Comment from NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions on Democrat Plans to Put Liberal Interests Ahead of American Jobs

May 11, 2009

Comment from NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions on Democrat Plans to
Put Liberal Interests Ahead of American Jobs

Washington- National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chairman Pete Sessions released the following statement regarding comments reported in today’s New York Times story on the Democrats’ plans to put liberal interests ahead of American jobs:

“I have said it once and I will say it again. Democrats are intent on passing an agenda that puts their liberal interests first, and the future of American jobs second. Despite their efforts to re-frame my comments, I was simply reiterating what many members of the Democratic Party have echoed over the past several weeks, which is that many of the so-called economic ‘solutions’ proposed by liberals in Washington either already have or have the potential to inflict further damage on our economy and undercut our country’s free enterprise system.

“After publicly feuding with the Democratic leadership over the political merits of Nancy Pelosi’s crusade to institute a national energy tax, it appears that my counterpart at the DCCC is lobbing rhetorical missives with the desperate hope of scoring points with the liberal party leaders he infuriated. If Chris Van Hollen, or any other member of the Democratic leadership, takes issue with my comments, then I would urge them to take a look at what some of their own members have been saying about their reckless economic policies.”

Comments from Congressional Democrats on Democrat-Proposed Economic Policies:

Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK): “Gov. Brad Henry and Congressman Dan Boren have joined a growing chorus of Oklahoma politicians speaking against President Barack Obama’s budget proposals. The plans would eliminate two tax breaks heavily used by the state’s oil and gas industry. Henry has sent a letter to the president saying that eliminating the tax breaks is a ‘grave concern’ and urges him to abandon the plan. Boren says it’s impossible for him to not speak out against the proposals that he says could destroy Oklahoma’s economy.” (Associated Press. 5/11/09)

Rep. Charles Melancon (D-LA): “At this point Melancon said he can’t support the draft because it would shut down the state’s energy coast. Melancon’s vote could have a detrimental effect on getting the measure out of committee. ‘I believe this bill would create an undue burden on families who are already paying too much in energy bills and on an industry that provides thousands of Louisianians with good jobs,’ Melancon said.” (Gerard Shields, “La. Democrats Key Figures In Federal Emissions Debate,” Baton Rouge Advocate, 5/2/09)

Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA): “‘What I’ve seen so far is nowhere near where it needs to be for me to support it,’ Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) told POLITICO. ‘Any way you do it, it hurts Pennsylvania, especially western Pennsylvania.’ ‘I think cap and trade is bad policy,’ said Altmire.” (Alex Isenstadt, “Cap And Trade Hits Speed Bumps,” Politico, 4/27/09)

Rep. John Boccieri (D-OH): “‘My understanding from what I’ve heard is it’s going to cause a big increase in our utility bills.’ Boccieri said the White House has been lobbying him heavily, but, ‘in its present form, cap and trade would be devastating to Ohio.'” (Robert Wang, “Boccieri Holds Telephone Town Hall Meeting,” Canton Repository, 3/25/09)

Background on Van Hollen feud with own Democratic leadership:

Van Hollen vs. Pelosi:

“Pelosi asked her deputies what was going on, sources close to the situation said, and word came back that Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), the party’s campaign chief, had given exposed Democrats a pass on the measure.

“Pelosi talked to Van Hollen and then worked to limit Democratic defections, securing for the White House the biggest margin of victory in more than a decade on the always-tough budget vote.” (Newmyer and Dennis, “Van Hollen Tests Power of Position,” Roll Call, 05/11/09)

Van Hollen vs. Waxman:

“Van Hollen doesn’t want vulnerable House Democrats — especially the freshmen under his care — to be forced to take difficult votes on the measure if it’s not going to pass anyway.

“But Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a 34-year veteran of the House who knocked off his longtime predecessor last fall to push an ambitious climate change bill, took umbrage with Van Hollen’s public stance during Thursday’s leadership meeting, people present said.

“Brandishing an issue of that day’s CQ in which Van Hollen laid out the merits of holding off, an agitated Waxman reminded his junior colleague that raising procedural concerns in public didn’t make it any easier for the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman to broker a compromise with the members of his committee — or help him pass an ambitious bill in the House.” (O’Connor and Lerer, “Democrats duel over climate bill,” Politico, 05/04/09)