Site Presented By
Thursday, Nov 26, 2009
But Energy Secretary Abraham has said the opposite.
There is an absolute, determined conflict of interest at the Department of Energy because Spence Abraham gets legal advice from the law firm Winston and Strawn, which is also advising the Nuclear Energy Institute, which is the umbrella for the nuclear power industry.
Anyway, the reason I've taken this step is because I feel that the president misled the state of Nevada. He didn't tell the truth. I also believe that the meetings Vice President Cheney had with energy executives where he came up with the energy policy of this country could have been a determining factor in the recommendation President Bush gave [about Yucca Mountain]. We do know that Cheney met with a significant number of nuclear power generators. We want to find out who [he] met with, what happened in the meetings, what they discussed.
The Democrats in the Senate and the House have been criticized by some commentators for being timid in their criticisms of Bush and Cheney. You, on the other hand, are suing them.
Here's how I feel about that: I know a war is going on. I understand that; I appreciate that. And I think the Democratic leadership has been coming together to try to solve our problems. But despite the war going on, this is not a dictatorship. The government is three separate but equal branches of government. I have just as much of a right to speak out as the president does. The fact that he's popular right now doesn't mean I won't speak out about things I disagree with him on.
What's been the reaction from your fellow Democrats to the lawsuit?
I have heard from my friends in just the last few days. They've told me that they're glad I did it. It's kind of "Follow me, I'm right behind ya."
Any reaction from Republican colleagues?
I haven't had any of those coming over and patting me on the back.
There are risks involved in suing the administration. You might be known as litigious. Might be dismissed that way. Have any political consultants expressed to you a fear of your becoming the Dan Burton of the Senate?
No, that doesn't bother me. I'm a lawyer; I've been to court lots and lots of times. It was my business 20 years ago. I try to be judicious when I criticize courts or when I attempt in some manner to use the courts.
Do you actually suspect that something fishy occurred during those energy task force meetings?
Of course I do, absolutely. I think this administration is so tight with the oil companies and the powerful utilities in our nation that we have an energy policy that's been dictated through Cheney that is now the word on the street that the administration is pushing. Sure it's fishy. Why are they refusing to give us this information? If it isn't fishy then it appears fishy just because they won't give us the stuff.
Now Bush supporters behind the scenes are arguing that Congress has exempted itself from many of the laws requiring the disclosure of deliberative advice, the Freedom of Information Act, and other sunshine laws that require politicians to disclose whom they get advice from. Is it fair to ask the White House to live up to a standard from which Congress exempted itself?
This is such an old-fashioned statement. It sounds like they've gone back and picked a page or two from Newt Gingrich's notebook. We're a separate but equal branch of government. The president has the right through his tremendous powers to do all kinds of things when it comes to rulemaking and meetings held. And we have the right to ask about it. For them to ask why don't we disclose is so amateurish it's hardly worth a retort.
