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
I was a bit taken aback as I read Fergus' article in the UL this morning. Wondering if phrases like this go over the heads of the Tea Party/912 group:
Some conservatives are happiest when they are angry, so Guinta sought to unite the group against common enemies. "We can do anything in the House. We have the votes in the House," Guinta assured the group. The problem occurs when legislation goes to the other side of the Capitol. "We don't have a Senate. We don't have a President who supports the values we all share."
[Guinta] said focusing on a balanced budget won't get America where it needs to be, but focusing on jobs will help growth.
Frank Guinta, 19 July:
I was a proud co-sponsor of this bill. Pundits are calling this a "symbolic vote," and they're right. Voting for the Cut, Cap and Balance Act symbolizes my dedication to putting our fiscal house in order, getting our economy back on track and helping job creators start hiring again.
Frankie is in trouble with the local Tea Party, according to this article in NH Journal by Fergus Cullen:
State Rep. Andrew Manuse of Derry, who was an active Guinta supporter in the campaign, posted the following on Facebook Wednesday: "I would like to apologize for urging support for Congressman Frank Guinta in the last election. Unfortunately, Guinta was good at giving lip service to what we all wanted to hear, but he has proven himself to be a typical Washington insider with his vote for the Patriot Act and now his vote to raise the debt ceiling. I will not be able to support him again. I do hope he has a primary opponent worth supporting."
In a press release explaining his vote for the Boehner bill to raise the debt ceiling, Frank Guinta pulled out one of the ubiquitous GOP talking points.
"This evening I voted against a blank check for the President..."
Someone please ask Guinta to reread the U.S. Constitution. Congress has the sole power to appropriate money. Congress determines spending. It's disingenuous and deceptive to say raising the debt ceiling gives President Obama a “blank check.”
This is a straight-up lie. Not the everyday, casual fudging that politicians do, but a straight up lie. As the Government Accountability Office explains: “The debt limit does not control or limit the ability of the federal government to run deficits or incur obligations. Rather, it is a limit on the ability to pay obligations already incurred.”
This isn’t a perfect metaphor, but not raising the debt ceiling is more like refusing to pay your credit card bill than it is akin to asking for a blank check. Congress appropriates funds; if they don’t want Obama to spend more, it’s within Congress’s power to withhold that money. That’s you know, in the Constitution. I believe the GOP insisted on it being read at the beginning of the 112th Congress, but they don’t seem to have been paying attention.
Twenty-two House Republicans voted against the Boehner debt ceiling bill because it didn't go far enough for the Tea Party constituents that elected them into office.
Frank Guinta and Charlie Bass were not among them.
Both of New Hampshire's congressmen explicitly ran as candidates aligned with the Tea Party. Charlie Bass:
"I love them. God bless every single one of them. Their agenda is exactly the same as mine."
Frank Guinta, "who rode the Tea Party wave to Washington last year," is strongly beholden to the movement:
Elected Tuesday with the support of Tea Partiers and pledging deep cuts to federal government, Frank Guinta will soon be one of many freshman House Republicans left to figure out where the fledgling movement fits within the halls of Congress.
The former Manchester mayor has said he would join a House Tea Party Caucus created this summer by U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, a Republican from Minnesota....
...During the Republican primary, he easily won a straw poll held by the New Hampshire Tea Party Coalition, taking 81 percent of the vote. Guinta's margin of victory over his Republican challengers was the most decisive of any contest featured in the Tea Party poll.
Guinta said at the time that he was honored by the results of the straw poll and cited his attendance at several Tea Party events, as well as gatherings for the 9/12 movement started by Fox News commentator Glenn Beck.
Frank Guinta broke his word and never joined the Tea Party Caucus. Charlie Bass' committment to them was questioned almost immediately.
As we move into a 2012 presidential general election cycle, it is unlikely that 2010 Tea Party candidates Bass or Guinta will court the deepest part of the GOP base so closely again. Whether or not the Tea Party acts on that rejection is another question.
The Los Angeles Times' Kathleen Hennessey writes that the debt ceiling vote has exposed the Faustian bargain many freshmen congressmen made with tea party extremists. Case in point: Congressman Frank Guinta.
How strongly must freshmen like Rep. Frank Guinta of New Hampshire hold out on the debt ceiling — and risk federal default — to appease people who voted for them?
But while Frank sold his soul to the tea party for votes, he looked to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce types for cash. And now each one has grabbed a limb and is pulling in the opposite direction.
Since taking office, Guinta has faced pressure from both sides. He met with tea party groups that urged him to hold the line. He also met with a business round table, where bankers warned him of the dangers of default.
So how is Frank going to talk his way out of this one?
"What I hear from people is it's not the debt ceiling itself. It's the spending," he added. "The debt ceiling is the tangible thing, but it's the spending people are angry about."
Earlier this year, 1st District Congressman Frank Guinta sponsored a bill to regulate freight brokers and to "increase the effectiveness of Federal oversight of motor carriers."
With the backing of three powerful trucking lobbies, the “Fighting Fraud in Transportation Act 2011, FITT, (H.R. 2357),” introduced last week by Reps. Russ Carnahan (D-MO) and Frank Guinta (R-NH), would increase bond amounts and strengthen requirements before anyone can begin brokering freight.
Guinta and Carnahan worked closely with OOIDA, the Transportation Intermediaries Association, and the American Trucking Associations in writing up the legislation.
Now it seemed out of character for Guinta to be taking the lead on regulating the trucking industry. After all, this is a man who said the "central focus of the challenges that we face in this 112th Congress" is ending the "overregulation that is strangling our small businesses." This is a man who disdains federal regulation so much that he said we don't even need the FDA to regulate food safety.
But then I reviewed Guinta's second quarter campaign finance report and I see $1000 contributions from, you guessed it, the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association PAC (OOIDA PAC), the Transportation Intermediaries Association PAC (TIA PAC), and the Trucking PAC of the American Trucking Associations, Inc. (Truck PAC).
Frank Guinta feels the pain of the jobless in New Hampshire as he advertises his stealth campaign event jobs fair:
Each number represents a real, living person who is out of work, a family that is struggling to avoid bankruptcy, or a person who wonders whether he or she will ever find another middle class job. Even worse, those monthly unemployment figures don't include the truly desperate: people who have been out of work for so long, they have given up hope of ever being employed again.
...One man told me he has been out of work for three years. Think about that for a minute; the last time he got a paycheck was 2008. Another man said he has had to use his savings to pay the bills while he looks for a new job. As a result, he now wonders whether he can afford to keep his child in college for another year. The stories went on and on, and they truly tugged at my heart.
Frank Guinta feels no pain killing some two thousand New Hampshire jobs (h/t Tuck):
If the House passed budget were signed into law around two thousand construction workers in New Hampshire would lose their jobs, according to the Federal Highway Administration. First District Congressman Frank Guinta says even if the number is correct, he was sent to Washington to cut spending.
"Well Democrats have been asking for more money for the last four years and they've spent us into debt and deficit. We've got to live within our means."
Not sure the new Maternal, Kinder, Gentler, Re-Elect Congressman Frank Guinta model works so well with the pre-existing Paternal, Austerity, Elect Candidate Frank Guinta one.
Frank Guinta has been clear about his desire to dismantle the American safety net. He doesn't want his children to know what Social Security is, and he voted to end Medicare for those under 55.
(Since that vote, he's earned an upside down favorability rating.)
Incredibly, Democratic President Barack Obama is willing to chip away at those programs for the sake of a "Grand Bargain" on the deficit, a concession that is both remarkably poor public policy and politically disastrous. What he wants in return from Republicans is to end the Bush-Obama tax giveaways to the wealthiest.
Equally incredibly, Frank Guinta lays out his own priorities:
"I have a core belief that I've maintained that raising taxes doesn't solve the problem,'' said Representative Frank Guinta, a New Hampshire Republican who was elected with support from Tea Party activists.
He's spectacularly wrong, of course.
But to the larger point: our President has given Frank Guinta the chance to chip away at the safety net, but he won't bite if it disturbs the free ride the rich have had for the past ten years.
Remember this when the government defaults and you don't get your Social Security check in the mail.
Me neither. Here we have the Speaker of the US House coming to NH for a $1500 a person fundraiser for Frank Guinta, and WMUR couldn't spare a reporter or even any air time to cover it. But I seem to remember Carol Shea Porter going to Boston to a fundraiser with Nancy Pelosi and WMUR sent a camera team to hang out all day.
Speaker of the House John Boehner is rewarding Rep. Frank Guinta's loyalty by traveling to Bedford tonight for an end-of-quarter fundraiser. Carol Shea-Porter reminds us of Boehner's sordid fundraising history:
Remember when now-Speaker John Boehner was caught handing out tobacco industry checks to Republicans right on the floor of The House of Representatives, not even PRETENDING there was no connection between tobacco campaign contributions and votes? He was rewarding Republicans who voted for special interests. Now he is in New Hampshire to reward Frank Guinta for HIS votes against the people. (email)
Guinta, of course, earned Boehner's allegiance by voting with the Republican leadership on 95% of House votes including the votes to repeal healthcare reform, end Medicare and protect subsidies for Big Oil.
You're cordially invited to join this dynamic duo in Bedford. Suggested contribution is $1500 per person for a VIP roundtable, $500 per couple for the general reception. Better yet, why not mark Boehner's visit by making an end-of-quarter contribution to Carol's campaign instead?
Not only that, but the latest glossy, technicolor missive he's got the postman delivering, at public expense, in the Granite state is ungrammatical to boot.
We must preserve and strengthen Medicare. I will not support any changes to benefits for anyone in or near retirement because they deserve those benefits in which they organized their lives around.
In its current form, Medicare will go broke. The failure is to do nothing. I will work to preserve the program for future generations because they deserve health and retirement security they can count on.
Congressman Frank Guinta
Not just ungrammatical, but wrong. Medicare payments for medical/surgical services are not "benefits." The people who need them paid into the program. To suggest that they "organized their lives around" the possibility that they'd get sick is insulting.
Medicare cannot "go broke." And therein lies the lie. Medicare can be broken, but that can only happen if the people charged with managing the public purse -- i.e. Congressman Guinta and his cohorts -- renege on their obligations and violate the trust we have placed in them. Our governments cannot break on their own; they can be broken when, like the unjust steward in the Bible, our agents distribute what we are owed to someone else.
At best, Guinta's using the "the dog ate my homework" excuse. Taxing the public purse to disseminate it is fraud.
Recently down in DC the NRCC stirred to help their "most vulnerable members," including our own Charlie Bass and Frank Guinta. In addition to demographic and electoral concerns, no doubt a big reason our two congressmen are on that list is their vote to turn Medicare into Vouchercare.
Interestingly, the head of the NRCC, Rep. Pete Sessions, is now going further. He wants to destroy Social Security by "reforming" it:
House Republicans on Friday introduced legislation that would allow workers to partially opt out of Social Security immediately, and fully opt out after 15 years.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee, and several other Republicans introduced the Savings Account for Every American (SAFE) Act. Under the bill, workers would immediately have 6.2 percent of their wages sent to a "SAFE" account each year.
That would take the place of the 6.2 percent the workers now contributed to Social Security.
As many will remember, Medicare foe Paul Ryan tried something similar with John E. Sununu and George W. Bush back in 2005; popular opposition to the privatization scheme was widespread and contributed significantly to the Democrats' electoral advantage in 2006.
But I am curious how this plays out for Frank Guinta, who clearly needs the NRCC's help, and who - very clearly - has expressed his desire for the abolition of America's most trusted safety net for seniors:
Will Frank Guinta sign on as co-sponsor to the Sessions bill? After all, when he debated Carol Shea-Porter on the issue last fall, he flailed around in the absence of a plan. Session's bill to destroy the "Social" part to Social Security is a plan right up his alley.
Adding: an eagle-eyed reader alerts me to the dangers already lurking (.pdf) in the Ryan plan on Social Security. So one way or another, the push to dismantling the middle class is on.
Having been to one town hall meeting featuring my congressman, heard about several others, and been treated to numerous mentions of Mr. Guinta in the national press, I have come to the conclusion that he is capable of memorization but not much else when it comes to policy.
The latest was the embarrassing encounter with Elizabeth Warren at the hearing by the House Oversight Committee.
Ever wonder why government often seems so slow to respond to the needs of We the People, despite who's in charge?
Here's one fundamental reason, perhaps THE reason:
In an election year where more congressional incumbents were ousted from power than any time since 1948, political action committees were quick to switch allegiances from one party to the other in the aftermath of the historic Democratic losses.
A total of 352 PACs in 53 U.S. House races and two U.S. Senate races gave money to incumbents prior to Election Day only to begin funding the winning challengers immediately after their preferred candidates went down to defeat, according to research by the Center for Responsive Politics.
That's double the number of PACs that flipped support following the 2008 election.
Ever wonder why Carol Shea-Porter seemed so different from (big) business as usual in Washington?
New Hampshire's 1st Congressional District, where Republican Frank Guinta defeated Democratic incumbent Carol Shea-Porter, ranks as the only House district where an incumbent was unseated where no PAC that supported Shea-Porter has since invested in Guinta, according to the Center's research.
There is a simple reason behind that remarkable fact: Carol Shea-Porter did not accept business PAC money, and so the list of Telecoms, Banksters, and Military Industrial bigwigs that so shamelessly pump money into other officeholders didn't get a space at the front of the line instead of you. "For the rest of us" was no empty slogan.
Too bad one half of New Hampshire is now represented by Frank Guinta, who gladly takes business PAC money like the rest of the Washington establishment.
Done right, this information could be the basis for a remarkably effective 30-second TeeVee ad.
Candidate Frank Guinta said some version of this repeatedly throughout the 2010 campaign:
The federal govt needs to first underatnd it does not create jobs. It can only create a better environment for our job creators. Rather than pick winners and losers, we should focus on strengthening the economy as a whole.
Member of the federal government Frank Guinta recently chose to pick winners and losers. The winners were multi-national oil giants. The losers, any of us who pay taxes and care about the deficit. The right-wing Fosters editorial board explains:
Sometimes even the best among us get tunnel vision. So it is with Republican members of the New Hampshire congressional delegation when it comes to not eliminating billions of dollars in annual subsidies to Big Oil.
...Subsidies distort the market. They lead to artificial pricing levels often overriding the laws supply and demand.
...Artificial supports, whether for oil, ethanol, tobacco, milk, corn or other grains- either through direct payments or tax breaks - turn control of pricing over to the government. This in turn takes control out of the hands of consumers.
Why won't Frank Guinta let the free markets work on their own without interference from Big Government?
UPDATE: Think Progress has video of a town hall audience not buying Guinta's lame excuses for giving our tax money to oil companies.
In light of multiple bi-partisan complaints filed with the FEC, Frank Guinta was asked at his town hall last night to produce a simple copy of a bank statement to back up claims that $355,000 that went to his campaign was his (despite logic and common sense saying otherwise).
Guinta responded (partial transcription my own):
"The ethics committee cleared it up. They said they reviewed my FEC reports. They gave it a clean bill of health. This was back in December."
This is as dishonest as the day is long.
Yes, it was back in December when Guinta began parading around a form letter everyone gets from the FEC a House committee as phony "proof" that he is in the clear. Even DiStaso wouldn't carry that water:
The e-mail received by the Guinta camp this week is not specifically in response to the complaint the Democrats filed with the House, but is instead the result of a standard review the ethics committees does of all House members.
Frank Guinta's dishonesty here goes even deeper, as it was also in December that this happened:
The Federal Elections Commission has taken a preliminary step toward investigating U.S. Rep.-elect Frank Guinta's personal finances.
The commission this week told state Democratic Party director Mike Brunelle that it has assigned a case number to his complaint and that Guinta will have 15 days to respond once he is notified.
In no way has anyone "cleared it up" in regard to Frank Guinta's mystery money. Indeed, he has spent the past five months with the possibility of an FEC investigation - with subpoena power - hanging over his head.
(Not to mention the complaint filed with the Clerk of Congress and a request by the NHDP to a US Attorney General to investigate.)
I think the privatization of medicare and destruction of social safety nets that Guinta and Bass voted for is summed up pretty well in this video.
This is exactly what the NH republicans, tea baggers, and free staters (is there a difference anymore?) in Washington and Concord are trying to do - take away everything that makes America great while throwing the elderly, middle class, and poor over the cliff in exchange for benefits for the rich. I can't wait to see more ads like this for the 2012 elections!
Frank Guinta is so scared about his vote to destroy Medicare he went begging for mercy to the President of the United States. Not to be outdone, Charlie Bass suspends reality by claiming a voucher is not a voucher.
What are these men so frightened of? Mothers.
Carol Shea-Porter, (campaign email):
I spent Mother's Day with my 87 year-old mom. I told her how lucky I was to still have her, and asked her if she was surprised by how long she has lived. She laughed and replied that she never expected to live this long. My mother's generation clearly benefited from the best medical care in our history, thanks to Medicare. Medicare works!
Annie Kuster (op-ed):
My 87-year-old mother-in-law lives on her own in a small apartment on a widow's pension and her Social Security. A few weeks ago, she was hospitalized for a few days with pneumonia, and her hospital stay was covered by Medicare.
In 2008, more than 200,000 people in our state received benefits from Medicare, which is why I am so disturbed that our congressman and his colleagues voted to jeopardize the health and well being of future retirees.
Making matters worse for Guinta and Bass, Sununu's old Social Security privatization pal Paul Ryan is going to try, try again this week to convince Americans 54 and younger that getting rid of an extremely popular program that we have all paid into in some cases for three decades plus should be scrapped in favor of vouchers we are not allowed to call vouchers.
>140 on birch paper; on twitter <140
