Home > Window on Washington > Archives > 2007 > April > 16 > Entry
Showdown on TXU, Part II
Note to Rep. Joe Barton: Don’t duel with former Secretary of State James Baker over TXU. If a weekend-long exchange with his policy assistant is a prelude, this is one pro-environment Texan to not pick a fight with.
The background: Last week Barton, R-Ennis, puffed up and challenged Baker to face him on “neutral” Texas territory for a debate on TXU’s proposed sale. Barton opposes the sale; Baker supports it. The blog noted Barton’s challenge, letting it stand on its own, no real need to embellish when a member of Congress makes such a publicity grab.
Baker, not one to back down, sent a response last Friday that did not make it into the blog that day. But he attacked Barton’s pro-energy politics: “Unlike you, I am out of politics and not running for re-election to anything,” Baker wrote. “Therefore I will not expand or enhance your platform.”
He also suggested Barton “consider talking” with someone who believes, “as most Texans and I do, that climate change is an important challenge.”
So, back to the blog. A Baker policy assistant contacted the Statesman Saturday afternoon and strongly advocated that the blog be updated with Baker’s letter.
The letter was already out; it was posted on other Texas media. The blog was not updated.
Sunday afternoon, the blog gets notice that Baker’s office feels they “wasted” their time Saturday, since the blog was not updated.
The blog does try to respond multiple times, but email technological difficulties disable “reply.” Decides to handle it Monday from the office. As said earlier, the letter is already out and well-disseminated.
Monday morning, email Inbox from Baker’s office alerts the blog that it’s been “66 hours” since original blog item was posted.
“I can only surmise that your desire to get the item posted with immediacy — as you explained to me Saturday — surpassed any similar desire for balance. By comparison, reporters with The Dallas Morning News, Bloomberg and Reuters called for a response and ran stories including it. Bloomberg and Reuters had their stories posted before you submitted your blog posting, and thus they could have been a source had you performed a 15-second Google-search.”
“I don’t expect miracles … However, if it would not be a bother, please post a mention of Mr. Baker’s response before the close of the legislative session in Austin.”
One last testy phone call later, and the assistant directs that if blog is going to post his email, it’s only fair to post the blog’s.
In one line, the blog email said:
“When I talked to you on Saturday I did not promise to update the blog item, I thanked you for bringing it to my attention. If I mention the letter again, I will be sure to mention the response. “
Ah, diplomacy. So, since the blog is mentioning the letter again, here is the response:
And here is Barton’s. Download file
Permalink | Comments (1) | Categories: Texas, Washington
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Larry Neal
April 17, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this
Tara: Message received.
Last week it seemed to us that somebody might learn something useful from a reasoned public discussion between two straight-shooting old friends talking policy instead of politics, especially at a moment when nobody’s running for anything.
A debate would be a long shot, we thought, but possible. If it was not to be, the likeliest response would be a diplomatic, “sorry-I’m-due-in-Mongolia-that-year” note, right? Not so much. The actual, “go-away-you-bother-me” reply from Secretary Baker’s office had the advantage of being unmistakably candid, however. Just like their notes to you.
Larry Neal
Deputy Republican Staff Director House Energy and Commerce Committee