What Fresh Hell Is This?

October 26, 2017

Senator Toomey RESPONDS To Another Letter

Yesterday, I said I'd received two Toomey responses - one email and one snail mail.

Today, my friends, I received a third Toomey response.

That's three letters in two days!

We'll start with the last one.

It begins thusly:
Thank you fro contacting me about the protection and conservation of our environment. I appreciate hearing from you.
Huh? When did I write to Senator Toomey specifically about the environment? His second paragraph offers no clues (you can read it below). The clue comes in the first two sentences of his third paragraph:
As such, I understand your thoughts about the conservation of our environment and climate change. During Senate consideration of the Keystone XL pipeline in January 2015, I voted in support of several amendments about these issues, including an amendment which acknowledged that human activity contributes to climate change.
Great - climate change!  Now we're getting somewhere.  He's either answering my Eleventh or Twenty-seventh letter. As they both acknowledge Toomey's Keystone XL votes and I am feeling rather magnanimous today, I'll give him credit for both.

Not that it's going to help him because he's lying by omission.

Here's the story. I wrote about this in January, 2015 (weren't you paying attention?) and there were three amendments that Senator Toomey voted on that day.  The first one contained this language:
It is the sense of the Senate that climate change is real and not a hoax.
Senator Toomey voted in favor of that one (and good for him for doing so - it puts him at odds with the current occupant of the White House as well as the head of the EPA). The second amendment contained this language:
[C]limate change is real; and human activity contributes to climate change.
Toomey voted for that one, as well. So far so good. But the third amendment contained this language:
[C]limate change is real; and human activity significantly contributes to climate change.
Toomey voted against that amendment. Notice the difference? It's the word "significantly" that changes things for the Senator. Climate change is real, not a hoax, and human activity contributes to it but not significantly.

Seeing as that's in direct conflict with what the science says and seeing that Senator Toomey chose to omit mention of that third vote while taking credit for the previous two (hoping, I suppose, that no one would know about the third), I'm voting this a lie by omission.

Sorry Senator, but you're lying about your climate record.

The complete text:
Thank you fro contacting me about the protection and conservation of our environment. I appreciate hearing from you.

I believe it is essential to protect Pennsylvania's natural beauty and the quality of our environment. I am supportive of reasonable pollution controls that are designed to protect public health and our natural resources, and I believe individual state agencies have the best knowledge and experience to safeguard these important assets. It is for these reasons that I have supported commonsense efforts in Congress to protect the environment and conserve lands for the enjoyment of future generations.

As such, I understand your thoughts about the conservation of our environment and climate change. During Senate consideration of the Keystone XL pipeline in January 2015, I voted in support of several amendments about these issues, including an amendment which acknowledged that human activity contributes to climate change.  Please be assured that I value your input and will keep your thoughts in mind when Congress considers future legislation concerning the environment.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.


2 comments:

End the Witchhunt of Harvey Weinstein said...

Sent this letter.
http://herocops.blogspot.com/2017/10/open-letter-to-senator-pat-toomey-and.html
Too Thick?

"As your constituent and given your past full support of Law Enforcement that
place their lives at risk to protect our neighborhoods and deserve our respect,
admiration, and support.

It is a difficult and demoralizing time for Law Enforcement. Increased
surveillance resulting from advances in technology like digital recording and
wireless broadband has come to mean that Law enforcement mistakes are
wrongly widely broadcast — typically without context or rights of rebuttal —
exposing them to unprecedented, unfounded public scrutiny This allows the
public who have not trained as police officers to make what often amounts to
biased and ill-informed judgments of the police."

Dayvoe said...

Look over there!!