Washington– With gas prices continuing to skyrocket and no plan of her own to offer up, does Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-08) endorse a prominent Democrat’s plan to nationalize the energy industry? Clearly devoid of any ideas or solutions, Democrats are taking a page from Venezuelan Dictator Hugo Chavez’s book and calling for a government takeover of America’s oil refineries. While these half-baked “solutions” might seem misguided or even comical, Gabrielle Giffords has refused to state her public position one way or the other. 

At a press conference yesterday, Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), a member of the House Natural Resources Committee had this to say: 

“Should the people of the United States own refineries? Maybe so. Frankly, I think that’s a good idea…So if there’s any seriousness about what some of our Republican colleagues are saying…about improving the number of refineries, then maybe they’d be willing to have these refineries owned publicly.” (Rep. Maurice Hinchey, 6/18/08) 

Rep. Giffords, who continues to choose partisanship over productivity, has not yet weighed in on this newest proposal to socialize America’s energy industry.

“Arizona voters deserve to know whether Gabrielle Giffords wants to reshape America’s energy industry by government fiat,” said NRCC spokesman Ken Spain. “While Giffords and Democrats in Washington are busy tearing pages out of Hugo Chavez’s socialist playbook, the American people are hurting at the pump. The time for action on gas prices is now, and Gabrielle Giffords' record of standing with her do-nothing Democrat leadership will not sit well with voters in November.”

While Democrats have been standing in the way of sensible energy solutions for years, a recent Rasmussen poll shows that 67 percent of Americans support expanding production of American-made energy. Washington Democrats are at odds with the overwhelming majority of voters across the country. The American people are screaming to be heard, but is Gabrielle Giffords?

OBAMA'S SUPREME MISTAKE ON GUNS

The Supreme Court Rules Against Obama's Anti-Gun Views On D.C. Gun Ban, Further Demonstrating Obama Is Most Anti-Gun Presidential Candidate In History

Obama Expressed Support For The D.C. Gun Ban:

Obama Campaign: "Obama Believes The D.C. Handgun Law Is Constitutional." "[T]he campaign of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said that he '...believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.'" (James Oliphant and Michael J. Higgins, "Court To Hear Gun Case," Chicago Tribune, 11/20/07)

During An Interview, Obama Acknowledged His Support For The D.C. Gun Ban. Questioner Leon Harris: "One other issue that's of great importance here in the district as well is gun control. You said in Idaho recently - I'm quoting here - 'I have no intention of taking away folks' guns,' but you support the D.C. handgun ban." Obama: "Right." (Leon Harris and Sen. Barack Obama, Forum Sponsored By ABC And Politico.Com, Washington, DC, 2/12/08 

• In The Same Interview, Obama Indicated He Feels The D.C. Gun Ban Is Constitutional. Harris: "And you've said that it's constitutional. How can you reconcile those two different positions?" Obama: "Oh, because I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it is important for us to recognize that we've got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of people, law-abiding citizens, use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have violence on the streets that is a result of illegal handgun use. And so, there is nothing wrong, I think, with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets..." (Leon Harris and Sen. Barack Obama, Forum Sponsored By ABC And Politico.Com, Washington, DC, 2/12/08)

In Addition To Supporting The D.C. Gun Ban, Obama Has A Long Anti-Gun Record That Includes Telling Scholar John Lott "I Don't Believe That People Should Be Able To Own Guns":

Scholar John Lott Recalls Obama Stating: "I Don't Believe That People Should Be Able To Own Guns." John Lott: "In fact, I knew Obama during the mid-1990s, and his answers to IVI's question on guns fit well with the Obama that I knew. Indeed, the first time I introduced myself to him he said 'Oh, you are the gun guy.' I responded 'Yes, I guess so.' He simply responded that 'I don't believe that people should be able to own guns.'" (John R. Lott, Jr., "Obama And Guns: Two Different Views," Fox News, www.foxnews.com, 4/7/08)

In Response To A 1996 Independent Voters Of Illinois Questionnaire, Obama Indicated That He Supported Banning The "Manufacture, Sale And Possession Of Handguns." Question: "Do you support state legislation to ... ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?" Obama's Response: "Yes." (Independent Voters Of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization 1996 General Candidate Questionnaire, Barack Obama Responses, 9/9/96)

Obama Was Director Of Anti-Gun Joyce Foundation, Which Spent Millions On Gun-Control Causes. "Adding even further skepticism to Obama's claim of support for the 2nd Amendment is his previous service as a director of the Joyce Foundation. Since 2000, the Joyce Foundation has provided over $15 Million in funding to radical gun control organizations such as the Violence Policy Center and the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. The Joyce Foundation is tightly linked to the Soros Open Society Instit ute -- an extremist group that advocates a worldwide ban on civilian firearm ownership." (Illinois State Rifle Association, "ISRA Blasts Candidate Obama On His Record Of Hostility Toward Law-Abiding Firearm Owners," Press Release, 8/24/04) 

In 2004, Obama Voted Against Self-Defense Rights. "[Obama] opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation." (Ryan Keith "Obama Record In State Legislature Offers Possible Ammunition For Critics," The Associated Press, 1/17/07)

In 2004, Running For U.S. Senate Obama Called For Federal Legislation To Pre-Empt State Concealed Carry Laws. "In a February survey of Democratic primary candidates for the U.S. Senate by the Tribune, Obama said he opposed allowing ordinary citizens to carry concealed weapons and that a federal law banning concealed carried weapons except for law enforcement is needed." (Liam Ford, "Keyes Backs Law On Concealed Guns," Chicago Tribune, 8/25/04)  

On December 21, 1999, Obama Discussed The Penalties One Would Receive If Carrying A Firearm Illegally. (State Of Illinois 91^st General Assembly Regular Session Senate Transcript, www.ilga.gov, 12/21/99, p. 20-23)

• Obama: "Senator Emil Jones has offered - and I think this is an excellent idea that gets at the concerns that everybody on that side of the aisle has had, which is that we would create a felony offense and a misdemeanor offense, depending on the kinds of weapons you're carrying. Basically, the provision would say that there are category one weapons: handguns, sawed-off shotguns, sawed-off rifles, other firearms that are small enough to store on their person, that to unlawfully possess and carry these weapons would be a felony; but, on the other hand, if you were going to be carrying a rifle or shotgun, a spring gun, other firearm that were used for hunting, then that would be a misdemeanor." (State Of Illinois 91^st General Assembly Regular Session S enate Transcript, www.ilga.gov, 12/21/99, p. 21)

Tax Increase Called “Mistake” By Fellow Dem
Giffords Supports Tax Increases over Cutting Wasteful Washington Spending

Washington- Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-08) fulfilled her role as part of Washington’s tax-and-spend society today when she loyally sided with her Democrat leaders in passing an AMT “patch.” The bill was chocked full of tax increases, including $13.5 billion in tax increases that would stifle American efforts to produce domestic energy, while exempting Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez from these same tax increases (House Roll Call 455).

Unable to find a single spending cut in the interest of sparing Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars, Giffords voted to kill the amendment which would have eliminated these burdensome tax hikes from the AMT “patch” (House Roll Call 454).

“Gabrielle Giffords has once again failed her constituents in Arizona by voting for tax increases that only weaken our economy by reaching into her constituents’ wallets,” said NRCC spokesman Ken Spain. “Taxpayers in Arizona deserve a representative who will be a good steward of their money instead of throwing it away on wasteful Washington spending.”

Just as the House voted on the AMT bill, fellow Democrat Rep. Jim Cooper said that it was a “mistake” to pass the bill with these tax increases, stating that because the Democrats couldn’t find a single spending cut, this bill would “punish” the wrong people: 

“The first choice should always be spending cuts.  Now, if anybody thinks that there is no program in government that couldn’t be cut, I think they are mistaken.  But, we’re not very good at finding those cuts.  Because, the way that the system works here in Washington is that you only get rewarded for adding spending, because whoever benefits from that individual program that should be cut, they’ll scream like crazy and complain.”   (CSPAN, 6/25/08)

Kyl, Republicans Unveil Energy Proposals

“Republicans have presented a unified energy policy to reduce our dependence on foreign nations by finding more of our own domestic resources while relying on less energy from overseas”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senate Republicans today unveiled their proposal to address the high price of gasoline and provide a comprehensive approach to the nation’s long-term energy needs.  Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), a cosponsor of the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008, offered details of the plan while criticizing Democrats lack of action.

“Republicans have presented a unified energy policy to reduce our dependence on foreign nations by finding more of our own domestic resources while relying on less energy from overseas,” said Kyl.  “In contrast, the Democrats have offered no solutions to high prices, and instead shut off every avenue to allow the United States to increase its own energy supply.

“The Republican plan increases supply by safely producing oil off our own shores and from oil shale on federal lands.  We also propose to reduce consumption by fast-tracking plug-in hybrid automobile technology.  The Republicans combination of ‘use less, find more’ is a balanced approach.  The Democrat response appears to be ‘find less, import more,’ thereby increasing our dependence on unstable regions of the world at a time of record high gas prices.

“The Democrats’ view of domestic production appears to be ‘no we can’t’-- no to our own waters, no to our public lands, no to our own coal, and no to nuclear power.  Saying no to U.S. production means saying yes to higher prices, and yes to oil from Venezuela, Iran, Russia, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia.”

Currently, 600 million acres of federal coastal waters are off-limits to exploration.  According to the Interior Department, these waters are believed to hold at least 18 billion barrels of undiscovered, recoverable oil; and this estimate is likely low because there has been no exploration allowed in those restricted waters for over 30 years.  Meanwhile, Cuba has indicated it will allow other countries to drill for oil off its shores, which are less than 50 miles off the U.S. coast.

The proposal includes four mainstream proposals:

·       Allows deep sea exploration for oil and natural gas 50 miles or further off the coasts in U.S. waters – lease payments will be paid to the federal government, to the participating states, and for wildlife conservation. 

·       Allows the safe production of oil shale on public lands in Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado for an estimated six trillion barrels of oil.

·       Supports the development of plug-in hybrid technology that will dramatically decrease transportation costs to consumers by reducing the amount of gasoline they use. 

·       Provides the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission with the resources necessary to ensure transparency in all trading activities