Shelley Berkley proudly votes with her beloved colleagues, Jon Porter and Dean Heller

Congratulations to Rep. Shelley Berkley for truly distinguishing herself Thursday. Of 233 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, Berkley was one of only three of them voting to let the world's largest mining companies take billions of dollars worth of minerals that belong to the U.S. public for free, without paying the U.S. public one red cent. Or as it is known in the real world, stealing.

OK, that's not exactly right. The mining companies have pay a fee to "patent" the land where the minerals are. And those fees can be as steep as, oh, $5 an acre. That's five. Not five million. Or five thousand. Or five hundred. Five.

The two other mining corporation tools in the Democratic Party were Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota and Dan Boren of Oklahoma. The South Dakota person is understandable, s'pose, because she's the poor little rapidly depopulating state's only member of Congress and there really aren't supposed to be any Democrats in South Dakota since Tom Daschle got beat, except for that one guy who they let stay in the Senate because he's sick and they feel sorry for him. As for the Oklahoman, yeah, Oklahoma, whatever.

The trio's valiant stand notwithstanding, a majority of the House voted for law and order and to put an end to the corporate welfare that has kept the world's largest mining companies from standing independently and on their own for 135 years (Reuters, AP). In fact, at 244 to 166, the vote wasn't close, and one reason was that while Berkley was voting with most of the Republicans Thursday, she wasn't voting with all of them — 24 Republican members of the House cast uncharacteristically sane votes in support of making mining companies stop taking the public's gold, silver, copper and other minerals for free.

Yes, well, those darned Eastern elites just don't understand the West, and this is one of those issues where Western Democrats are different than their national counterparts, right?

Not exactly. Eleven Democratic members of the House from interior Western states (four each from AZ and CO, and one each from NM, ND and UT) voted with the majority to stop one of the largest handouts in the history of this or any other country. Apparently Shelley Berkley needs to get them in a room and educate them on traditional Western values as practiced in the rural heartland with which she is so familiar and whose mythical idyllic lifestyle she is so eager to defend.

Here's Berkley's rationalization for voting the way her beloved Nevada congressional colleagues Dean Heller and Jon Porter want her to, as reported in the Sun earlier this week:

“If [mining corporations] made zero, what do you want to extract from them?” Berkley said. “It would be the taxpayers’ problem if (the mines) closed up operations because they are not making any profit and they have to sell assets in order to pay their taxes,” she said. “It’s more than jobs. It’s the entire economic base of particular areas of our state that would simply fail to continue to exist if it wasn’t for the mining industry.

“I understand taxing profits and paying for the privilege of doing business,” she said, “but having them pay taxes to the point where they’re closing up shop doesn’t seem like a very sound argument.”

Yes, we see what she means. After all, Newmont Mining announced just this week that its net income for the third quarter of 2007 was only $400 million.

Actually, the bill that passed the House Thursday, over Berkley's opposition, imposes no "taxes" at all. It would require companies to pay "royalties" to the public for taking possession of the public's minerals. Further, the bill has nothing whatsoever to do with "profits" — on the contrary, the bill levies an 8 percent royalty on the gross value of the gold, in recognition, perhaps, that the company is not paying a tax but paying for a commodity that belongs to the public. In fact, it is the watered down, corporate-sponsored legislation supported by Berkley and the Republicans, and that would place an easily circumvented charge on net value, that more closely resembles a tax.

Berkley is also hopelessly and really rather embarrassingly wrong to suggest that if they are charged royalties, companies will be  "paying for the privilege of doing business." No. The companies will be paying for something different altogether: our gold.

It's totally possible that Berkley just doesn't understand the issues; nobody else in urban Nevada gives a shit about mining reform, so it wouldn't be surprising if she doesn't either. Or maybe she's just following the lead of Harry Reid, who issued a statement Thursday vowing to never let meaningful mining reform ever see the light of day because he's the industry's bitch.

But Reid's hopelessness/spinelessness on the issue is legendary, part fear of getting creamed in the sticks in his next election, and part historical inertia and habit stemming from those bygone days when the mining industry actually mattered almost as much as the mining industry says it does.

Really, what's Berkley's excuse?

If we're going to speculate idly (a key tenet of the Gleaner mission statement) about why Berkley is coddling transnational mining conglomerates, we're going to guess that some neocon assclown from Cheney's office floated the ridiculous War Party contention that gold mining is vital to national security, and told Berkley that if mining corporations had to actually pay for their raw materials, U.S. defense corporations wouldn't be able to manufacture enough weapons to keep up with Israeli demand, and Israel might not be able to bomb Iran.

That argument, or a variation thereof, usually seems to be in play when Berkley goes voting with the Republicans.

Comments

WTF is she doing for Las Vegas? Vegas is her District. Unfortunately, this is what passes for the Democratic Party here.
Someone please tell me where the real Democrats are in this fukacta state.

Now that all this NV relevant bullshit is over with, maybe Shelley can get going on protecting her real constituency-Zionists.

[nvmediaboy]

That Zionist comment is thinly veiled anti semetism and as such is reprehensible. It also deflects from the real issue that the Congresswoman obviously care less about Nevada's long term interests than she does HR and their mutual masters of mining, water and development. We need to elect Chris G to federal office!

[FedUp]

Not exactly a vote exhibiting courage, in the face of a special interest, Shelley.

You don't have any real principles, do you?

[Nevada Scandalmonger]

It looks like Jon Porter is having an allergic reaction to shaking Berkley's paw in that pic. It appears as if his head is full of pus and ready to blow at any minute.

Or is that the normal size of his head?

nvmediaboy:

You have a point on the Anti-Semetic implications, but you have to agree that Shelley comes off as a reverse-type, philo-Semite ("My people are more special than yours") in her primary issue, her obsession with Israeli politics -- which has little to do with her district or Nevada -- and then when there IS a vote that would impact Nevada and finally remove a special block on fees that mining should be paying, she votes with the Republicans FOR the mining interests.

I think she may have made a deal with some devil.

I'll never trust her.

Anti-Zionism has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, media boy. More like anti-US-sponsored-terrorism.

In fact many Semites oppose the extreme actions taken by Israel in the name of "national security." Sound familiar?

[JewsForJeter]

Yo-semite. This shout-out goes to Not Bob.

[Christopher Trent]

Or, I don't know, she might just be a Congresswoman from NEVADA. I have no idea why she might cast a vote in support of the MINING INDUSTRY. In NEVADA!

...

(This is like harassing Trent Lott for supporting cotton subsidies. HE'S FROM MISSISSIPPI!)

[MikeZahara]

The support of this rape of Nevada and its mineral assets is disappointing and a big issue if opponents jump on it. The global demand for minerals is at historic highs fueled by all the money we're sending China and an in the toilet dollar and there's our delegation saying no, no, no!

Harry doesn't surprise me as he has zero ethics as he's proven so many times before. Shelly does surprise a bit though.

as for Shelley's Zionism, there is no doubt--she had never not taken the AIPAC line and is terrified of them, but also is their beneficiary in I forget how many trips. She strongly supports the 40 year theft of other people land and assets in the name of Israeli expansionism---but howls at Iran's same ambitions.

You gotta love that duplicity...if not the hypocrisy.

I think over the course of her career in the House, Shelley has managed to get all of 6 bills out of Committee. Her District will shrink in 2011 and become more GOP.

She's very vulnerable with positions and votes like this mining fiasco.

She's referred to as the 'Queen of Barrick' within Barrick for good reason.

[IronJawed]

"Her District will ... become more GOP." Stop making things up/pulling things out of your ass Zahara. You have no idea what you are talking about.

[MikeZahara]

with a new 4th seat where to you think that's going to come out of if the GOP draws the map in 2011? Or even if we do?

USDOJ guidelines will likely require CDO1 or 04 to be the 'minority majority' seat. Shelley's seat will have more GOP territory no matter who draws the map cupcake...

Interesting senario about Shelley's district, Zahara. You might be right. It might change the district Shelley calls "the hole in the bagel."

Hard to believe with Nevada's population gains, how the Legislature could do the simple Strong Republican, Strong Democrat, and Even district formation it did after 2000. Likely more Repubs would be injected into her district after 2010.

Zahara, no one has begun to draw lines. Everything is still up for grabs. You have no idea what is going to happen. No one does. Stop pretending.

[MikeZahara]

They'd have to...RCCC would insist on it and so would USDOJ. CD04 will have all of NLV, all of the NW/Centennial too, maybe some Sunrise. CD01 will become more compact and more urban and central and Shelley lives way out in Queensridge, but does well for now with the GOP there...If I were she, I would be worried about 2010,12 & 14 as my vulnerable race years.

[IronJawed]

Of course lines are going to be redrawn. Just stop pretending like you know how they will be redrawn. You don't know a thing.

If Dems take over the state senate, we are going to have a huge advantage. There are too many variables between now and the re-drawing for clear prediction. Stop letting your butt do the talking for you, Cupcake.

[MikeZahara]

Its the art of political speculation and everyone plays this game cupcake. With a Dem WH win in 2008 its a blood bath for all Dems in 2010...meaning we're more likely to lose a NV Senate seat, than gain one.

Harry brings the entire 2010 ticket down and we lose 2 state offices.

There is a bit of science to this too and I bat about .970 in this arena.

the variables are many indeed and the biggest one is Harry. Not a single Dem wants him on the ticket in 2010 for good reason...the GOP draws the map if he's there. We are in deep whit with a WH win in 2008.

USDOJ will pipe into this remap too...that's almost guaranteed.

omg you are an idiot Zahara

[MikeZahara]

do you know nothing of American political history? If you don't think the GOP will make 2010 gains when we win the WH in 2008, its you who'se the idiot...esp under Hillary.

If you don't think this is already being planned on both sides and test mapping is already being done everywhere...than you are the idiot.

Why do you think Slanker is in DC?" Its not to help Ensign...it's to grease the way for Porter in 2010 dumbshit...these boys know what they're doing.

mike, sounds to me like ur correct. will anyone on this site vote for harry in 2010? roflmao

Yeah, but Porter will likely lose in '08, with the anti-Bush, pro-Dem realignment (fueled by a probable recession) that's going to happen.

Would Porter then come back in 2010? To revive memories of GW Bush, whom he supported slavishly? Not likely.

And, you are giving FAR too much credit to that sleazy-midget Karl Rove, Mike Slanker -- hired because he is the lowest political slime the GOP could get, at a desperate time.

Even he can't stop the coming political "D" tide of '08.

[MikeZahara]

Tides tend to turn into tsunamis and we're taking a lot for granted about '08. Porter needs one of our 'A'team against him or Martin or Dankas needs 7-8 million and a lot of luck.

It aint as easy as you're making it out to be.

And no...no soul with a brain or conscience in this state will cast a vote for Reid in 2010. He's lost his entire LDS and Gaming base and is dragging the entire party down with him...

He's done...he knows it...so does eveeryone else running in 2010. trust me.

[Keeping Them Honest]

Boy, Zahara, gotta give you credit. Talk to enough Republicans and you'll believe waterboarding isn't torture. Oops.

[MikeZahara]

I support the Geneva Conventions and I don't support water-boarding. Though I do take a look at moderate Republicans, I do not give money to them like so many of our Dems in leadership do...Top of the list: Harry Reid!

Nonetheless, Porter is going to be tough to beat and again, I wish someone from our 'A' team...Perkins, Gibson or Titus would take him on.

Illegal immigration will be at or near the very top in this campaign so a very liberal Democrat needn't even try. Tessa lost with the backing of LDS and the puny Reid machine in a year we should have won this seat. LDS will support the Catholic Porter in '08, unless we get Gibson to run (he and Perkins would win)...Gaming likes Porter and is priming him for the US Senate.

He's got money.

The Wagner race in Henderson is an indicator of how GOPers will rally to a good campaigner...though he lost, it was only by inches.

Today CD03 votes GOP for prez in '08 and that helps Porter regardless of registrations...their voters vote...ours don't do nearly as well.

Remember the GOP beat us in Clark in turnout as a percentage of their registrations in 2006...that should worry everyone.

[KICKBOXERMOMMA]

"Today CD03 votes GOP for prez in '08 and that helps Porter regardless of registrations...their voters vote...ours don't do nearly as well."

MZ you little devil of doom, I'm voting for Harry in 2010 if he's running. He's the devil and powerhouse I know. You will start seeing earmarks for Nevada come 2008 and 2009 like crazy.

Harry is no Tom Daschle and has plenty of time to prepare for 2010. Democratic Congress/Democratic WH in 2008 hell yes Harry's going to run in 2010 and he'll mow down the opposition when he does run. He has the war chest and the political chits to call in. How many top Dems will come out for him- Start the love line honey it will be long and constant. Dems have smarten up with the Daschle debacle - it won't happen again.

Lighten up MZ you little harbinger of gloom.