Jaime Herrera-Beutler, "bright, shiny object" politics and confusing motion, with action.

Once again, Jaime Herrera is attempting to practice the Art of Bright, Shiny Object Politics by attempting to confuse us with motion, instead of action.

Look: Jaime Herrera is owned by the special interests financing her campaign (Kiewit, a major bridge building company, is her top campaign donor, after all; and they DO want some ROI...) like the 13th Amendment is the 13th Suggestion.

Lately, she's been getting some heat for sitting on her congressional ass and not doing anything.

This is what she did today, which is, essentially, nothing:.

Herrera Beutler sends legislative message to Coast Guard on CRC

Congresswoman's provision advises agency to consider project's economic impacts

Vivian Johnson

U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Camas, spoke with The Columbian in November about her vision for her second congressional term.

By Stevie Mathieu
Columbian Politics Reporter

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

digg submit

Columbian files

Columbian files

Congresswoman Jaime Herrera 

Beutler moved legislation today 

that advises the U.S. Coast 

Guard against approving a permit 

for a new Columbia River bridge 

that restricts river traffic.

Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler moved legislation today that advises the U.S. Coast Guard against approving a permit for a new Columbia River bridge that restricts river traffic. 

Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler moved legislation today that advises the U.S. Coast Guard against approving a permit for a new Columbia River bridge that restricts river traffic.

The Camas Republican added that provision to an appropriations bill that makes 2014 spending decisions for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The U.S. House Appropriations Committee, of which Herrera Beutler is a member, unanimously passed the DHS spending bill earlier today.

Her provision in the bill also would require the Coast Guard to submit a report to Congress about the Columbia River Crossing project’s efforts to mitigate financial harm to a few businesses located upriver of the Interstate 5 Bridge. Under the bill, that report must be submitted to Congress before the Coast Guard could issue a permit for the CRC.

“I understand the CRC is pursuing mitigation deals with companies that employ hundreds of Southwest Washington and Oregon residents, but we deserve to know what will happen to those jobs once the deals are signed,” Herrera Beutler said in a statement. If the CRC can’t provide assurances that those businesses’ jobs will stay in the region, “then the Coast Guard should not permit this project,” she added.

More, if you can stomach it.

Here's the thing:

What SHOULD have been added was this:

1.  A provision that killed the CRC.

2.  A provision requiring  a minimum height of 150 feet or so.

3.  A provision removing light rail.

4.  A provision requiring a Clark County-wide vote on the entirety of this subject.

Instead, we get a provision that ADVISES the Coast Guard to "consider" some nebulous, apparently unspecified (or at least unreported-on) "economic impacts," an utterly meaningless provision that will likely be stripped out of the bill on final passage because the LAW has no such requirement in it, and she doesn't say WHAT "economic impacts" they are supposed to "consider," or what the criteria are.

Further, the word "advises" means that they can "disregard" her request.

The only thing that has a cocktail wienie's worth of meat in it is the requirement that the Coast Guard submit a report before they approve the permit.

So, instead of taking action that would have actually MADE A DIFFERENCE, she throws up THIS worthless smoke screen.

It's not just that this idiot is bought... it's that she truly believes we're stupid... although, unfortunately, many of the anti-CRC commenters are, in fact, drinking her kool-aid.

Litterally for years, I have been demanding that Ridgefield Barbie actually DO something.

This... is not... that.