Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Frank Guinta has spoken of little but cutting spending since embarking upon his questionably funded campaign. Soon after taking office, he made this statement to Fosters:
I will work tirelessly to find places to cut the budget and implement savings; I have outlined many specific proposals during the campaign. I do not feel, however, that LIHEAP's New Hampshire program, which served over 35,000 households last year, is an appropriate place to cut."
Frank's no dummy, he knows that letting poor folks freeze to death isn't a good re-election strategy. He voted against funding Planned Parenthood, because women should be forced to serve as incubators in Frankworld. And if some of them get ovarian cancer - oh well. There are plenty more women around. They're the disposable gender. Plus it'll save taxpayers some $363 million! Those kinds of savings are worth cutting off cancer, HIV, and STD testing, and contraception for low income women.
Frank showed he has what it takes to be tough on low income women, but he's a marshmallow when it comes to Big Oil. He voted AGAINST cutting taxpayer subsidies to oil companies - along with all of his fellow Republicans.
For the typical American, I suspect this will seem hard to understand. In the face of fiscal challenges, Republicans are ready to slash funding in education, health care, job training, and national security, but they're not willing to end taxpayer subsidies -- our money -- for the oil industry? An industry that's already enjoying extraordinary profits?
Also note, ending the subsidies would save the federal government tens of billions of dollars, making a significant dent in the deficit-reduction campaign that Republicans pretend to care about. It's a reminder that the GOP's commitment to fiscal responsibility is shaped in large part by who'll suffer as a result of the cuts -- working families can feel the brunt of the budget ax, under the GOP vision, but ExxonMobil can't.
Every time Americans go to the pump -- which is becoming more painful all the time -- Democrats want consumers to remember, "You're not only paying higher prices for gas, your tax dollars, thanks to Republicans, are also subsidizing the oil companies themselves."
For the record, ending those subsidies would be a savings of $40 billion.
Here's the roll call The Bass master also voted to continue socialist subsidies for Big Oil.
After all, it's Big Oil and the rest of their pals in big biz that'll be ponying up the big bucks for their reelection campaigns. Corporate America is their real constituency.