About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
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

Guinta: Protecting his Constituency

by: susanthe

Wed Mar 02, 2011 at 11:22:58 AM EST


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.  

susanthe :: Guinta: Protecting his Constituency
Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Everything you have to know about Frank Guinta (0.00 / 0)

This vote tells the entire story.

You get the government you deserve.


Disagree. The exploited do not deserve to be (0.00 / 0)
exploited and the deceived do not deserve to be deceived.
If people were trustworthy, the succession of Guinta would not be a negative.  It is good for public offices to be manned on a rotating basis.  The voters ought to be faulted for crediting a person whom the Democratic power structure treated as a credible candidate.  Nobody, as far as I know, brought his prior performance as a public servant to the table.  Nor were Congresswoman Shea-Porter's achievements properly recognized.  In part, I suspect, that was because the Democratic power structure was not supportive of her candidacy from the start.  Hailing her election because she was the first woman elected to Congress from NH simply appealed to the superficial optics of Democrats.

[ Parent ]
Every voter in NH (4.00 / 1)
Needs to know this. This is a perfect counter-attack on "the Dems as Socialist" meme and the trade-offs R's are willing to make for their sponsors.

The case could not be more clear. This has LTE written all over it!

""Hope is the dream of a soul awake.""

/French Proverb quotes.



Winners and losers (0.00 / 0)
I thought Republicans were against the government "picking winners and losers."  Obviously, this is a stupid argument and they know it.  They pick winners and losers just as much as any Democrats.  The only difference is with this Republican House, the winners are big oil, big business and big donors, and the losers are the other 99% of us.

In fact, (0.00 / 0)
gov't "picking winners and losers" was a phrase Frank used in a negative light over and over and over again in the campaign.

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

[ Parent ]
what subsidies? (0.00 / 0)
i've googled this motion to recommit a couple of ways, and can't find any clear explanation of what this means, although i've found a lot of posts similar to this one.  it all sounds very rah-rah, but what subsidies are we talking about?

If what you are looking for is the actual subsidies (0.00 / 0)
try here.

[ Parent ]
So... dont buy Gas from Exxon and Mobil for a Year (0.00 / 0)
I got an interesting email that said if we don't buy from these two companies the price of oil will surely go down. I don't deal with these companies any more because I think it just might work, especially if everyone takes heed. Even if you cant use your speed pass any more or get all those shaws bucks from A "local" grocery store that charges you more if you don't have one of their little savings cards. Stick it to all the "to big to fail" corporations America... and force them to appreciate who's the real boss.
DaverNH

Thank you, Susan! (0.00 / 0)


""Hope is the dream of a soul awake.""

/French Proverb quotes.




Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox