Tag Archives: Republicans

AMERICA FIRST-BEFORE POLITICS by Scotty

AMERICA FIRST BEFORE POLITICS


While listening to the Interview by FAREED ZAKARIA who was interviewing Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles.  I was pleasantly suprised that Simpson had the guts to put America First before Politics. (emphasis added by Scotty)

At the start of the Interview he got my full attention when he called himself a “R.I.N.O. …which means a Republican in name only because I guess of social views perhaps or common sense would be another one which seems to escape members of our party”. (Its a great lesson for all of the Republicans in Office).

I admired Mr Simpsons- frankness in why the Republicans and Democrats are causing the turmoil that is hampering the rebound of the US economy .  I especially appreciated his direct comment on Re-Election when he said:

” if (Re-Election)…” means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress.

He continues on to discuss the economy and progress needed to ensure continued growth.

You can’t cut spending your way out of this hole. You can’t grow your way out of this hole and you can’t tax your way out of this hole “Put that in your pipe and smoke it,”

To  bring about the progress that is needed to fix our economy while lowering our US Debt all Parties must be involved in solutions and learn how compromise is not always a bad thing.

“if you want to be in politics, you learn to compromise and you learn to compromise an issue without compromising yourself.
Show me a guy who won’t compromise and I’ll show you a guy with rock for brains.”

Truelly pointing out that the lack of Partinanship is not helping the economy.

Mr Erskine Bowles then went on with the interview and pointed out his thoughts on where the economy was headed

If we have a negative effect of 2 percent of GDP, we’ll be right back in recession and you better believe that the people of America will be calling on these members of Congress to do something.


So we think something will happen in the lame duck session. We believe it’ll probably be a two-step process where we end up setting up a framework with a time-frame in order to get something done. ZAKARIA: Boy, that’s pretty optimistic.

 

Lame Duck Session? What are they talking about.  We need Compromises ASAP.  What happened to the American Way of:

Everybody pitching in to do their part for the benefit of all?


Granted we Americans are a tuff nut and can handle anything thrown our way.  But what in the hell is wrong with our Elected Officials when they have to go behind the scenes and enact legislation during “Lame Duck Sessions”.   


  • Do we really need to wait 6 blessed months for progress?



  • Further Example of how the GOP is truely “Out of Touch” with Mainstream America.

If you too are tired of the Politics of the USA.  


Join me in voting a Democratic Ticket in the upcoming election.


My Best to You and Yours,
Scotty 


Helpfull Web Links:

Article transcripts to follow- supplied by CNN from the following listed web sites.

Twitter         —-    Find Me   —         Facebook
http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/N7433.148119.BLOGGEREN/B6533657.237;sz=180×150;ord=timestamp?;lid=41000000026530730;pid=60768;usg=AFHzDLsyw5HDL8duArEmBN3-Zhq1mylq-w;adurl=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.abt.com%252Fproduct%252F60768%252FSamsung-GT-P3113TSYXAR.html;pubid=540661;price=%24249.97;title=Samsung+8GB+Galaxy+Tab…;merc=Abt+Electronics+%26+Appliances;imgsrc=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent.abt.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fproducts%2FBDP_Images%2Fbig_GTP3113TSYXAR.jpg;width=54;height=85

FAREED ZAKARIA GPSInterview with Alan Simpson, Erskine Bowles; Panel Discusses Presidential Politics
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/2012.05.27.html http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1205/27/fzgps.01.htmlIn 2010, President Obama challenged the bipartisan duo to chair a commission to develop policies to bring America back to fiscal sustainability and they did. Many powerful Washingtonians on both sides of the fence applauded the proposal from the two chairs, but nobody ever did anything about it and this week, the dangerous carping over the debt limit began anew.

  1. Who better to talk about this than Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles who are joining me now from North Carolina?
  1. Thank you so much for joining me, folks.
  1. ALAN SIMPSON, FORMER WYOMING SENATOR: It’s a pleasure.
  1. ERSKINE BOWLES, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: Great to be here.
  1. Senator Simpson, you’ve seen what’s been going on these last few months. The House actually voted on the Simpson-Bowles proposal and it went down decisively.
  1. Paul Ryan, the leader of the House on fiscal issues, I suppose, said that Simpson-Bowles was the wrong way to go because there weren’t enough spending cuts and there were too many tax increases.
  1. What was your reaction? That’s your party.
  1. SIMPSON: Well, I think my party and I have different views on a lot of things. I guess I’m known as a “

rhino” now, which means a Republican in name only because I guess of social views perhaps or common sense would be another one which seems to escape members of our party.

  1. Abortion is a horrible thing, but, for heaven’s sakes, a deeply intimate and personal decision and men legislators shouldn’t even vote on it. Gay-lesbian issues, we’re all human beings. We’re all God’s children. What is that?
  1. And for heaven’s sakes, you have Grover Norquist wandering the Earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he’ll defeat you. He can’t murder you, he can’t burn your house, the only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection.
  1. And

if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress.

  1. ZAKARIA: But talk about Ryan particularly, because what I’m struck by is the Simpson-Bowles plan calls for an awful lot of spending cuts and, yet, those weren’t enough.
  1. SIMPSON: Well, Erskine can tell you we don’t call for —

You can’t cut spending your way out of this hole. You can’t grow your way out of this hole and you can’t tax your way out of this hole “Put that in your pipe and smoke it,” we tell these people.

  1. This is madness. If you want to be a purest, go somewhere on a mountain top and praise the east or something, but

if you want to be in politics, you learn to compromise and you learn to compromise an issue without compromising yourself. Show me a guy who won’t compromise and I’ll show you a guy with rock for brains.

  1. ZAKARIA: Erskine, you’re hopeful. You think that some of the ideas gaining fraction and, you know, there’s a kind of inevitability if you’re going to do this, there has to be some approach that’s pretty close to what you’re describing.
  1. BOWLES: Fareed, I believe the markets will force us to. I’ve spent my life in the markets, as you know, and look at what’s happening at the end of the year.
  1. We have about $7 trillion worth of economic events that are happening. We have expiration of the Bush tax cuts, we have the patch that’s been placed on the alternative minimum tax that’ll affect so many middle-class taxpayers, we have the payroll tax deduction that’s expiring.
  1. We have these senseless, mindless, across-the-board cuts that come from the sequester that comes as a result of a failed super committee. You know, all of those are hitting at once and the economic effect of those just next year, about 2 percent of GDP.
  1. If we have a negative effect of 2 percent of GDP, we’ll be right back in recession and you better believe that the people of America will be calling on these members of Congress to do something.
  1. So

we think something will happen in the lame duck session. We believe it’ll probably be a two-step process where we end up setting up a framework with a time-frame in order to get something done.

  1. ZAKARIA: Boy,

that’s pretty optimistic.

  1. BOWLES: And don’t forget it doesn’t have to be exactly what the Simpson-Bowles plan has, but it’s got to be a balanced plan. You’ve got to have some small amount of revenue that comes from reforming the tax code and there’s broad agreement that the tax code needs to be reformed.
  1. So I believe that you will find — if, in fact, we can get the right kind of momentum going, I think I’ll find strong support. We’ve been working with 47 members of the Senate, an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, the same kind of group in the House of Representatives.
  1. And I believe these — this group will come together during the lame duck to put forward a plan like this. Now, I don’t think the plan itself will be implemented during the lame duck, but I think there will be an agreement that we have to do some kind of balanced plan.
  1. If we don’t, then I think you will see the markets really take a really adverse look at the country and I think you’ll see us lose another downgrade in our credit and I think you’ll see interest rates pop up and, before long, you’ll see the availability of credit lessen. So I think we could have a real problem if we don’t do something and do something relatively quick.
  1. SIMPSON: And you know who will get hurt the worst in that process when interest rates go up and inflation kicks in, the little guy, the one that everybody on their hind legs talks about, “We’re doing this for the little guy, the most vulnerable, the unfortunate.” Well, Merry Christmas, those guys are going to get eaten when interest rates and inflation kicks in.
  1. ZAKARIA: Gentlemen, stay with us. When we come back, we’re going to ask Senator Simpson and Erskine Bowles what they think of President Obama’s leadership on this issue, what they think of Mitt Romney and there’ll be a few other things as well.
  1. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
  1. ZAKARIA: And we are back with Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, the authors of the Simpson-Bowles plan for a rare opportunity to have a conversation.
  1. Senator Simpson, I want to ask you — I want to ask both of you, but I want to ask you what you think of President Obama’s embrace of your plan or lack thereof.
  1. And I’m going to start by asking you — just bear with me because I talked to him in January, mostly about foreign policy, but I did ask him about Simpson-Bowles. And he probably got — this got him more agitated than at any point in our conversation.
  1. This is what he said. He said, “I’ve got to tell you most of the people who say it if you ask them, “What’s in Simpson-Bowles,” they couldn’t tell you. First of all, I did embrace Simpson-Bowles. I’m the one who created the commission. If I hadn’t pushed it wouldn’t have happened because the Congressional sponsors, including a whole bunch of Republicans, walked away.”
  1. “The basic premise of Simpson-Bowles was we have to take balanced approach in which we have spending cuts and we have revenue increases. And although I did not agree with every particular thing that was in it, what I did do is take the framework and present a balanced plan of entitlement changes, discretionary cuts, went ready to make a deal.”
  1. “I presented this plan three times to Congress. The core of Simpson-Bowles, the idea of a balanced deficit reduction plan, I have consistently argued for, presented to the American people, presented to Congress.”
  1. Is that fair?
  1. SIMPSON: Well, he does get a little testy and we all get a little testy, but the president — I wouldn’t have done this if I didn’t regard him as our president. I accept that. He’s my president, too. And it’s ugly stuff out there.
  1. There’s a lot of hatred in the world, hatred toward politicians, hatred toward the president, hatred toward Democrats, hatred toward Republicans, but I can tell you this. If he had embraced our plan, he would have been ripped to shreds.
  1. Erskine can tell you a little more. He visited with him personally alone for an hour-and-a-half, but he would have been ripped by the Democrats saying, “Why you rotten — you’re digging into the precious, precious Medicare.”
  1. And the Republicans would have rejected — if he’d embraced the Republicans, en mass, in the House would have rejected it. So, either way he’s going to get hammered so he’s playing the waiting game.
  1. ZAKARIA: Erskine, a lot of economic experts say, look, the right solution for the United States right now is obvious, which is you need some stimulus now, particularly given the very low interest rates, the very high levels of unemployment in the construction sector.
  1. The government should spend some money repairing and rebuilding the infrastructure, but that would only be viable and particularly something the markets would celebrate if it was tied to a long-term deficit reduction plan like Simpson-Bowles.
  1. Do you buy that basic idea that if your plan were adopted as a ten-year plan, it actually gives the U.S. government some leeway to make some necessary investments now?
  1. BOWLES: Yes, I truly believe that the only thing standing between the U.S. and sustainable growth is having a sensible, responsible, long-term fiscal plan. I believe if the world believed that we were going to put our fiscal house in order that you would see substantial economic growth in the future.
  1. But, again, I got back to what’s happening at the end of this year. We have $7 trillion worth of economic events that are going to hit the fan in December.
  1. And if we don’t set up to them — if we don’t stand up for them and we don’t do the right thing, if Congress doesn’t act, it doesn’t put this partisanship aside and doesn’t make some compromise, you’ll have a negative impact on GDP next year of at least 2 percent. That doesn’t make any sense.
  1. ZAKARIA: Alan, what do you make of Mitt Romney? Romney’s first ads are out and when he says, on day one what is he going to do and he says he’s going to approve the Keystone Pipeline, fine. But then he says and, then, we’re going to have tax cuts.
  1. This has, of course, been the, you know, kind of a Republican strategy for a while. Do you think — given what you’re describing, I can’t imagine you think day one what a Republican president should do is propose tax cuts?
  1. SIMPSON: Well, I wouldn’t have voted for him if I’d have been in Congress. How could you vote for a tax cut when you were doing two wars on the cheap? You had two wars you were fighting. You had things that were — the government — all the income from the government was only taking care of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and you do a tax cut.
  1. Every time there was a surplus and the last time was when this fine gentleman was doing it in ’96, you can’t get there. But you don’t have to do a tax cut, get that out of your gourd. You go into the tax expenditures and start knocking that stuff off and that’s where you get your revenue.
  1. BOWLES: Fareed, we have the most inefficient, ineffective, globally anti-competitive tax code that man could dream up and what we need to do is broaden the base, simplify the code, use — get rid of this spending in the tax code and use about 90 percent of the money to reduce income tax rates for everybody and use about 10 percent of the money to reduce this deficit.
  1. You know if you think about the debt today and the interest on the debt, it’s kind of — you know and put it in relationship to something else, we spend about $230, $240 billion a year on interest on the debt today even at these current low rates.
  1. Fareed, that is more than we’re spending today at the Department of Commerce, Energy, Education, Homeland Security, Interior, Justice and State combined. And if we don’t do anything, if we just, you know, put our heads in the sand and hope things will get better, we’ll be spending over a trillion dollars on interest by the year 2020.
  1. That’s a trillion dollars we can’t spend on this country on education or infrastructure or high valued-added research. And worst of all, it’s a trillion dollars we will be spending principally in Asia to educate their kids and to build their infrastructure and to do high value-added research over there so that the next new thing is created there and the jobs of the future are there not here. That’s crazy.
  1. ZAKARIA: All right, final question. Erskine, there are rumors in Washington that President Obama has asked you whether you would be interested in being the Secretary of Treasury. Do you have a comment?
  1. BOWLES: He hasn’t asked me to be Secretary of Treasury for sure.
  1. ZAKARIA: If he were to ask you, would you accept?
  1. BOWLES: No, I’m living in North Carolina and that’s where I want to live. I’m the happiest in my whole life, Fareed.
  1. ZAKARIA: Gentlemen, pleasure to have you.
  1. SIMPSON: I would just say we — all we do, Erskine and I, is math. We don’t do Power Points. We don’t know charts. We do math, but we don’t do BS or mush so join us.
  1. ZAKARIA: Maybe what we should try and get — and do is for the first time in the history of the republic, have co-Secretaries of the Treasury, one Republican and one Democrat. SIMPSON: Boy, if we could get our hands on that script.
  1. BOWLES: I don’t want a job, thank you.
  1. ZAKARIA: Thank you very much, gentlemen.
  1. SIMPSON: Thank you.
  1. BOWLES: Thank you

2012 Election Poll-What are the Issues that really matter to you?

What are the 5 most Important Issues in the upcoming election to you and your family.

Created March 23, 2012

Compare the Results of the 2010 Election Poll to the Issues of today- Poll Results from 2010 Election Issues

2010 Election (created Oct 28, 2010)-What issues are most important to you and your family in the up-coming Election?

Answer Votes Percent
Health Insurance 20 21%
Jobs / Employment 17 18%
Government Spending 17 18%
Republican 11 12%
Tea Party 9 9%
Ear Marks 5 5%
Democrat 5 5%
Other (see below) 4 4%
Green Legislation / Energy / Oil 3 3%
Lobbyist Activities 3 3%
Independant 1 1%
Climate Change 0 0%
Other Answer Votes
Social Security Benefit Legislation 1
pro-life 1
Life 1
eliminate Progressives 1

Last chance: Tell the State Department to reject the Keystone XL Pipeline

Dear Friends,

The State Department is collecting it’s final round of public comments on whether the dirty and dangerous Keystone XL Pipeline is in our national interest.

It is not. And they must reject the permit to build this pipeline.

These comments are especially important right now, because of new evidence of a shockingly cozy relationship between State Department Officials and lobbyists for the Canadian pipeline company TransCanada, and of major conflicts of interest in the pipeline review process.

The State Department may not be taking seriously it’s obligation to to conduct an impartial evaluation of the impacts of this pipeline, but this decision is ultimately still up to the President.

I just submitted a public comment to send a strong message to President Obama and the State Department, and I hope you will too. Learn more and submit a comment at the link below:

*Scott’s Contracting*
Green Me UP-Scotty
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
https://scottscontracting.wordpress.com
Twitter Facebook

MO Sen. Roy Blunt took lots of oil money .

MO Sen Roy Blunt votes for Big Oil and Not the Taxpayers (And then voted to let Big Oil keep taking our money)

Hold Sen. Roy Blunt accountable for the vote against ending oil subsidies.
Take action!
Clicking here will add your name to this petition to your Senator:
Take action now!
Dear Friend,
Last night, 48 Senators, including Sen. Roy Blunt, put Big Oil before the American people and helped defeat a bill that would have ended tax breaks for the five biggest oil companies.1
How could anyone vote against a bill that would have kept $21 billion of American taxpayers’ money out of the pockets of cash-rich oil companies?
One big reason is oil money in our political process. A lot of it. Oil and gas companies spent $39.5 million lobbying congress in just the first quarter of this year,2 and have donated tens of millions of dollars directly to the political campaigns of current Senators, including $697,998 to Sen. Roy Blunt.3

In all, three Democrats joined all but two Senate Republicans to protect Big Oil tax breaks that even a former Shell CEO said weren’t needed.4
But make no mistake. Even though we didn’t get the 60 votes required for passage, our pressure to end oil subsidies is already working. More and more legislators are acting defensive about their support of Big Oil over the American people.
In February, similar legislation to repeal some oil subsidies got only 44 votes. Yesterday, we got 52 votes. That comes after CREDO Action members sent more than 225,000 petitions to the Senate and made more than 1,000 calls yesterday to 11 key Senators, six of whom flipped their position and voted to end tax breaks to Big Oil.
Senate Majority leader Harry Reid said yesterday that despite this defeat, he will continue to push for ending oil subsides as part of negotiations on the budget and to raise the debt ceiling.5
We need to keep the pressure on. And one key to breaking Big Oil’s grasp on our legislators is letting Congress know that we know about the millions of dollars that Big Oil has given them — including the $697,998 to Sen. Roy Blunt.

Let’s make sure that voting to protect oil company profits doesn’t go unanswered by those of us who actually pay the price.
Thank you for taking action.
Elijah Zarlin, Campaign Manager
P.S. — Want to find out more about the Big Oil money going to our elected officials? Our friends at the Dirty Energy Money campaign have the scoop. Click here to see how much dirty energy money your Senators and other elected officials have taken.

Facebook
Twitter

Is this why our Gasoline Costs are Sky Rocketing?

Oil and Gas: Lobbying Background

For Months I have been preaching about Dirty Energy Politics and quoting information I’ve been viewing from http://opensecrets.org yet for some reason I’ve not received many responses to the Article Posts on the Sustainable Building Blogs I operate http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com and https://scottscontracting.wordpress.com. So with this post I’ve included everything from the open secrets web site in one easy to use point of reference. As you will see the various lobbying organizations are spending Millions of Dollars Influencing our Elected Leaders.

Do Dirty Environmental Polluters Speak For You?

They don’t speak for me either. So Join me in the battle to reduce Climate Change created by the Biggest Polluters and the Lobbying Organizations that buy off the Politicians in office.

I myself don’t have the lobbying power that these organizations do.

So I took the next best step and joined a movement called 350 and

created with the organizations assistance created a group for St Louis.

Here are the details I’ve worked out so far:

A new Meetup has been posted in the 350 of St Louis 350.org Community

Here are the details for “Let’s meet in Saint Louis, MO”:

When:
TBD

Where:
Provide a venue for this Meetup:
http://www.meetup.com/350/350-of-St-Louis/97166/t/bn1_l2/?ed=venue

Let others know about this Meetup! Send them to:
http://www.meetup.com/350/350-of-St-Louis/97166/t/bn1_l1/

Tag any tweets, photos, and videos with #350ppm.

Add info to your address book to receive all Meetup emails

Check out Meetup Groups near you! http://www.meetup.com/cities/us/mo/saint_louis/

I am only one person in the big clog of life and need your help. Use the above links to join me in the fight against the unscrupulous individuals and companies that are polluting the Air we Breath, Water we Drink, and the Land we all depend upon for our daily substance.

This applies to both the Veggies and Meaties

Now on with the promised information about the Lobbying Activities of the Oil and Gas Industries

This industry, which includes multinational and independent oil and gas producers and refiners, natural gas pipeline companies, gasoline service stations and fuel oil dealers, has long enjoyed a history of strong influence in Washington. Individuals and political action committees affiliated with oil and gas companies have donated $238.7 million to candidates and parties since the 1990 election cycle, 75 percent of which has gone to Republicans.

Though former oilmen George W. Bush and Dick Cheney occupied the White House for eight years, the oil and gas industry could not win support for repealing bans on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. However, Congress voted in 2008 to lift a ban on offshore drilling. These companies are also wary of cap-and-trade climate change legislation, such as the measure Democratic President Barack Obama supports. Yet Obama still received $884,000 from the oil and gas industry during the 2008 campaign, more than any other lawmaker except his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Obama appeared poised to usher in more offshore drilling expansion in 2010 — until the explosion of a BP-operated oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico that resulted in millions of gallons of fossil fuels to leak into the coastal waters of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. The environmental toll has been significant, and industries such as tourism and fishing have suffered. Politically, the Obama administration has delayed plans to expand offshore drilling in many areas, and Congress is mulling whether to pass legislation aimed at avoiding another disaster of similar scope.

In contrast to former President Bush’s largely pro-industry stance on energy and environmental issues, the Democratic-controlled White House and Congress will probably grant these companies fewer favors. Bush consistently rolled back Clinton-era restrictions on commercial uses of federal lands—including nature preserves, national forests and national monuments. To the oil and gas industry’s delight, he got one step closer in March 2005 when Senate Republicans passed a budget resolution containing a filibuster-proof provision to allow for drilling in ANWR.

Oil and gas companies are always among the industries to spend the most on lobbying, pouring $132.2 million into these efforts in 2008 alone.

— Aaron Kiersh and Dave Levinthal

Updated June 2010

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.

Oil & Gas

Industry Profile, 2010


Year: “) “) “) “) “) “) “) “) “) “) “) “) “)

Total for Oil & Gas: $146,577,043
Total Number of Clients Reported: 195
Total Number of Lobbyists Reported: 788
Total Number of Revolvers: 500 (63.5%)

. Campaign Contributions from this industry

View totals by: Client/Parent | Subsidiary/Affiliate

Client/Parent Total
ConocoPhillips $19,626,382
Chevron Corp $12,890,000
Exxon Mobil $12,450,000
Royal Dutch Shell $10,370,000
Koch Industries $8,070,000
BP $7,335,000
American Petroleum Institute $7,300,000
Anadarko Petroleum $5,150,000
Marathon Oil $5,130,000
Williams Companies $4,900,000
America’s Natural Gas Alliance $3,360,000
Chesapeake Energy $2,776,560
National Petrochemical & Refiners Assn $2,764,909
Occidental Petroleum $2,582,989
Murphy Oil $2,410,000
Devon Energy $1,380,000
Apache Corp $1,310,000
Noble Energy $1,290,000
National Propane Gas Assn $1,200,000
Independent Petroleum Assn of America $1,185,774
Interstate Natural Gas Assn of America $1,140,000
Sunoco Inc $1,120,000
Hess Corp $1,100,000
Spectra Energy $1,083,509
El Paso Corp $1,076,718
American Gas Assn $980,000
Kosmos Energy $890,000
Tesoro Corp $870,300
Energy Transfer Equity $850,000
Weatherford International $840,000
Reliance Industries Ltd $760,000
Petroleum Marketers Assn $685,000
Valero Energy $644,000
Gas Technology Institute $625,000
Plains Exploration & Production $600,000
Shallow Water Energy Security Coalition $545,000
Transocean Inc $540,000
Denbury Resources $540,000
PDVSA $470,000
TMT Group $470,000
Enbridge Pipelines/Lakehead Pipeln Ptnrs $440,000
Cobalt International Energy $430,000
Hercules Offshore $420,000
National Fuel Gas Corp $400,000
Natural Gas Supply Assn $370,455
Enbridge Energy Partners $350,000
Halliburton Co $345,000
Quintana $300,000
Soc of Ind Gasoline Marketers of America $300,000
Statoil ASA $298,500
Gas Processors Assn $270,000
Bass Enterprises Production $270,000
Ansaldo Energia $270,000
Doyon Drilling Inc $265,000
Ad Hoc Deep Water Expl/Production Cltn $260,000
Gas Natural SDG SA $250,000
Domestic Petroleum Council $240,000
Atlas Energy $240,000
ATP Oil & Gas $240,000
Nexen Inc $240,000
Enterprise Products Partners $236,000
Arctic Slope Regional Corp $235,000
Magellan Midstream Partners $232,385
Cheniere Energy $230,000
Syntroleum Corp $219,000
Anschutz Corp $200,000
Frontier Oil $200,000
Lansdale Co $200,000
Hunt Consolidated $200,000
Nicor Inc $200,000
Oceaneering Intl $200,000
CNX Gas Corp $192,500
CenterPoint Energy $190,000
BG Group $190,000
EnCana Corp $190,000
Kinder Morgan Inc $190,000
Assn of Oil Pipe Lines $184,400
Nabors Industries $180,000
Helix Energy Solutions $180,000
TransCanada Corp $180,000
US Turkmenistan Business Council $180,000
In Situ Oil Sands Alliance $170,000
Industrial Safety Training Council $160,000
Mitsui Oil Exploration Co $160,000
Arrow General Supplies & Services Co $160,000
AGL Resources $160,000
Sinclair Oil $160,000
American Public Gas Assn $155,000
Nustar Energy $152,500
ONEOK Inc $150,000
Questar Corp $150,000
Intl Assn of Drilling Contractors $150,000
Michigan Consolidated Gas Co $140,000
National Oilheat Research Alliance $140,000
Southwest Gas $140,000
National Oilwell Varco $137,500
US Oil & Gas Assn $129,195
XTO Energy $120,000
Tellus Operating Group $120,000
Gulf LNG Energy $120,000
Countrymark Cooperative $120,000
Gary-Williams Energy $120,000
Ergon Inc $120,000
Excelerate Energy $120,000
Kern Oil & Refining Co $110,000
Marion Energy $110,000
Vulcan Energy $110,000
Tidewater Inc $100,000
Strata Production $100,000
Hyperion Resources $100,000
Hornbeck Offshore Services $100,000
Seminole Energy Services $100,000
Oilfield Services & Drilling Indus Cltn $100,000
Gilbarco Inc $100,000
Great Point Energy $100,000
Alliance Pipeline $100,000
CSA America $90,000
Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Assn $90,000
Vitol Inc $90,000
Independent Petroleum Assn/Mountn States $85,000
DaVinci Hourani $85,000
Denali-The Alaska Gas Pipeline $80,000
Enstar Natural Gas $80,000
Falck Alford Services $80,000
Energen Corp $80,000
National Stripper Well Assn $80,000
Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America $80,000
US Oil $80,000
NATSO $78,973
Ohio Oil & Gas Assn $70,000
Alon USA Energy $70,000
Talisman Energy $70,000
New England Fuel Institute $67,000
Oil Oxidizer $60,000
Aegean Oil & Environmental Corp $60,000
Encore Acquisition $60,000
Sigma $60,000
Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition $52,500
Colonial Pipeline $50,000
Frank Reidy $50,000
Alberta Energy $50,000
Navajo Nation Oil & Gas Co $40,000
Oil Shale Exploration $40,000
QEP Resources $40,000
Iroquois Gas Transmission System $40,000
McDermott International $40,000
Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority $37,494
AES Corp $30,000
BakkenLink Pipeline $30,000
Western States Petroleum Assn $30,000
Washington Gas Light Co $28,000
Camelot Oil & Gas Development $20,000
Alyeska Pipeline Service $20,000
Green Earth Fuels $20,000
DeepStar Project $20,000
Mariner Energy $20,000
NIC Holding $20,000
UNEV Pipeline $19,500
Trenton Fuel Works $10,000
Western Independent Refiners Assn $10,000
TORP Technology $10,000
Texas Alliance of Energy Producers $10,000
Northern Star Natural Gas $10,000
Elkem Holding Inc $10,000
American Assn of Petroleum Geologists $10,000
Colonial Oil Industries $10,000
Boardwalkd Pipelines $0
Bradwood Landing $0
C&C Technologies $0
Cabot Oil & Gas $0
Delta Petroleum $0
Fleishman-Hillard Inc $0
NSTAR $0
Seven Seas Petroleum $0
Petro-Hunt LLC $0
Montana Refining Co $0
National Assn of Shell Marketers $0
National Cooperative Refinery Assn $0
Independent Fuel Terminal Operators Assn $0
Gulf South Pipeline Co $0
Stanley Energy $0

NOTE: All lobbying expenditures on this page come from the Senate Office of Public Records. Data for the most recent year was downloaded on January 31, 2010.

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center.

Lobbying

Oil & Gas Lobbyist-Client

Total Number of Lobbyists Reported: 788*
Total Number of Revolvers: 500 (63.5%)

Download:

Lobbyist

Lobbying Firm/Registrant

Adcock, Michael W

Van Scoyoc Assoc

Addison, Daniel R

Patton Boggs LLP

Agnew, Richard A

Van Ness Feldman

Aguillen, Dean

Ogilvy Government Relations

Akins, Haley E

Dow Lohnes Government Strategies

Albert, Alex

McKenna, Long & Aldridge

Alfano, Holly A

National Assn of Truck Stop Operators

Allen, Kevin

Clark & Weinstock

Alperin, Janice

El Paso Corp

Amontree, Tom

America’s Natural Gas Alliance

Anderson, Mark A

Kelley, Drye & Warren

Anderson, Mark Joseph

Kelley, Drye & Warren

Anderson, Rebecca L

Williams & Jensen

Anderson, Tobyn J

Lighthouse Consulting Group

Antelo, Cristina

Podesta Group

Archer, Bill

PriceWaterhouseCoopers

Architzel, Paul

Alston & Bird

Armstrong, James

Shell Oil

Atkins, Caroline

ConocoPhillips

Avery, Kevin J

Marathon Oil

Ayres, Merribel S

Lighthouse Consulting Group

Baer, Julian

Olsson, Frank & Weeda

Baierlein, Daniele

Podesta Group

Baird, Frederick A “Tripp” III

JC Watts Companies

Baker, George D

Williams & Jensen

Baker, Teal

Podesta Group

Bangert, Philip

Patton Boggs LLP

Barbour, Austin

Capitol Resources

Barnes, Ben

Ben Barnes Group

Barnett, Charles

Alpine Group

Barnette, James D

Steptoe & Johnson

Barry, Lisa B

Chevron Corp

Bates, Michael J

Prime Policy Group

Bayless, James L Jr

Winstead, Sechrest & Minick

Beal, Lisa

Interstate Natural Gas Assn of America

Beatty, Chris

KRL International

Beaudreau, David

DC Legislative & Regulatory Services

Beaulieu, Stephen A

National Assn of Truck Stop Operators

Becker-Dippmann, Angela

McBee Strategic Consulting

Beer, Michael S

Williams & Jensen

Beizer, Amy

Van Ness Feldman

Belair, Robert R

Oldaker, Belair & Wittie

Belcher, Leslie

Steptoe & Johnson

Bell, Michael J

Hogan Lovells

Bemis, Robert

Noble Energy

Bendall, Jennifer L

Eris Group

Benedict, Mark

Genesis Group

Bentzel, Carl W

DCI Group

Berman, Howard

Dutko Worldwide

Berman, Michael S

Duberstein Group

12345617 Next

* Actual number of individual lobbyists. This number may be different from the total number of records as lobbyists may be associated with more than one lobbying firm.

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center.

If these stats and numbers sicken your stomach as much as they do mine and you question as to why our Trusted Leaders are Failing to Listen to the Constituents and failing to enact solutions to the everyday struggles that “We the People” are going thru in our daily lives as we are struggling to fill the gas tank and heat/cool our homes.

Then you are perfect person for the St Louis 350.org Community

Join Me in the Fight Against The Biggest Polluters!

Care2.com Listing Information:

Environment  (tags: climate-change, CO2emissions, destruction, environment, GOP, republicans, Govtfearmongering, government, oil industry, coal pollution, Politics as Usual, Dirty Politics, 350.org, opensecrets.org, Politcal Contributions )

Scott’s Contracting

Green Me UP-Scotty

scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
https://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

http://twitter.com/StLHandyMan
https://www.facebook.com/GreenMeUPScotty

Congress 2011-IT’S ONLY A DREAM

Subject: Congress 2011-IT’S ONLY A DREAM

Guest Post by: Russ Hacker

IT’S ONLY A DREAM

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971…before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land…all because of public pressure.

I’m asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

1. Term Limits.

12 years only, one of the possible options below..

A. Two Six-year Senate terms

B. Six Two-year House terms

C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2. No Tenure / No Pension.

A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.

The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!

If you agree with the above, pass it on.

Regards,

Russ Hacker
913.593.3480 (cell)
rhacker3@gmail.com

Scott’s Contracting

Green Me UP-Scotty

scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
https://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

http://twitter.com/StLHandyMan
https://www.facebook.com/GreenMeUPScotty

Example-GOP Out of Touch With America

I ask myself what is the big deal with stopping Pollution from Fossil Fuels and GHG’s?

? Doesn’t everyone want to be healthy?

Why is it wrong to Protect the Environment?

? Do the Republicans understand that when they cut health care and then Remove Environmental Safe Guards that “We the People” could get sick and then not have any access to Health Care because they have DE-Funded the Programs?

Ms Lisa Jackson, Administrator for the EPA cites:
  • 60 percent of Americans believe the E.P.A. “needs to hold polluters accountable,”
  • 75% of Americans favor tougher regulations on pollution in order to protect our air and water
  • the contamination of our soil and water is the #1 issue for Americans

These are just some of the questions I asked myself.  To attempt to learn why the GOP is so Short-Sighted and not protecting the America they say they so strongly care for. I started looking and searching into why the Republicans are voting the way they are.

Through the Power of the Internet (which they are also trying to curtail) I found the Open Secrets Web Site.

OpenSecrets.org is your nonpartisan guide to money’s influence on U.S. elections and public policy. Whether you’re a voter, journalist, activist, student or interested citizen, use our free site to shine light on your government. Count cash and make change.

I Found out who the Top Oil and Gas Contributors were in 2009-2010.  In the graph below you will see the Republicans in RED and the Democrats in BLUE and you can see for yourself which party receives the Largest Contributions.

I don’t own a Calculator that will add figures into the Multi Billions of Dollars.  What I do know is that if the Oil and Gas Companies have that much money to spend on Lobbying the Republican Party;  Then “We the People” are getting screwed over when we pay to fill up at the Gas Pumps.If they weren’t Lobbying Multi Billion Dollars to Buy the Republican Party OFF to vote for Dirty Fossil Fuels and decreased Regulations on GHG’s our/ “We the People” Gas Prices Would be Lower.
I feel this is a personal assault against the Average American and Small Business.  We are the Major Supporters of the US Government through the Taxes that are levied against our paychecks and through the Goods and Services we depend on.

Through the News Networks: CNN, HLN, CNBC I’ve learned that the Major Corporations are not paying their fair share of Taxes.  So this leaves “We the Average Citizens” paying more taxes to support the “Wasteful Government Spending”

I don’t have a solution but I do know that there needs to be some changes made in the way our Government operates.

Here are just some of the things I do and are planning to do and urge all concerned American Citizens to the same.

  1. I will vote a Straight Democratic Ticket for the First Time in my Life in the Up-Coming Elections.  (I don’t agree with many of their views but the Alternative is Worse.)
  2. I have contacted my Government Representatives through this web site and let my voice be heard- I suggest that Every Concerned American Do The Same
  3. Stay Active in the Political Discussions.  I post frequent Articles on my Web Sites: St Louis Renewable Energy and Scotts Contracting  That highlight the GOP Republicans attempts to undermine and drive the Average American into the Poor House.
  4. Stay Informed on the Issues that are Affecting American and re-peat 2 above.  If your Elected Leaders do not know on how you stand on the issues, How will they support your views and Vote on the Issues you Support?
    • When Listening to the Republicans on TV and radio Don’t let their slick tongues distort the real issues “Listen and Watch“- while reading between the Lines.
  5. Because of the way Lobbying Activities Work in Washington there needs to be additional safeguards enacted to protect “We the Americans” from the Major Corporations who are gaining more and more power, and removing the protections that the Average American Depends upon.
Contributor Amount
Koch Industries $1,931,562
Exxon Mobil $1,337,058
Chief Oil & Gas $1,192,361
Chevron Corp $937,964
Marathon Oil $678,290
Valero Energy $636,500
Occidental Petroleum $575,900
Devon Energy $507,250
Williams Companies $491,685
Chesapeake Energy $467,056
ConocoPhillips $462,204
Independent Petroleum Assn of America $459,500
Anadarko Petroleum $443,260
American Gas Assn $386,400
Halliburton Co $314,280
Pilot Corp $290,567
Tesoro Petroleum $277,883
Society of Indep Gasoline Marketers $274,000
Bass Brothers Enterprises $247,465
Petroleum Marketers Assn $243,900

For additional ideas on:

  1. Reducing GHG’s
  2. Becoming Energy Efficient
  3. Saving $ on Energy Costs
  4. Government Reform
  5. Clean Energy Jobs

Feel Free to use the Links Below.

Scott’s Contracting

Green Me UP-Scotty

scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
https://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

http://twitter.com/StLHandyMan
https://www.facebook.com/GreenMeUPScotty

When Did Progress Become a Partisan Issue? | Renewable Energy News Article

Political debate over the direction of United States energy and technology policy is obviously nothing new. But in recent weeks, two news items jumped out for me from the usual political cacophony:

News item 1: Republicans introduce bills in the House and Senate to repeal the 2007 federal law requiring 25-30 percent more energy-efficient light bulbs starting next year. Republicans in four state legislatures also offer bills to exempt their states from the mandate.

News item 2: As the new majority in the House,  Republicans have replaced the House cafeteria’s compostable cutlery and cups, introduced under ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Green the Capitol initiative, with the previously used plastic and polystyrene versions.

It’s one thing to disagree about tax incentives for the wind and solar industries, subsidies for the extraction of fossil fuels, the future role of nuclear power, the strictness of building efficiency standards, or countless other issues that will determine our energy future. But it seems like quite another thing to actually turn back the clock on progress already made.

“It’s just symbolism, but symbolism of the worst kind,” says Alan Salzman, CEO and managing director of clean-tech funder Vantage Point Venture Partners, of the compostable cutlery replacement. “While they’re at it, why don’t they put a nuclear plant in the basement?” One Congressman, Oregon Democrat Earl Blumenauer, was equally sarcastic with a Tweet: “I can hardly wait for the lead paint.”

What exactly is going on here?

In President Obama’s State of the Union address in January, he spoke of the U.S. need to “win the future” by stepping up our investments in education and technology R&D, including clean-energy technologies. Let’s see—America embracing the leading edge of innovation, leading the world in new technologies, as we’ve done in so many other tech revolutions throughout history—can any politician really be against this?

Apparently so.

Take the humble light bulb. Yes, the good old incandescent bulb is a venerable icon of Yankee ingenuity – the transformative product of one legendary American’s forward-thinking vision and above all, hard work. (It was Thomas Edison who famously said, “Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration.”). The incandescent bulb was perfected by Edison (the concept had been around for 50 years already) in 1879. Isn’t it time to move on?

Former President George W. Bush seemed to think so when he signed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 into law, after it had overwhelmingly passed both houses of Congress with bipartisan support. That law included new efficiency standards for light bulbs as well as transportation and buildings, training programs for green jobs, funding for smart-grid initiatives, and many other measures. Contrary to the oppositional rhetoric now being thrown around, the law does not “ban” incandescent bulbs—it sets new efficiency standards that are easier to meet with newer compact fluorescent light (CFL) or especially light-emitting diode (LED) technologies.

That’s how you win the future – establish a policy goal for the common good, then let innovators, entrepreneurs, and investors fight it out to create the best, most cost-effective products to win in the marketplace. LED lighting, one of the five top trends spotlighted by Clean Edge in our Clean Energy Trends 2011 report released last month, is now a red-hot industry sector. Vantage Point alone has five LED-related startups in its portfolio: Bridgelux, Huga Optotech, glo AB, Light-Based Technologies, and a stealth company currently called Superbulbs.

But, cry opponents, Americans don’t want to be told what kind of light bulbs to buy. Well, the market has already rendered its verdict here. More than 70 percent of Americans have replaced at least one incandescent bulb with a CFL or LED, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll in February, and 84 percent say they are satisfied or very satisfied with the results. Walmart and Sam’s Club have sold more than 350 million CFL bulbs—somehow, I don’t think all the buyers are climate-change activists. In the USA Today/Gallup poll, 61 percent of Americans say the 2007 law is good, while just 31 percent say it’s bad. And light-bulb manufacturers overwhelmingly support it, too.

Some may point out that we’ve seen the ‘turn back the clock on progress’ theme before, citing President Ronald Reagan’s decision to remove Jimmy Carter’s solar PV panels (recently restored by Obama, after much public pressure) from the White House roof. But historical research shows that this story did not quite happen the way it’s usually told—that Reagan came into office in 1981 and ordered the removal as one of his first official acts.

The Reagan White House actually received solar power for more than five years; the panels were removed for roof maintenance in 1986 and not replaced—without any fanfare or making of political hay. Not to excuse the move, but at the time, the price of oil was below $10 a barrel ($20 in today’s dollars), climate change was an obscure scientific theory, and China didn’t have a more than 50 percent share of the global solar PV manufacturing industry (or much of a market for anything). The world is very different in 2011, and embracing progress should be more important, and less controversial, than ever. Especially with the U.S. now officially slipping to third in the global clean-energy market behind China and Germany, according to a new report from the Pew Charitable Trusts.

In the end, I think, it’s all about framing the issues. To borrow some favorite symbols of the anti-progress movement—if you ask people whether they believe in a ‘nanny state’ that makes all your choices for you, or whether they’re willing to sacrifice convenience or pay higher prices, they’ll say no. But ask about saving energy, encouraging innovation, and creating American jobs in the industries that will define global competitiveness in the 21st century, and you’ll surely get a different response.

I know that the anti-progress naysayers have their reasons and motivations, and that partisan politics can always yield some bizarre results. But who really benefits from moving the nation backwards? Are the incandescent light bulb and plastic fork industries really critical to our future? “One of our favorite phrases at Vantage Point,” says Salzman, “is ‘invest in the inevitable.’ Does anyone think that fossil-based resources will get less expensive over time? Or that your grandson or granddaughter won’t be driving an electric car, powered by a smart grid? I want us to lead in the 21st century industries, not the 20th or 19th century ones.”

Why is it so hard for some people to agree with that?

 

Wilder is Clean Edge’s senior editor, co-author of The Clean Tech Revolution, and a blogger about clean-tech issues for the Green section of The Huffington Post. E-mail him at wilder@cleanedge.com and follow him on Twitter at Clint_Wilder.

Scott’s Contracting

Green Me UP-Scotty

scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
https://scottscontracting.wordpress.com
http://twitter.com/StLHandyMan

When Did Progress Become a Partisan Issue? | Renewable Energy News Article.

Disgusted with the Politicians

If you are not happy with the Politicians and their Back Room Deals with Big Oil, Big Coal, and Big Business.I suggest to everyone to check out this site. It is full of valuable information about who is donating and to whom. After viewing the information- You to will then have an idea (A-Hah Moment!!!) of why the politicians vote as they do.

 

In regard to Climate Change and Global Warming– the Biggest Polluters

Donate the most money to the Politicians. The Majority of the Republican Party receives Donations (Numbering in the Millions) to their piggy banks in the form of Lobbying $ Money $, campaign re-election funds, etc

The only viable solutions I can see is to:
1) End lobbying activities by Big Business;
2) Don’t Vote Republican (in the upcoming elections-I will be voting a Straight Democratic Ticket for the 1st time in my life- and I personally am still in shock when I say this);

3)Get serious about Reducing Energy Use– by Weatherization, Recycling, and Renewable Energy in your Home and Work.

Sincerly,

Green Me UP-Scotty

ps: a house is built one piece at a time, each stage of the Building Process is built on the preceding one. The same technique can be applied to Building a Less Polluted and Better World for everyone.

Article also posted here: http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/corporations-or-politicians-hurting-america/question-1452293/comment-54728007/ and Repower America

The EPA protects the American public; please protect the EPA and Small Business

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Solar Nation wrote:

Thank you for using Solar Nation Mail System.

Message sent to the following recipients:
Senator Blunt
Senator McCaskill
Message text follows:

April 7, 2011

[recipient address was inserted here]

Dear [recipient name was inserted here],

The House of Representatives is very likely to pass HR910, a bill that
could rob the Environmental Protection Agency of its power to regulate
harmful pollution. President Obama has indicated that he will veto any
such bill passed by Congress, but he needs the support of the Senate both
before such an action and also in the event of an override vote.

The Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Air Act has brought decades of
health benefits to Americans without damaging the economy or our ability
to generate electrical power. But HR910 threatens to undo this progress,
make us more rather than less dependent on fossil fuels, and prevent the
agency from obeying the Supreme Court’s order to regulate carbon emissions.

Senator, when presented with the opportunity to vote on a Senate version
of HR910, please cast your vote for the health of the environment and the
American people. Please vote against any bill that seeks to undermine the
EPA.

I’d also like to add: My current project: Installing an Energy Efficient
Roof System per DOE Guidelines on a Home in Sunset Hills, MO 63127. The
proposed roof system will have estimated rvalue: R40, an increase of R30
when compared to the existing roof. Because the Funding was reduced for
Energy Efficient Up-Grades via the Recovery Act Funding Reduction of 2010.

The Total Cost could exceed the Budget for the Home Owner- Even though I
have reduced my labor/installation charges by 20% because it is a Green
and Sustainable Project. I can’t lower my prices any more and pay the
required taxes for all those involved or expect my crew of 5 workers for
the proposed project to work for less pay. Something has to give in re to
the Governments plans on Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Solutions.

The homeowner is also interested in a Photovoltaic System to generate
Clean Non-Polluting Energy that has no negative Side Affects- Such as
Nuclear Waste.

I feel as if the Politicians are driving the small business people into a
corner.

Here is what I propose:

It would seem to me that the fastest way out of the current
Economic situation that the Politicians in Washington have caused would be
to Create Jobs and remove the tax advantages that the top percentile are
not being required to pay- Remove the Government Sponsored Welfare. With
more people paying taxes from their wages it will ad to the Governments
Coffers / Piggy Banks, and more people will have money to spend on Goods
and Services. Thus creating the income needed to keep the Country Afloat
while improving the bottom line.

An old Businessman Told me once: “You can charge high prices and stay a
little busy or you can charge lower prices and stay really busy and make
more money” The same holds true in this situation. Example: I’d love to
donate to your Political Ambitions but the extra money I would have
donated has went to the higher gasoline costs at the Gas Pumps, currently
$3.69/gal in South City, MO.

I encourage you and your fellow Law Makers to Drop the we can’t deal with
the Other Party’s and get these problems solved. There has to be a middle
ground that each Party will support.

If all else fails: I say to cut the Politicians and Law Makers Pay Roll.
How can you and your Partners in Crime justify your high salaries on the
Backs of Joe Constituents? When our Salaries remain low from the Actions
and In-Actions caused by the Regulations in Place.

Scott’s Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com

“Monthly Energy Review” by the U.S. Energy Information Administration
(EIA), nuclear power and renewable energy sources are now neck-in-neck
with nuclear power’s share of domestic energy production dropping while
that from renewable sources growing rapidly.

The share of domestic U.S. energy production derived from renewable energy
sources (i.e., biomass/biofuels, geothermal, solar, water, wind) rose to
10.92% in 2010, up from 10.65% in 2009. By comparison, nuclear power’s
share of domestic energy production dropped from 11.48% in 2009 to 11.26%
in 2010.

Sincerely Disgusted,

Scotty

-Find Your Representatives-Republican or Democrat, and Let Your Voice BE HEARD! Active Participation is Suggested– Click here to Tell my Politician