Tag Archives: rob simmons

Monday’s Where We Vote: Peter Schiff

Peter Schiff by Chion Wolf

by John Dankosky – I think Colin McEnroe got it right about Peter Schiff. Every thing I’ve been reading, watching and listening to about him reminds me of this line Colin wrote in his blog: “He’s all about his ideas, and they tend to blot out the rest of the universe.”

This came after Schiff’s entertaining and very interesting appearance on Colin’s program last month. It solidified Schiff as a guy who is very able and willing to explain his ideas about the financial collapse and government overreach, but less eager to talk about some of the other issues at hand for a U.S. Senator.

Now that he’s officially on the primary ballot against Linda McMahon for the Republican nomination, we’re having him in as we re-start our “Where We Vote” series.  We’ll be talking about the financial services reform bill, his uneasy relationship with the tea party movement, and his fight against Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman in a battle of the “Stimulators” v. the “Austereians.” (In fact, I’ve begun to wonder, is Schiff running against McMahon and Blumenthal or Krugman and Bernanke?)

But, we’ll also be talking about things like education, health care, immigration…

We’ll be taking lots of listener calls at 860-275-7266 (9-10 am ET), emails wherewelive@wnpr.org and tweets @wherewelive.

28 Comments

Filed under Economics, Federal Government, Politics

Where We Vote: Rob Simmons on Climate Change

By Libby Conn–  When John asked Rob Simmons this morning about any mistakes he’d made in congress as the Representative for Connecticut’s second district, Simmons pointed to his support for cap and trade legislation, saying:

Rob Simmons shows off his Barry Goldwater book - Photo by Chion Wolf

At the time that I was involved with that issue, there was a huge amount of information out in the public domain focusing on issues of climate change and global warming, etc.  Over time, that information has become modified with new information and with some very disturbing news about how that data was manipulated, improperly, by folks who had a vested interest in manipulating it.  And so there’s been a shift away, if you will…

But then Simmons went on to explain that it was actually his time serving as Connecticut’s Business Advocate that convinced him that a cap and trade system would result in higher energy costs for businesses in the state already struggling to operate with some of the nation’s highest rates.

JD: Are you backing away though from the idea that human activity has an impact on the climate? Do you still believe that what we do here does raise the temperature of the planet and something needs to be done about it?

RS: I think we all know that the Clean Air Act, which was signed by Richard Nixon, kind of ironic, and the creation of the EPA, created by Richard Nixon was in response to clean air issues.  I mean, I’ve suffered fro asthma.  So I understand how air pollution and particulate matter in the air can affect our health and our lives.  And that particulate matter, in some cases, is created by human beings…the same issue goes to water.  If you pollute the water and we don’t have clean water, we don’t have the opportunity to live in a quality environment.  So we want to make sure the water is clean.  I remember the days when the rivers of Connecticut ran different colors based on the dyes being used by the velvet mills.  So there’s no question that certain human behavior causes pollution that we need to be concerned about.

JD: The idea that carbon dioxide is one of those pollutants though is something that’s changed since the Nixon administration…..Do you believe that the US moving forward needs to have controls on carbon dioxide emissions, so that the temperature of the earth does not continue to rise?

RS: We need common sense solutions and that’s why I support nuclear power.

At least one caller, Susan, was confused:

Susan:  I thought that Mr. Simmons skirted the question about whether or not he accepted the science about C02 and the cause of global warming and I would like to hear a definitive answer from him because that is kind of the crux of the issue.

RS: It’s nice to have a definitive answer if there is a definitive answer….I’m not convinced there is a definitive answer I’ve read a number of books on both side of the issue and I think it’s basically part of a discussion that is ongoing….I’m continuing to educate myself on the subject and will continue to do so.

JD: You changed your stance on cap and trade, you said, because you thought it would kill business.  But when you supported it at first, it must mean that you believed global warming was happening and there was a reason that we should have cap and trade at all.

RS: There was a lot of information out on the subject at the time.  But in retrospect, as we update ourselves, as we live and as we learn, we’ve discovered that some of that data was manipulated and incorrect.  The entity in Great Britain that was charged with millions of dollars of research on the subject concealed some of their findings, and worked to disregard people who had alternative viewpoints…..I think this issue is a developing issue where new information is being brought to bare and we have to keep our mind open to that.  What really concerned me, as the Business Advocate, is that we have the highest energy costs in the continental United States.  To lay another layer of cost on these companies without being certain that other countries will engage in the regime , without being certain that the science is absolutely correct, it is a job killer and we can’t afford job killers right now.

We had some tweeters take issue with Simmons’ characterization of the science and the significance of  “climate-gate.”:

@wherewelive the climate change emails were shown to be innocent of what Simmons is accusing by an independent panel.

And…

@wherewelive Simmons is just out of touch with reality w/r/t global warming. The email scandal doesn’t impact the main body of research.

In any case, it doesn’t seem that Simmons, or anyone will have an opportunity to vote on cap and trade legislation again anytime in the near future.  Though the House passed legislation last year, the Senate never did so and the policy has, to a certain extent, fallen out of favor.  President Obama’s most recent budget didn’t include the term at all.  Read more on the demise of cap and trade in yesterday’s New York Times.

2 Comments

Filed under Environment, Federal Government, Politics, Where We Vote

Connecticut Mirror: McMahon Feeling “Great Momentum”

by John Dankosky - After a few scheduling snafus, Republican Senate Candidate (and now front-runner for the nomination) Linda McMahon is scheduled to appear on our Where We Vote series March 30.   A few days earlier (March 26), her major competitor for the nomination, Rob Simmons is scheduled to appear.

For now, we’ll have to rely on profile pieces, like the nice one written by Mark Pazniokas of the Connecticut Mirror. Some highlights:

  • She admired Sen. Jim Bunning’s stand on deficit spending
  • She escapes by reading Michael Crichton
  • She really doesn’t like talking about steroid use and the WWE.  A sample:

“There is not an incentive to use steroids in WWE. The reason I bring up the fact it is entertainment is because a performer’s popularity in WWE is not relative to size,” she said. ”It is the charisma. It is the story line. It’s the soap opera that runs every week. It’s the connection with the audience. It’s what goes on back stage.”

Read Mark’s full story here.

Do you have questions for the Senate candidates?  Leave them here, or email wherewelive@wnpr.org.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Federal Government, Politics, Where We Vote

Republicans Weigh in on Bernanke

With his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, looking on, Chairman Ben Bernanke addresses President George W. Bush and others after being sworn in to the Federal Reserve post. Also on stage with the President are Mrs. Anna Bernanke and Roger W. Ferguson, Jr., Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Photo - Wikipedia

by John Dankosky - The Hartford Courant’s Capitol Watch has done a nice job in the last few days getting reaction from Richard Blumenthal’s main rivals for a Senate seat to his announcement on Where We Live that he would oppose the re-nomination of Fed. Chairman Ben Bernanke.

Republican Rob Simmons agreed with Blumenthal (a rarity) in a statement:

“As a central figure in failing to anticipate and prevent the economic meltdown, an architect of the no-strings-attached government bailouts, and a defender of the Fed’s lack of transparency, Chairman Bernanke’s record does not support his confirmation for another term as Federal Reserve Chairman.”

Peter Schiff wonders where all these critics were years ago, when he was beating up Bernanke on TV.

“Together the two of them kept interest rates too low, inflated the housing bubble and tried to get consumers to spend too much,” Schiff said in a brief phone interview this afternoon.

“You have these other politicians jumping on the bandwagon now that its popular to bash Bernanke,” Schiff said. “They didn’t say anything about him two or three or four years ago.”

Linda McMahon re-iterated her support for Bernanke in a statment:

“While not perfect, Ben Bernanke helped steer the fed through some very turbulent waters and Linda respects the President’s decision to re-appoint him.”

Senator Dodd, meanwhile, also affirmed his support for Bernanke, putting him at odds with the man now most likely to replace him.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Economics, Federal Government, Where We Vote