Thursday, June 21, 2007

Heller Has His Head in Oil

For someone that accepted over $40,000 from oil and gas industries within months of taking office, Heller sure has a suspicious voting record. This seems to be a growing trend in the Republican party, and as we know, he wouldn't be caught dead distancing himself from them. For a first time representative that will be trying to get re-elected, Heller really isn't looking for conservationist voters. Heller recently voted against and act to reduce subsidies to large oil companies and invest in clean energy. Why the government should be paying taxpayer money directly to oil companies when we already give them a large chunk of our incomes is beyond me. What is even worse is people like Dean Heller voting to keep them when the oil companies are setting record profits. He is obviously siding with the companies for a reason.
Oil/Clean Energy Vote
I am positive that if Heller had a good explanation for why he voted this way, he would immediately come forth with it and defend his vote. The only reason why he hasn't is that he doesn't have a good reason. All that he cares about is protecting large companies and lobbyists in the short term. He doesn't care at all about the long term effects of the things he stands for...or with.

As I stated before, it is a growing trend with Republicans in the Congressional and Executive Branches of the Government to stand by lobbyists and corporate America every chance they get. They realize that these companies donate large amounts of money to their campaigns, therefore helping them get re-elected. If you look at the contribution record of most Democrats, you will find that large companies generally don't even bother with them. It seems to be some kind of unwritten agreement between corporate America and Republicans that the representatives will get money for campaigns if in exchange they get votes benefiting their growth and profits. Do we really want these kind of people representing us and continually voting for big business?

There is a standard response from these people when they are asked a question about conservation and oil use. They say that it will hurt the economy if we burden big companies with restrictions. If we continue to emit infinite quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, there will be no economy, let alone life on Earth.

Despite the global warming argument, there are many other reasons to cut and eliminate carbon dioxide emissions. The same people who are voting for big companies and against reducing dependence on foreign oil are the same ones that are continuing the war in Iraq. If we really want this world to be a safer place, we can start reducing the amount of oil we import. Disruption in the Middle East sends crude oil prices spiraling upwards. This is the main reason why gas prices are so high right now. We are very unsafe with so much of our oil coming from these countries. If we keep pissing them off, they could just cut off all oil exports to the U.S. This would be far more crippling than a bomb or suicide attack. Also, our environment would be in a far better condition if we weren't polluting it as much. Another reason is that oil will eventually run out, it is bound to happen. If these corporate-loving representatives keep getting elected, they will run the oil companies until the oil companies run this country into the ground. Imagine how big of a crisis that would be.

If these representatives keep voting for big business, despite all the reasons not to, there is no reason they deserve an elected office. Our country would have a better environment, would be more safe, and would add more jobs if we would just start switching to alternative energy sources. There are so many other ways to get energy that aren't as harmful to environment and well being of our country. All other industrialized nations of the world have far more of their energy coming from nuclear power, solar, and wind power. Why aren't we on the same page? It is because there have been so many people like Dean Heller in the U.S. Government.

Intelligent Quote of the Month:

If we're going to talk about pollution let's talk about who's polluting here
- Dean Heller saying that the Defenders of Wildlife are polluting the airwaves by attacking him.

Well, Dean, to be honest with you I was hoping that the people of your district would get an intelligent and thought out explanation of a voting record.. for once. Obviously that is impossible. Now, what you said might have been my response to this situation in first or second grade. But from a United States Congressman, it is completely unacceptable.

1 comment:

Desert Beacon said...

Good post! Perhaps the worst element in Heller's position is that he's so afraid of hurting our present oil-based economy, that he's willing to sacrifice our long term benefits in terms of technological innovation, and new forms of enterprise. He seems quite willing to accept long term losses for short term gains, which I think, is the very definition of short-sightedness.