No No Knollenberg Is Really On The Wrong Side of the Issue This Time

Joe Knollenberg thought he was going to come across as the defender of the auto industry, but instead he has made himself into the laughing-stock of the industry.

While everyone else, including the auto companies themselves, have agreed that they need to work to reduce emissions, Joe Knollenberg is out there claiming that changing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards will destroy the industry. And he is pointing the finger at a fellow Republican by trying to blame everything on California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The second headline in tonight's Detroit News tells the real story: "Toyota: Auto industry obligated to help solve problem of global warming."

The Detroit News reports that Toyota is willing to step up to the plate and reduce emissions. The Domestic autos are hopefully smart enough now to not let Toyota get the upper hand competitively by being able to market more fuel efficient vehicles so they will step up to the plate too -- they may kick and scream a little for show, but they will step up to the plate.

Meanwhile, Joe will still be outside yelling that the sky is falling. That increased CAFE standards will decimate the industry. CAFE standards haven't been changed in over a decade, but the industry is in chaos. The industry seems quite capable of self-destructing with or without changes in CAFE.

Of course, most people who have seen Knollenberg's big sign about Schwarzenegger say the sign doesn't really make any sense to them. They don't understand the point of the ad and don't even have any recollection of who sponsored it.

Seems Joe went after "The Terminator" in an attempt to make himself "The Defender", but it turned out that he just made himself into a Joke instead.

P.S. And here is the real dirty little secret -- the Big 3 already make cars that meet what the new standards would propose. The problem is they need to be able to sell those cars and that has been their problem all along. They are not making cars that consumers want to buy. Toyota and Honda are making cars that consumers want -- that is why their market share is increasing and Detroit's is decreasing.

Knollenberg's Anti-Environmental Record: Part 2

Joe Knollenberg must think the voters of the 9th District are stupid -- otherwise why would he tell us that he is an "environmentalist", when it is so clear from his voting record that he is really one of the most anti-environmental Congressman in history.

In a previous post we pointed out some of Knollenberg's anti-environmental votes and noted that we were unable to find even a single pro-environmental vote by Knollenberg.

Here is some more evidence of just how strongly anti-environmental Joe Knollenberg really is:

• Knollenberg added a rider to an appropriations bill prohibiting EPA from funding efforts to reduce greenhouse gases under programs like the Kyoto Protocol
• Knollenberg's biggest priority for years was to make certain that toilets could WASTE MORE WATER - rather than conserve water like a true environmentalist would propose
• Knollenberg supported a measure that prohibited EPA from tightening air pollution laws -- and even prohibited them from using their monitoring data to determine which areas of the country were meeting health based air pollution standards
• Knollenberg opposed EPA's efforts to use equal protection guarantees to assure that all Americans have clean air and clean water

In fact, Knollenberg is so anti-environmental, the Lana Pollack from the Michigan Environmental Council once gave Knollenberg an "award" consisting of a Ken doll with his head buried in a bucket of sand. It was a great metaphor for how Knollenberg treats most issues -- he hides from them -- but it is particularly appropriate for environmental issues because Knollenberg votes on them like a dummy with his head in a pile of sand.

It is easy to do a search online and find hundreds of articles about how anti-environmental Joe Knollenberg is -- but can anyone find an article about Joe doing ANYTHING positive and proactive for the environment?

Knollenberg Lies About His Environmental Record

On his new and improved website, Joe Knollenberg claims he is an”environmentalist”.

This is yet another example of where Knollenberg says one thing, but what he does is very, very different.

Knollenberg is a liar like Scooter Libby!


Knollenberg is NOT An Environmentalist By Any Stretch of Any Imagination
My definition of an environmentalist is someone who wants to protect the environment – all aspects of the environment. Based on his voting record in Congress, Joe Knollenberg is NOT an environmentalist by any stretch of the imagination.

Knollenberg Voted AGAINST Making EPA a Cabinet Level Department
Contrary to popular belief, the EPA is not a Cabinet level position. It isn’t equal to the Treasury, or Dept of Health & Human Services, or the Dept. of Education – all of which are cabinet level posts. Being a Cabinet level agency would elevate the importance of Environmental Issues by assuring that the leader of the Department was involved in Cabinet meetings. Right now, the Administrator of the EPA would not generally participate in such meetings and thus they have less influence over what the President learns or thinks about Environmental issues. Given the chance to elevate the EPA to a cabinet level position – Joe Knollenberg voted NO.

Here are some more of Knollenberg’s ANTI-Environmental Votes:

• · Joe Knollenberg Voted Against Strengthening Environmental Regulation of Mining Operations;
• · Joe Knollenberg Voted Against Expanding protections of the Endangered Species Act;
• · Joe Knollenberg Supported Legislation That Would Allow Private Property Owners To Harm delicate Environments and the Global Commons;
• · Joe Knollenberg Supports Legislation Allowing for Major Industrial Operations such as Oil Drilling to take place in pristine areas such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge;

In fact, looking through Knollenberg’s voting record, I was unable to identify a single vote by Knollenberg that was pro-environment. Knollenberg votes Pro-polluter instead.

Environmental Groups Rate Knollenberg As One of the Worst
The idea that Knollenberg is pro-polluter is supported by all the ratings given by environmental organizations.

According to the website, “On the Issues”, Knollenberg has voted to:

• · Reduce "critical habitat" for endangered species;
• · Speed up Forest Thinning Projects
• · Only rated 5% by the League of Conservation Voters (which means he has a poor record on environmental issues).

For a whole list of issues showing how Knollenberg is pro-polluter and anti-environmental, look here.

Here is a 1998 Article About Knollenberg’s Poor Record on Environmental Issues & The Fact that He Gets Lots of Campaign Contributions from Polluters.

Joe Knollenberg calls himself an environmentalist, but all of his votes in Congress have been anti-environmental protection.

We know Cheney's Chief of Staff Scooter Libby is a liar. He was convicted on four counts of federal felony charges of lying including perjury and obstructing justice.
The only difference between Scooter Libby's lies and Joe Knollenberg's lies is that Libby has been convicted of lying.

Joe Knollenberg should be ashamed of himself.

Knollenberg's Chief of Staff Is Not Only A Lobbyist

but he must recognize that Knollenberg is in over his head this year.

It appears that Trent Wisecup, Knollenberg's Lobbyist Chief of Staff, can't find anyone to write letters in support of Knollenberg so he is having his family members write letters to the editors of local papers to support Joe Knollenberg.

You gotta know your candidates is in trouble when the only people who support him are his paid staff and their family members.

Of course it is published in the Radical Right Wing Detroit News -- the only organization in the country with less credibility than the Bush White House. Notice how ALL the letters to the editor on that page agree with the Radical Right wing talking points?

A little relevant humor: The iRack

I hope our readers don't mind a little relevant humor.

Look, Joe, a 100 mpg car

I wonder if the Big 3 could start building these. Hmmm.

Cars that make hybrids look like gas guzzlers
Plug-in versions can go 100 miles on a gallon of gasoline
Sherry Boschert
Sunday, March 4, 2007

Toyota Prius owners tend to be a proud lot since they drive the fuel-efficient hybrid gas-electric car that's the darling of mainstream environmentalists and one of the hottest-selling vehicles in America. A few, however, felt that good was not good enough. They've made "improvements" even though the modifications voided parts of their warranties.
Ron Gremban of Corte Madera did it. So did Felix Kramer of Redwood City, and Sven Thesen of Palo Alto. Why? Five words: one hundred miles per gallon.
"We took the hybrid car to its logical conclusion," Kramer says, by adding more batteries and the ability to recharge by plugging into a regular electrical socket at night, making the car a plug-in hybrid.
Compared with the Prius' fuel efficiency of 50 mpg, plug-in hybrids use half as much gasoline by running more on cleaner, cheaper, domestic electricity. If owners forget to plug in overnight, it's no big deal -- the car runs like a regular hybrid.
These trendsetters monkeyed with the car for more than their own benefit. They did it to make a point: If they could make a plug-in hybrid, the major car companies could, too. And should.
Kramer, Gremban and a cadre of volunteers formed the California Cars Initiative (online at calcars.org), and in 2004 converted Gremban's Prius to a plug-in hybrid in his garage. They added inexpensive lead-acid batteries and some innovative software to fool the car's computerized controls into using more of the energy stored in the batteries, giving the car over 100 mpg in local driving and 50 to 80 mpg on the highway. The cost of conversion is about $5,000 for a do-it-yourselfer.

Read the rest of the story here:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/04/ING44OD4AS1.DTL

Joe Knollenberg Voted FOR the Christian Supremacy Act!!!

Oddly, Joe Knollenberg has been invited to speak to the JVS Networking and Awards Luncheon in organization.

I say oddly because Joe Knollenberg is NOT a supporter of the jewish community. Oh he claims to be alright – but he claims to be an environmentalist too and we know he isn’t one of those either.

Joe Knollenberg voted YES last year on HR 2679 – the Christian Supremacy Bill. Why is it called the Christian Supremacy Bill? Because it would make challenging a state or local government’s support of the Christian religion nearly impossible.

The synopsis of the Bill: “Vote to pass a bill that prohibits monetary awards and bans attorneys' fees in all civil action cases against any federal, state or local officials, due to an alleged violation of the “establishment of religion.”

Here is the type of lawsuit the Christian Supremacy Bill was trying to ban:

A jewish family living in the Indian River School District in Delaware were living a nightmare. They were the only jewish family in the area and their school district had created an “environment of religious exclusion” and state-sponsored religion. At Samantha Dobrich’s high school graduation in 2004, the class had an invocation by a local pastor who said about her:

“I also pray for one specific student, that You be with her and guide her in the path that You have for her. And we ask all these things in Jesus' name.

Other situations in the same school district included:

• The district's "custom and practice of school-sponsored prayer"
• The district ignored the Supreme Court's 1992 Lee decision limiting prayer at graduation ceremonies
• District teachers and staff led Bible clubs at several schools. Club members got to go to the head of the lunch line.
• While Bible clubs were widely available, student book clubs were rare and often canceled by the district.
• When Jane Doe complained that her non-Christian son "Jordan Doe" was left alone when his classmates when to Bible club meetings, district staff insisted that Jordan should attend the club regardless of his religion.
• The district schools distributed Bibles to students in 2003, giving them time off from class to pick up the books.
• Prayer is a routine part of district sports programs and social events
• A middle school teacher told students there was only "one true religion" and gave them pamphlets for his surfing ministry.
• Samantha Dobrich's honors English teacher frequently discussed Christianity, but no other religion.
• Students frequently made mandatory appearances at district board meetings -- where they were a captive audience for board members' prayers to Jesus.

The family was able to sue the school board because the law provides that if the school board loses, they would have to pay the family’s legal fees. The Christian Supremacy Act was intended to prohibit families from being able to bring such suits by banning such payments for legal fees. Thus, any family that suffered religious discrimination but couldn’t afford hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees would be precluded from pursuing their constitutional rights.

JOE KNOLLENBERG VOTED TO STOP LAWSUITS LIKE THE ONE FILED BY THE DOBRICH FAMILY. [HR 2679, Rollcall Vote # 480]

Of course, HR 2679 is only one part of a plan for “Christian Nationalism”. As stated by the Family Research Council, one of the driving forces behind Christian Nationalism – and a supporter of Joe Knollenberg :

"While it is true that the United States of America was founded on the sacred principle of religious freedom for all, that liberty was never intended to exalt other religions to the level that Christianity holds in our country's heritage...Our founders expected that Christianity -- and no other religion -- would receive support from the government as long as that support did not violate peoples' consciences and their right to worship. They would have found utterly incredible the idea that all religions, including paganism, be treated with equal deference."

Joe Knollenberg voted YES on the Christian Supremacy Act.

This makes the thought of his speaking at the JVS networking and awards luncheon extremely disturbing.

Why would JVS want someone who is so obviously anti-jewish to speak at their meeting? As a jew I find this particularly offensive.

Why doesn't Joe think ALL AMERICANS are entitled to constitutional protections?

Joe's Health Care Credit is a Joke. $200 credit won't solve our Health Care Crisis

Article published Mar 11, 2007
Reducing health care costs, diseases Bill encourages wellness programs in workplace
BY LINDA ANN CHOMIN STAFF WRITER
http://www.hometownlife.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070311/HEALTH/703110402/1006

Joshua Kugelman would still be carrying around 270 pounds on his 6-foot-1 frame if Metaldyne hadn't launched its employee wellness program in early 2006. The product engineer has lost 52 pounds since the automotive supplier began partially subsidizing Weight Watchers at its facilities in Plymouth Township.
Kugelman's health benefits have far outweighed the minimal fee he pays to participate in weekly sessions. For months now he's been able to take only one blood pressure medication instead of his usual three.
"I don't think I would have done it otherwise," said Kugelman of Pontiac.
If U.S. Rep. Joe Knollenberg's Wellness and Prevention Act of 2007 is passed, more employees could not only reduce their risk for disease, but help lower health care costs. Studies have shown for years how unhealthy lifestyle choices lead to disease. The bill promotes screenings and prevention programs in the workplace by offering businesses a $200 tax credit for employees who join their wellness program. At least 50 percent of employees must participate. Additionally, the act provides a $200 tax credit for employees as encouragement.
H.R. 853 was introduced on Feb. 6 and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and House Energy and Commerce Committee. So far it has received support from the American College of Preventive Medicine, American College of Occupation and Environmental Medicine, Beaumont Hospital, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit Medical Center, Pfizer, AARP, and Oakland County Wellness Coalition.
In addition to tax credits, the bill provides a $20,000 loan forgiveness for individuals pursuing a preventive medicine specialty and achieving board certification between 2008 and 2012.

Joe's Latest Antics Don't Help the Auto Companies

I found this blog through my Google alerts -- I have no idea who the author is, but he makes some good points about how Joe's latest antics actually hurt the Big 3 more than they help them. Enjoy:

http://postnihilist.blogspot.com/2007/03/joe-knollenberg-gets-it-wrong-again.html

Joe won't win any Oscars for this performance

Take a look at Laura Berman's column in today's Detroit News:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070310/OPINION03/703100378

Joe used to be a pretty quiet guy, but now he's shouting out his message on billboards. Winning by only 5% in November has put a scare into him and he's coming out of his shell -- giving speeches, appearing on TV, voting with the Democrats on an energy bill.....

Yes, it may seem on the surface that Joe has changed his tune on energy now that he's voted with the Democrats and is talking openly about alternative energy sources, but is this reallly how he feels or is he just acting to try to convince the voters he's wised up? I think we know the answer to that, don't we? Joe doesn't want to take a chance on losing in '08, so's he's saying things he thinks will appeal to the voters in the 9th even if he doesn't really believe them.

He can't on the one hand say we need alternative fuel sources, electric cars, hybrids, fuel cells, etc. and then say we shouldn't increase fuel standards or hike gasoline taxes. Duh! Don't those go hand-in-hand? If we make all of the changes to our cars that he says we should make, fuel economy will automatically go up, won't it?

The only thing worse than a Joe Knollenberg who votes with Bush almost 100% of the time is a Joe Knollenberg who pretends to have changed his tune when all he's doing is acting out of fear of losing his seat by voting the way he thinks the people want him to vote until he's got a majority back in the House (which probably won't happen for a while), at which time he'll go back to being the same old Joe. You can fool some of the people......

Oakland County voters aren't stupid -- they can see right through this charade.

Joe Knollenberg Votes AGAINST Clean Water

Joe Knollenberg has the audacity to call himself an environmentalist, but his votes show otherwise.

Last week, Joe Knollenberg voted AGAINST Clean Water!
Heck, he even voted NO in an attempt to block Congress from voting on the issue at all!

Joe Knollenberg voted NO on HR 720 which was a bill that would authorize EPA to make grants to provide:

• technical assistance to rural and small municipalities for wastewater infrastructure financing; and
  
• technical assistance and training for rural and small publicly owned treatment works.

The Statute revised eligibility requirements for grants for sewage collection systems; and state water pollution control revolving fund provisions. Requires states to: (1) establish a list of revolving fund projects that prioritizes water quality improvement projects; and (2) provide financial assistance to only projects on such lists.

Gasp! Legislation that required prioritizing how to improve water quality! Oh my. Such good government must be offensive to someone like Joe. Otherwise, why would he oppose such legislation??

Why does Joe Knollenberg want to help polluters?

Knollenberg Lies About Lobbyists!

Joe Knollenberg is a liar.

I don't generally call people liars. If you look at past posts you will see I say things like, "he has an aversion to the truth" or "he must not know any better" or "he must be misguided".

But at some point, when one tells this many untruths -- there is no other way to categorize him -- he is a liar.

Knollenberg just sent out another campaign brochure (but made taxpayers pay the postage) and this time it says he is trying to reform Washington and the lobbyist culture.

But Knollenberg has consistently voted TO KEEP LETTING LOBBYISTS GIVE HIM GIFTS AND TAKE HIM AND HIS WIFE ON LUXURIOUS VACATIONS!!!

• 1994. Knollenberg voted against restricting lobbyists from giving gifts, vacations, etc.
  
  In a way it is true -- he is reforming the way Congressmen and lobbyists interact -- it used to be that lobbyists were on the outside looking in --but Joe Knollenberg keeps his lobbyists closer -- Knollenberg hires lobbyists for his Chief of Staff. His current lobbyist Chief of Staff is Washington DC lobbyist Trent Wisecup. His former Chief of Staff is Lobbyist Paul Welday.
  
  This isn't a fluke either. Knollenberg has had 2 lobbyists for Chiefs of Staff in the past few years. We have already written about Knollenberg's propensity to put line items in legislation to set aside federal funds for his campaign donors.
  
  Here is the truth about how Joe interacts with Lobbyists:
  


• Knollenberg's Chief of Staff, Trent Wisecup, is a Washington DC lobbyist


• Knollenberg's former Chief of Staff, Paul Welday is a lobbyist


• Knollenberg put a line item in a bill that set aside $8 million that he was mandating that AMTRAK pay to one of his largest campaign donors. (This is called "earmarking" funds.)


• Knollenberg was a key obstructionist who blocked efforts to make public the earmarks that Congress puts in spending bills -- Joe doesn't want you to know which ones of his campaign donors he puts millions of dollars of federal funds aside for.


• More links showing just how hard Joe worked to keep earmarks from being reformed: Here at this conservative website, here at this conservative website, here is an article by the conservative pundit Bob Novak, here,

Watch here to see Joe speak out against any restrictions or changes in the earmarks he makes for his friends.

Oh. And back in 2002 when Congress was trying to pass campaign finance reform -- which is in large part necessary due to the money that lobbyists put in the pockets of incumbent Congressional members -- Knollenberg tried to stop the legislation and when he couldn't he filled it with loopholes. Here is an excerpt from an article in The New Republic:

When Congress finally passed the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill
last month, Republicans were all but unanimous in charging that it would never
work, that it was riddled with loopholes that would shift money to the darkest
corners of politics. "Reformers claim this bill will increase disclosure and
shine the light on big money in politics. This is, of course, not true," warned
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell. "Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker," explained
Michigan Representative Joe Knollenberg, "I support real reform with no
loopholes and full disclosure--not just lip service to reform." Having thus had
their say, Knollenberg's House brethren this week hopped down off their high horses and got to work widening loopholes and squelching disclosure. Specifically, they tried to relax disclosure requirements in the most shadowy corner of the campaign finance world--so-called "stealth" PACs, or 527s, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money. (The phony "Republicans for Clean Air" PAC that sandbagged John McCain to the tune of $2.5 million during the 2000 GOP primaries was of this breed.) These are precisely the groups whose influence is likely to grow once campaign finance reform takes effect next year, making disclosure all the more important. Nonetheless, the House GOP sought to exempt some 527s from the stringent disclosure requirements of federal law if they instead file reports at the state level, where campaign finance laws are often flimsy. The effort failed when 25 House Republicans broke ranks to vote
with the Democrats. But given the longtime GOP position that the way to fix
campaign finance is not contribution limits but rather full, fast disclosure,
you'd think their colleagues wouldn't have minded a bit more paperwork in the
name of "real reform." Unfortunately, you'd have been wrong.

Oh. And here are some more examples of where Joe voted NO on reforming earmarks and reforming lobbyist rules: HR 4, January 2007; Floor Debate, June 2006. As you can see, the evidence is overwhelming that Joe Knollenberg has opposed reforms that would restrict his ability to give earmarks to his friends.

Next time, we will talk about HAWAII JOE Knollenberg's propensity to accept gifts and expensive luxurious vacations from lobbyists.

Joe Doesn't think Iraq is even an issue

Joe has a pretty new web site, but when I visited his issues page today, 3/9/07, guess what, Iraq isn't even mentioned. Joe is so busy attacking Arnold with his big billboard, he doesn't even have time to think about the biggest issue facing America.

No wonder Joe won't meet with constituents about Iraq. He doesn't think it's important enough to talk about on his web site. I guess he thinks if he doesn't mention it, it will go away and people will forget his undying support for President Bush's failed war and the more than 3000 American deaths, over 20,000 injuries, the squalid conditions at Walter Reed and the other VA hospitals around the country, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives lost and the millions that have had to flee their own country to escape the death squads. If I were Joe, I might not mention Iraq on my web site, come to think of it.

Poor Joe just can't get his facts straight on CAFE

An article in the Oakland Press on March 9 launches Joe's campaign against raising corporate CAFE standards. Apparently Joe, like his conservative friends that like to ignore science, think that backward thinking can help the auto industry. Had the Big 3 kept pace with the foreign manufacturers, they wouldn't be in the state they're in. Joe thinks that selling gas hog trucks and SUV's can help our economy. While that may be true in the short run, a real leader thinks long term and Joe is no leader.

According to the Union for Concerned Scientists, the United States could create 200,000 jobs by adopting higher CAFE standards, not to mention helping to save the planet for our grandchildren. Read the full report here.

Knollenberg Updated His Website (Finally) -- but STILL Doesn't List IRAQ As an Issue!

Joe Knollenberg finally updated his website.

Apparently he doesn't have much to say because it is now mostly pictures.

But more importantly, he STILL doesn't even list IRAQ as an "issue".

Other "problems" with his website:

Knollenberg supports privitizing Social Security (but doesn't mention that on his website)

• Knollenberg calls himself an "environmentalist" but can't point to a single "environmental" vote -- he votes for polluters, not the planet

• Unlike most Americans, Knollenberg OPPOSES universal healthcare (but he doesn't mention that on his website)

We will cover these and more in detail over the coming weeks.

Apparently Joe Knollenberg has an aversion to the truth.

Stay tuned.

We will give you the real story of Joe Knollenberg.

Then you can read how he spins it and see who you trust.

Knollenberg Keeps His Friends Close & His Lobbyists Closer

No Wonder Knollenberg Opposes Negotiating Drug Prices

For Medicare & Opposes Importing Drugs

Knollenberg's Chief of Staff is a Washington, D.C. Lobbyist
As noted in a previous post, Joe Knollenberg's Chief of Staff, Trent Wisecup, is a Washington, D.C. Lobbyist!

Apparently Joe lives by the adage of keep your friends close and your lobbyist closer!

And Wisecup isn't just any lobbyist, he was one of the key lobbyist's for the big Pharmacuetical companies during the debates over the Medicare prescription drug plan.

Knollenberg Supported a Bill That Made Senior Drugs MORE Expensive!
The Democrats wanted to allow Medicare to be able to negotiate lower drug prices for seniors -- just like Medicaid and the Veterans Administration. But Republican's like JOE KNOLLENBERG OPPOSED using such a fiscally responsible approach.

Instead, Joe Knollenberg supported a Medicare drug benefit that allows pharmaceutical companies to charge Seniors the maximum price -- far more than what they would pay if the prices were negotiated.

Knollenberg has also consistently voted against allowing Seniors and other Americans to import their medicine from Canada even though it could save them thousands of dollars a year.


Knollenberg's Chief of Staff Was Lobbyist For Big Drug Companies
It all became clear once we learned that Knollenberg's current Chief of Staff (who was also a staffer before he became a lobbyist) was a lobbyist for the big drug companies that were opposing having to negotiate their drug prices with Medicare.

In fact, the firm that Wisecup worked for brags about this on their website.

Apparently, Wisecup was behind the lobbying campaign that kept the Medicare Rx Bill from allowing Seniors to save money by importing their medication from Canada.

Yes. Knollenberg's Chief of Staff was the lobbyist that ran the campaign opposing allowing the importation of prescription drugs from Canada.

Knollenberg Voted For Big PhaRMA and Against Seniors
So it is no real surprise to see that Knollenberg voted with Big PhaRMA (and his lobbyist friend) and against Seniors.


In fact, earlier this year the House voted on whether to allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices for Seniors -- Knollenberg voted NO!!!


Why does Joe Knollenberg insist on forcing Seniors to pay more for their prescriptions?

Why does Joe Knollenberg want to hurt our Seniors?

Haven't they given enough to this Country?

UPDATE:
It seems that Mr. Wisecup isn't the first lobbyist Knollenberg has had on staff.
In fact, Knollenberg's previous Chief of Staff was a lobbyist too. Paul Welday was Knollenberg's former Chief of Staff and he is now involved in a controversy at the Oakland County Commission because many Commissioners believe that the County shouldn't be paying Welday $50,000 to be a lobbyist for the Commission. They believe that the Commissioners themselves are able to handle any lobbying efforts necessary.

Knollenberg's Chief of Staff is a Washington DC Lobbyist!

We've already reported on some of Joe Knollenberg's close ties with powerful Washington DC lobbyists.

It turns out he isn't just "close" to them. He has them on his staff!

Joe Knollenberg's Chief of Staff is a Washington DC Lobbyist!!

Knollenberg's Chief of Staff is Trent Wisecup. (We believe in full disclosure so we think it is important to note that he has been posting comments here under the initials "TLW". )

A quick review of some records shows that Mr. Wisecup is a Washington Lobbyist.

Here is a copy of a filing with the U.S. Senate's Lobbyist Disclosure program.

Mr. Wisecup was with the firm "D.C. Navigators". Apparently they knew how to navigate through the halls of Congress -- with the help of Congressman like Joe Knollenberg.

Heck -- on their own website they have a picture of the White House with the caption "Policy Development". Does that mean they develop policy for the White House? Gosh. Lobbyists who develop policy for BUSH & KNOLLENBERG -- now on-staff -- now getting a taxpayer funded salary! That is cozy.

Some of the clients of Wisecup's firm have included:

ACS
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Aetna
AgustaWestland North America Inc.
American Bankers Association
American Council of Life Insurers
American Immigration Lawyers Association
American Insurance Association
American International Group, Inc.
American Vantage Media
Association for Advanced Life Underwriting
Assurant Group
BellSouth
Bombardier
British Nuclear Fuels
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
Californians for Clean, Affordable, Safe Energy
Calpine
Caruso Affiliated Inc.
Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers
Dickstein & Zerbi
Fannie Mae
Farallon Capital Management
Financial Services Coordinating Council
Fisher Scientific
GateSafe
Hartford Insurance Brokers and Agents of the West
Jefferson Pilot Financial
Mass Mutual
Mutual of Omaha
New York Jets
Oracle
Pfizer Inc.
PG&E Corporation
Securities Industry Association
Sutter Health
Tyco International (US) Inc.
UnumProvident Corporation
Visa USA Inc.
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
WellCare

Gee. There are a lot of financial service companies on that list -- like VISA, and banking interests, etc. Those were the folks whose lobbyists were successful at getting the bankruptcy laws changed so that individuals have a much harder time getting their debts discharged in bankruptcy than Corporations!

Knollenberg's Chief of Staff was a lobbyist for those interests.

Knollenberg voted to support the new bankruptcy laws.

Any connection there?

Culture of Corruption

As this article in "The Hill" points out -- Republican lobbyists have a vested and financial interest in making certain that Republicans get elected to office. Apparently, the more Republicans in office, the more influence they have and thus the more clients they get and the more money they make.

Of course one of the most famous lobbyists is the indicted felon, Jack Abramoff. He certainly made millions off of having Republicans in Congress that he could influence for his clients.

Knollenberg Consistently Votes To Slash Funding For Veterans

With the shameful condition that seriously wounded Iraq veterans are being subjected to at Walter Reed and other military facilities, it is important to remember just who is responsible for slashing the budgets of these critical veteran services.

Joe Knollenberg is one of the Bush/Cheney team that have sent troops in harms way in Iraq, while failing to adequately fund their care after they return.

This isn't really a new issue -- it has been an issue for years -- it is just now getting more attention as more and more of our troops are getting seriously wounded in Iraq.

And the cost of adquate funding isn't exactly a mystery. The Congressional Budget Office has studied it and reported on the matter to Congress. But Joe Knollenberg still voted to underfund the VA.

More specifically, here are some of Knollenberg's votes against the troops:

Knollenberg Voted Against the Military Surviving Spouses Equity Act
Joe Knollenberg voted to maintain the “widow’s tax” on benefits received by survivors of their husbands and wives killed in service. Over 50,000 American families whose loved one was killed in Iraq are now living at or below the poverty line. But the government continues to impose a “widow’s tax” on survivors. After putting money into the Survivor Benefit Plan—sometimes for decades—the government offsets VA survivor compensation by keeping SBP money, then returning the paid premium as taxable income.
In May 2006, Congressman John Salazar moved to add the Military Surviving Spouses Equity Act to the 2007 defense bill. Joe Knollenberg voted against removing this unfair penalty on military widows. [HR 5122, Vote #144, 5/11/2006]

Knollenberg Voted for an Increase in Pharmacy Co-Pays for Military Families
Knollenberg voted to kill an amendment to the FY 07 Department of Defense Authorization bill that would remove the Bush administration’s proposal to increase pharmacy co-pays for military families.
Currently, military families who purchase their drugs through a retail pharmacy have a co-pay of $3 for generic drugs and $9 for brand-name drugs. However, the bill would raise those co-pays to $6 for generic drugs and $16 for brand-name drugs, as proposed in President Bush’s budget. The Democratic amendment sought to remove the provision increasing the co-pays and to leave the co-pays at their current level. [HR 5122, Vote #139, 5/11/06]

Knollenberg Voted for a FY 2007 Budget That Hurts America’s Veterans
For the FY2007 budget, Knollenberg supported a Republican budget resolution that cut funding for veterans’ appropriated programs by $6 billion below the level that CBO estimates is needed to maintain current services.
Additionally, the Republican budget resolution included significant increases in TRICARE costs for military retirees under 65. In fact, healthcare fees will triple for retired officers, double for retired senior enlisted personnel, and increase by 40 percent for junior enlisted retirees. [HCR 376, Vote #158, 5/18/2006]



So while JOE KNOLLENBERG says he supports the troops -- in fact he slashes funding for important veteran programs every time he gets the chance.

And these are just a few of his votes over the last year!

There are more votes -- and for each one, JOE KNOLLENBERG VOTES AGAINST OUR TROOPS!

Has Knollenberg EVER even visited any troops at Walter Reed? There is no evidence that he ever has. So Knollenberg is willing to send young men and women to war where they may die or suffer serious debilitating injuries -- but then he votes to cut funding to care for them when they return. That could only be considered negligent or just plain cruel.

Give Joe Credit Where Credit's Due

Giving Credit Where It’s Due
By Nancy Greggs

If you’re out of work because your government made it financially worthwhile for US companies to outsource your job to a cheaper labor market, THANK JOE.

If your son/daughter in the military is in a combat zone without sufficient equipment or training, THANK JOE.

If your war-wounded spouse is a war vet tied up in endless red tape and can’t get medical treatment or disability payments, THANK JOE.

If a loved one died in NOLA for want of food, water, medicine, or assistance of any kind in the aftermath of Katrina, THANK JOE.

If you’re upset that New Orleans was left in ruins while we could afford to build a billion-dollar embassy in Baghdad, THANK JOE.

If the cost of your life-saving prescription medicine has skyrocketed, even to the point where you can’t afford it at all, THANK JOE.

If you lose sleep at night worrying about the national debt your children and grandchildren will have to pay off in the decades to come, THANK JOE.

If you’re concerned about the fact that we don’t have the necessary funds to overhaul our crumbling infrastructure, THANK JOE.

If you’re worried about rising numbers in the incidents of homelessness and poverty, THANK A JOE.

If you’ve had to declare bankruptcy, but you still owe your soul to credit card companies, THANK JOE.

If you’ve noticed that you’re continually getting gouged at the pump even though oil companies are raking in record profits, THANK JOE.

If you’re angry at the fact that you have to go through intensive screening at the airport to board a plane with a hold full of uninspected cargo, THANK JOE.

If you wonder why hard-working middle-class citizens have to pay their full share of taxes while wealthy individuals and corporations don’t have to pay their fair share, THANK JOE.

If you wonder why investigations into government corruption always seem to get stopped in their tracks, THANK JOE.

If you think it unseemly that fabrications and outright lies are permitted to be broadcast as unqualified fact, THANK JOE.

If you worry about your kids getting sick from tainted food that should have been inspected but wasn’t, THANK JOE.

If you’re concerned that religious fanatics have too much influence over your government, THANK JOE

If you’re troubled by the erosion of your rights and freedoms and see that as an assault on democracy, THANK JOE.

If you are appalled by excuse-making and passing-the-buck having replaced accountability, THANK JOE.

If you have realized that the American Dream is now out-of-reach for millions of citizens, that the gap between the rich and the poor is growing at an alarming rate, that elections are no longer a matter of the will of the people but the whim of those who control the voting machines, that a nation that was once a Beacon of Democracy is now a nation that tortures, that the democratic country you were born and raised in is now indistinguishable from the worst dictatorship, that the Constitution is now treated as an antiquated document of no meaning, and that the country your ancestors fought and died for is no longer recognizable …

… don’t forget to THANK JOE.

Major Legislation Sponsors: Knollenberg's Name is Nowhere To Be Found

I was researching more campaign financing information on Joe Knollenberg when I stumbled across a page that encourages you to check and see what major pieces of legislation your Congressman has sponsored or co-sponsored.

I clicked to see what major legislation Joe had sponsored or co-sponsored -- and there wasn't any!! (Click on the image to the right to view a larger image of the page.)

Sad, but true.

Why does he make over $160,000 in taxpayer's money if he doesn't do anything?