way to pass any progressive policy.”

Maybe the progressives should not in your words, “hide” the bills, maybe the issues should be debated and presented as stand alone themselves (and I am not talking about massive cap and trade bills). Then with a wrong outcome you could legitimately be pissed off. As someone who is in the business the RES would greatly affect on the positive side I’ve always been against the progressive side hiding the issues. It grinds me more that a back door method is attempted. If one truly believes the merit of ones case and in this case an RES and cash grants etc, let that case and its merits speak for themselves in debate and comment and then the public can decide for themselves. The apparant underhanded nature of hiding an issue (and it is underhanded to the general public) with something not connected to that issue is what really bugs me. I personally applaud the GOP for taking a stand, resolve the tax cut issue up or down and then address on its own the RES and its attendent issues in the next congress. One other issue which is apparant in the media all over is that the progressives (I’ll call them Democrats which they are) are really attempting to squeeze in as much as they can in a Lame Duck session because the belief is they can’t get what they want in a new congress. This also is somewhat of a slight of hand and less then honest way of doing business. I can’t believe that if you truly believed in the merits of an RES that you would NOT want it debated as a stand alone with all the merits of the issues presented. Or am I to believe that you would rather your side continue to hide things in bills having nothing to do with the issues (which is some areas is what turns the public off about the current congress). In our business we do not hide issues amongst bigger ones to trick our customers or stakeholders into believing one way or another, we attack and address individual issues based on the merits of each one. That is why my comments in the past on some of Cleantechs discussion of cap and trade were that it was too many sometimes non connected issues tied together that would be better debated as stand alones. It seems that again is the case here.

But the minority party in the Senate would not let it come up for an up or down vote (remember they use the filibuster: a 60 votes “vote to vote”, to prevent us having an up or down vote), despite one Republican (Graham) attempting to cross party lines and work with Kerry on it for most of last year.

The GOP has filibustered the clean energy provisions like a Renewable Energy Standard on at least 6 attempts over the last decade. There are numerous examples, and it is maddening. It is almost as if they are working for a foreign power that wants us to be left in the lurch.

Believe me, if it could be addressed as stand alone, it wouldn’t be stupid.

Clean energy IS a partisan issue, unfortunately. The GOP will not agree to any. Only fossil energy.

If you don’t want your legislation tied to such things, perhaps you should choose at the outset to simply not tie them to predictably partisan bills.

Unless, of course, the point all along was to turn a legislative shellacking into a talking point.

I hope they’re using their many lobbyists to carry their message to Congress Members offices and fundraisers. Big companies carry big sticks.

Head over to Business Insider.

They run regular posts on US inequality.

http://www.businessinsider.com/facts-about-inequality-in-america-2011-11

http://www.businessinsider.com/bernanke-inequality-is-destroying-america-2010-12

I respect your right to an opinion, and I think I have a right to an opinion. But, as far as I’m concerned, the “management” at GE can go blow their smoke in China, or, wherever they pay taxes.

“The newly released 1943 data make for absolutely stunning reading. We have simply never had clearer evidence of just how much America used to expect out of individual wealthy Americans — and just how little, by comparison, we expect out of our wealthy today.

We learn, for instance, that 1941’s top executive at IBM, Thomas Watson, collected $517,221 in compensation that year, about $7.7 million in current dollars. Watson paid 69 percent of his total 1941 income in federal income tax.