Posted on 06/24/2008 7:06:35 AM PDT by Loud Mime
Call your Congressmen and tell them to sponsor this bill!
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2279 To expedite the construction of new refining capacity on closed military installations in the United States, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
A BILL To expedite the construction of new refining capacity on closed military installations in the United States, and for other purposes.
snip
SEC. 2. STATE PARTICIPATION AND PRESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION.
(a) Designation Requirement- Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the President shall designate no less than 3 closed military installations, or portions thereof, subject to subsection (c)(2), that are appropriate for the purposes of siting a refinery.
snip
[The permit process is limited and has definite time limits. This whole idea is to expedite the building of new refineries for the military in more secure locations]
(5) Attorney's FEES- In any action challenging a Federal refinery authorization that has been granted, reasonable attorney's fees and other expenses of litigation shall be awarded to the prevailing party. This paragraph shall not apply to any action seeking remedies for denial of a Federal refinery authorization or failure to act on an application for a Federal refinery authorization. END
(Excerpt) Read more at thomas.loc.gov ...
Who are the sponsers? I love the bit about attorney’s fees.
I was thinking, too, about putting refineries on Indian Reservations. They have special sovereignties and are virtually immune from environmentalists’ lawsuits. Wowzie! That would kill lotsa birds with one stone — jobs for Indians, wealth for the tribes and gasoline for the cars of the good old USA!
Cosponsors: [notice how many signed on this month!]
Rep Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 6/17/2008
Rep Blackburn, Marsha [TN-7] - 6/19/2008
Rep Blunt, Roy [MO-7] - 6/10/2008
Rep Boehner, John A. [OH-8] - 6/10/2008
Rep Bonner, Jo [AL-1] - 6/10/2008
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 6/18/2008
Rep Boustany, Charles W., Jr. [LA-7] - 6/10/2008
Rep Broun, Paul C. [GA-10] - 6/18/2008
Rep Brown-Waite, Ginny [FL-5] - 5/10/2007
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 5/22/2008
Rep Buyer, Steve [IN-4] - 5/10/2007
Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] - 6/17/2008
Rep Camp, Dave [MI-4] - 6/10/2008
Rep Cole, Tom [OK-4] - 6/10/2008
Rep Conaway, K. Michael [TX-11] - 5/10/2007
Rep Cubin, Barbara [WY] - 6/17/2008
Rep Dent, Charles W. [PA-15] - 6/11/2008
Rep Diaz-Balart, Mario [FL-25] - 6/19/2008
Rep Drake, Thelma D. [VA-2] - 5/10/2007
Rep English, Phil [PA-3] - 5/10/2007
Rep Everett, Terry [AL-2] - 6/9/2008
Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] - 6/9/2008
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 6/18/2008
Rep Goodlatte, Bob [VA-6] - 5/10/2007
Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 5/17/2007
Rep Hastings, Doc [WA-4] - 6/19/2008
Rep Keller, Ric [FL-8] - 6/19/2008
Rep Kline, John [MN-2] - 6/10/2008
Rep Kuhl, John R. "Randy", Jr. [NY-29] - 6/10/2008
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 6/11/2008
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 6/17/2008
Rep Manzullo, Donald A. [IL-16] - 6/18/2008
Rep McCarthy, Kevin [CA-22] - 6/19/2008
Rep McHenry, Patrick T. [NC-10] - 6/10/2008
Rep McKeon, Howard P. "Buck" [CA-25] - 6/18/2008
Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 6/18/2008
Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9] - 6/9/2008
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 5/10/2007
Rep Rehberg, Dennis R. [MT] - 6/17/2008
Rep Rogers, Harold [KY-5] - 6/11/2008
Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 6/18/2008
Rep Roskam, Peter J. [IL-6] - 6/18/2008
Rep Sessions, Pete [TX-32] - 6/17/2008
Rep Shadegg, John B. [AZ-3] - 6/18/2008
Rep Smith, Adrian [NE-3] - 6/10/2008
Rep Smith, Lamar [TX-21] - 6/17/2008
Rep Souder, Mark E. [IN-3] - 5/10/2007
Rep Terry, Lee [NE-2] - 6/18/2008
Rep Thornberry, Mac [TX-13] - 6/17/2008
Rep Tiberi, Patrick J. [OH-12] - 6/18/2008
Rep Upton, Fred [MI-6] - 6/11/2008
Rep Weldon, Dave [FL-15] - 5/17/2007
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 5/10/2007
Rep Wilson, Joe [SC-2] - 6/18/2008
Rep Wolf, Frank R. [VA-10] - 6/18/2008
ping
My first impression is that this is a BAD idea! It would give the Democrats some talking points about easing up on new refineries while moving us in the direction of government control of oil production.
The sponsor is a former science teacher of mine. A good man. He represents portions of Lancaster County, Pa.
I’ll have to email Sestak again. The last time I did, I got a looooong winded diatribe on all the envirowacko talking points. I’ll give him credit for writing back himself but it is obvious that we are on opposite sides of the issue.
I recall President Bush pushing for this legislation after the last BRAC commission. It certainly seems like a good idea to me. Anyone care to guess how many jobs would be created? The Left stalls all of these projects with endless lawsuits, though. If they aren’t dimwitted Obama staffers dreaming up websites and Presidential seals, they’re smug, pain in the rear lawyers stymying any alternatives to the energy mess (or any other Bush proposal)
A new refinery will be more enviro-friendly than the older ones. My understanding (a freeper may correct me if I’m wrong) is that the old refineries have two options when equipment breaks: repair the old or replace it with the most modern machinery. They cannot upgrade, it must be the newest or the oldest.
But, the odds are that the holdouts do not like the “loser pays” litigation angle of the legislation. There’s big campaign donations from the trial lawyers in them thar hills. Loser pays means no donations!
Sestak’s legislation is questionable. Look at the title of this:
H.R.960 : To enhance the national security interests of the United States both at home and abroad by setting a deliberate timetable for the redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq by December 31, 2007, and for other purposes.
How does surrenduring enhance our security?
H.R.2710 : To repeal and modify certain provisions of law relating to the review of the detention of enemy combatants.
The trial lawyers love this!
A little search turned out that he is getting LOTS of money from trial lawyers and such:
2008: Lawyers & Lobbyists $161,950 11.8 % of his total!
2006: Lawyers & Lobbyists $227,022 15.6 %
http://www.opencongress.org/people/show/412232_joe_sestak
You might bring that up if you CALL his office. Email is worthless, IMHO. It’s off campus and often delegated to another firm.
My concern deals with the laws regarding the Govt competing with private industry. Now my idea is that the US Govt build refineries to refine oil for it’s own use, rather than buying it from publicly owned companies. That would take a great bureden off of our present US refineries, if one considers that the largest trucking fleets and consumer of petrolium products, is the US Govt. Leaving publicly owned companies a large refining buffer to provide the public with product. And without violating competition Laws.
That *is* what thbey are giving as a reason...not that there isn;t enough oil availiable...but a lack of refining capacity...right?
A new refinery will be more enviro-friendly than the older ones.
It doesn't matter to the Green Party Wing of the Democrat Party (envirowackos). They'll file suit to stop any new refineries from being built, including expansions to existing refineries:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2035603/posts?page=9#9
A refinery needs to be built where it has reasonable access to a crude oil supply and refined products pipeline for delivery.
We do not build new refineries because of a shortage of land but because of a preponderance of environmental regulations.
That is the problem to be solve, not supply land away from the pipelines.
At the same time, refinery expansion and upgrades continue at the existing refineries. Some of the expansions are bigger than the average refinery.
The details of the legislation cover those items; they’re available at the source.
The link doesn’t work for me, but that is the only thing needed.
If these sites require hundreds of miles of new pipeline right-of-way, it only traded one problem for another. Not to mention needless cost for the lifetime of the facilities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.