"This is a responsible measure. It is carefully balanced."
... and this:
"I intend to vote yes, and I intend to encourage all other members of the committee to do the same."
... and this:
"But I am committed in the full committee to be supportive of this bill to encourage others to be supportive.”
... and this:
"Last week, Rep. Rick Boucher, a Democrat who has made protection of coal interests a priority, also endorsed the legislation."
"U.S. Rep. Rick Boucher voted for cap-and-trade legislation but said he doesn’t endorse the House-passed version of the bill."
He voted for it but doesn't support it?
He endorses it but doesn't endorse it?
What in God's name does that mean?
I'll tell you what it means: Boucher knows he's made a monstrous mistake and is now fighting for his political life.
From the Kingsport Times-News:
Boucher seeks changes in cap-and-tradeIn other words, he sold his vote. For "thirty pieces of silver" he abandoned us in favor of his friends in Washington.
By Hank Hayes
U.S. Rep. Rick Boucher voted for cap-and-trade legislation but said he doesn’t endorse the House-passed version of the bill.
The Abingdon Democrat, in a meeting with members of the Times-News Editorial Board, explained his vote on the controversial and complex climate change bill designed to enable the federal government to cap industrial greenhouse gas emissions.
“I voted for it because I had to do that to be part of the process and to make the changes that have been made,” Boucher said of the bill that passed by a seven-vote margin in the House and is now being considered by the Senate. [link]
Citing the Times-News article, Red State has this:
Rick Boucher Regrets Selling Out His District
A Critical Backer of Cap-&-Tax Suddenly Won't Take Credit
There are a few things to note here. First off, I’m not sure that the White House will appreciate Boucher essentially arguing that he has to vote for a terrible, job-destroying bill because if he doesn’t, the Obama administration will really sock it to Virginia. Further, the way to stay relevant on Capitol Hill is by voting against a bill. I realize that Boucher has only been in Congress for 26 years, but it’s the sort of thing some Members realize in as little as a decade. If you vote for a bill, the sponsor tends to think he has your support; if you vote against it, he’s more likely to try to win you over.But of course, Boucher really doesn’t believe what he’s telling his local press. He’s hoping they’re a bunch of rubes that don’t see through his fiction. We can tell that’s true because Boucher was a critical backer of the bill, whose work and support won others over, too.
If that doesn’t make thousands of his constituents feel better, then what will? They ought to be honored to be part of something bigger than themselves - a real sacrifice. Boucher won’t even have that, as his job has always been secure.
And if you’re paying attention, you might wonder whether Boucher’s attitude about the president’s agenda seems to have suddenly changed now that he may finally face a serious Republican opponent. It’s interesting to see what motivates people.
1) Those "rubes" Boucher is hoping won't see through his fiction referred to above include you and me.
2) "It’s interesting to see what motivates people." Yeah. Abject fear of losing his handsome gig up there in the Magic Kingdom can be a serious motivator, can't it.
But to the point: Rick Boucher is now running - not walking - from the legislation he so recently endorsed with enthusiasm. Because he knows the people here in Southwest Virginia are outraged by his sellout.
Problem is, he can't take his vote - his sellout - back. The damage is done. At least the damage that he can do. The future of Southwest Virginia - especially its precious coalfields - is now in the hands of the Democratically controlled Senate and ... OBAMA.
May God have mercy on us.