Democrats buy climate-change bill Vote with $3.5 billion in taxpayer money

When House Democratic leaders were rounding up votes Friday for the massive climate-change bill, they paid special attention to their colleagues from Ohio who remained stubbornly undecided.
They finally secured the vote of one Ohioan, veteran Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Toledo, the old-fashioned way. They gave her what she wanted – a new federal power authority, similar to Washington state’s Bonneville Power Administration, stocked with up to $3.5 billion in taxpayer money available for lending to renewable energy and economic development projects in Ohio and other Midwestern states.
Read More

The democrats are going to push their left liberal agrenda by buying votes with our children future tax money. Americans our country has been hi-jacked by the Radical Obama administration. When will we wake-up to the fact that our children will be paying this tax for their entire lifetime. Do we really want to leave our children with such a debt?

LINKS:

(1) Here is the cap-and-tax “placeholder:” Where’s the fine print?

Advertisements

4 comments on “Democrats buy climate-change bill Vote with $3.5 billion in taxpayer money

  1. I am beginning to grow my own food. I live in the county so I am able to have some chicken or even a turkey or two. The greenhouse is up and running
    and we are planning a method that will allow us to grow our own veggies through the winter. We are pretty sure that it is going to come down to some sort of primitive lifestyle until we can eradicate enough lib dems..

  2. My Republican Congressman says Cap and Trade will be good for America.

    And, he caught the Green River Killer.

    Did you catch the Green River Killer?

    No, no you didn’t.

    You can hear his interview here.
    http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=194&sid=184941

    Dave Reichert SPEAKS: says Cap and Trade will be good for America

    He argued that the expense would not be what the Heartland Institute, Heritage Foundation, and Wall Street Journal were predicting. He argued that it would cost around $.48 per day and that we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill. He argued that the conservative arguments against were mistaken, and that Washington specifically would be better off even though the bill was imperfect.

    And, he caught the Green River Killer.

    Yeah, it took him a couple of decades, but better late than never.

    I hear Fox was thinking about making the Series 24 about Reichert. But instead of showing 24 hours in a day they would have to make each episode a year.

  3. That “$.48 a day” line is one that my own fantastic and bizarre congressman is using. Bull, of course, shit. The figure is based on CBO’s “Fun With Numbers” study and represents but a fraction of the real cost of this … enormity.

  4. I’m wonder what in the heck climate-change bill has to do with national security?

Comments are closed.