U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser (D) Joe Neguse (D) Michael Bennet
50% 50% 50%
Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) Brian Mason

60%↑

30%↑

20%↓

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%↑

30%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

45%↓

40%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 17, 2010 01:48 AM UTC

Bennet's Big Kiss to Big Oil

  • 24 Comments
  • by: wade norris

From Senator Bennet’s email for donations today:

“Too often these days we’re waking up to newspaper headlines that prove what all of us already know: the old ways just aren’t working.

In the past few weeks we’ve seen profound examples of this, with lax regulations and long-standing corporate loopholes leading to catastrophic financial and environmental disasters.

This is completely unacceptable. I know we can do better.”

Yesterday Senator Bernie Sanders offered an amendment to close one of those  ‘long standing corporate loopholes’ – Huge Tax Credits to Big Oil companies.

But Senator Bennet, the same one sending out fundraiser appeals on closing corporate loopholes, decided to vote with the Republicans to keep that loophole open.

From Roll Call

http://www.senate.gov/legislat…

S.Amdt. 4318  to S.Amdt. 4301  to H.R. 4213  (American Workers, State, and Business Relief Act of 2010)

Statement of Purpose: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate big oil and gas company tax loopholes, and to use the resulting increase in revenues to reduce the deficit and to invest in energy efficiency and conservation.

more

http://www.reuters.com/article…

June 15 (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate on Tuesday rejected a measure that would have repealed some $35 billion in oil and gas industry tax breaks as it continued work on a bill that would raise taxes on investment fund managers.

Sanders argued that big oil companies making billions in profits do not deserve the tax breaks at a time when the nation is facing record budget deficits and rising debt.

“With a record-breaking $13 trillion national debt and an unsustainable federal deficit, the last thing we should be doing is giving tax breaks to oil and gas companies that have been making enormous profits,” Sanders said.

In light of what is happening in the Gulf, and the obscene profits Oil companies have made in the past decade, it is unfathomable that this amendment to recoup $35 Billion would not even get a simple majority.

It is because corporatists posing as Democrats like Bennet are not standing for us.

I will support his primary opponent, Andrew Romanoff – who would have voted for the amendment and has a plan to get us off of our Oil dependence.

Tweet
Share

Comments

24 thoughts on “Bennet’s Big Kiss to Big Oil”

  1. Bennet sends out a fundraising email implying that he’s working to close tax loopholes for big oil…and then votes against closing tax loopholes for big oil.  Check.

    2. research on this particular amendment. I really wanted to know why Bennet and Udall voted the way they did. I mean there had to be a reason right? Right. So turns out this amendment applied equally to Big Oil AND natural gas companies. Who has natural gas companies that are desperately needed? You guessed it! Colorado!  Now it’s find for the Senators on the East Coast to not write the Amendment specifically for just Big Oil..they don’t have natural gas to worry about. However, if you look at the Dems that sided with Bennet & Udall you’ll notice they are all geographically linked.

      So Bennet could have absolutely punished Big Oil, which would have made for a fantastic campaign ad. But it would have punished Colorado businesses and cost Colorado jobs. What would you have done for your state as Senator in his place? What do you think Romanoff would have done?

    2. Bennet sends out a fundraising email saying tax loopholes are a problem the day after he votes against closing tax loopholes and you…attack the guy who points that out?

      Classy.

    3. I know Wade & Stryker are in the tank for Romanoff. But that does not mean the question is not valid. The email ask Bennet sent out today is hypocritical. He claims he has done the opposite of his votes.

      Yes politicians do that all the time. And while it’s slimy, it’s also business as usual. But at the same time, they should be called out for it.

      If Josh Penry sent out an email claiming he was protecting the west slope from the depredations of the gas drillers – wouldn’t you call him on it?

      1. In your assesment of the candidate differences you failed to notice differences in the careers of immigraion.Romanoff threw the undocumented under the bus for political expediency.Now he rewrites history.

        He did the same with pac money. He also has a lifestyle v. expenditure problem with his taxes, unless he wants to come out with the source of his wealth.

        His health care views did a 180 from his time in the legislature and his current views. As a matter of fact, a large amount of his current philosophy never showed up in his career in the state house.

        1. Dean was a pretty moderate Dem who had one thing the left loved – that he was against the Iraq war. But what happened as he campaigned is he became quite progressive.

          And it was a real transformation. For 4 years as DNC chair and now after he’s remained one of the most progressive voices in the party. People can learn and change and Dean did.

          I think we’re seeing the same thing with Romanoff. The catalyst may be the race, but I think we’re seeing the real thing with Romanoff – it really shines through when he’s speaking.

            1. to back a “real” progressive. What “national progressive groups” have backed him? Other than Ed Schultz?

              Why did Kerry vote with Bennet on this bill? How about both Udalls? Funny how that was left out of this post. The author made it sound as if Bennet was the only Dem who voted with the Republicans. I find it MORE interesting that both Colorado Senators voted the same on this. Perhaps their vote was in the best interest for their constituents instead of the party? Just my two cents.  

  3. .

    of whatever this was ?  Meltdown ?  Coincidence ?  A day in the life ?  

    I understand the campaign chairman is resigning tomorrow morning, as will be announced at a 9 AM presser.

    .

  4. I do know how Bennet has voted.  And I know he has collected big bucks for his campaign war chest and it hasn’t come from smalltime contributors like me.  Michael Bennet thinks he can buy a senate seat with that money by duping suckers into thinking he’s a progressive.  I’m convinced he’s not.  So I’m going to vote for Romanoff.  But my primary reason for voting for Romanoff is because I want the Democrats in this state to prove that somebody can get the nomination without millions of dollars in special interest campaign contributions.  I truly believe it can and will be done and Andrew Romanoff will be our next senator.  And if he screws up and doesn’t keep his word once he gets to Washington, I’ll support someone else in six years.

    p.s. Memo to Mark Udall – You’re next!

    2. what you should be basing your vote on. Not on the ACTUAL issues facing Colorado or America. Not on either of these two candidates past acheivements or voting records. Not on an informed opinion on who would BEST represent the interest of everyone in this state.

      If you honestly think that Romanoff (newly progressive) is the right man for the job, then by all means vote for him. All this talk about “special interest” money is b.s. Progressive groups that donate to Romanoff are special interests. If he gets endorsed by the GLBTQ crowd will he turn their money down to? How about Latino voter groups? African American groups? These are all special interests. How far is Andrew willing to go to hold to his campaign pledge?

      1. but I don’t really remember Andrew refusing to take funds because someone has a “special interest”. There is a significant difference between a special interest group and a PAC.

        I believe I have an “informed” opinion. I was informed a few minutes ago about Senator Bennets’ vote for the benefit of that lil’ ol’ special interest group, Big Oil. After his vote against Brown/Kaufman, I find it incredible that anyone can still pretend that the good Senator isn’t looking out for the folks at the top of the food chain.

        One of the “actual issues” facing Colorado is the wholesale ownership of our government by Big Corporate Money. This situation will only change when enough candidates , like Andrew Romanoff and Stan Garnett, refuse to play the game, and depend instead on the PEOPLE to help them get elected. As a matter of fact, I think I will go get my credit card right now and send Andrew some more money.

        Thanks for getting me motivated EmeraldKnight76.

        1. many cases a more organized “special interest” group. Take say, Sarah PAC, would that be a special interest?  Let’s not split hairs. PACs are special interests on tax forms. Do you think there is some group out there that actually CALLS themselves a “special interest group” on the letterhead??

          As to the Brown Amnd. you refer to: let me inform you that along with Sen. Bennet in voting against it were neo-cons like Feinstein (D-CA), Kerry (D-MA), Menendez (D-NJ), and Schumer (D-NY)! Not to mention the OTHER Senator from Colorado Udall (D-CO).  In total 20 Democrats voted against this Amendment and you don’t think there might be a reason other than being in bed with Big Banks?

          The problem is LOW INFORMATION voters which Romanoff is counting on. He doesn’t want anyone looking too closely at HIS voting record while in the house. If they do they may notice he wasn’t progressive then. He was a proud DLC Conservative, remember?

          1. I have known Andrew Romanoff for six years, having worked with him in the legislature. You can throw around the claim that people who support Andrew are low information voters all you want. That doesn’t make it so. I know a great many Romanoff supporters and they are quite well informed.  Admonitions from a “google monkey” like you are completely unimpressive. What kind of money do you make doing this, anyway?

            In total 20 Democrats voted against this Amendment and you don’t think there might be a reason other than being in bed with Big Banks?

            No, I don’t. Why don’t you fill us all in about that reason…then we won’t be such “low information” voters, eh?

            1. that would make anyone want to stick around for long enough to earn some cred. What a pompous ass. I disagree with you and throw some facts at you and you throw insults? I guess that says a lot about you and who you support then doesn’t it? You admit to knowing Andrew for 6 years and even working with him in the legislature. You then go on to say you know a great many Romanoff supporters and then have the balls to ask ME how much I’m being paid? Seriously?

              This response came from someone who worked in the legislature?

              Clearly you’re a shill and though I enjoy this site, you’re the first person to really make me feel unwelcome. Instead of responding with reasoned arguments you attacked and insulted and belittled. Apparently new users should withhold all comments and opinions until they’ve logged a certain amount of time? Is there some guideline laid out we should be following? I also don’t want to be a “google monkey” so is there a pre-approved way to research information?

              I pray that you aren’t currently still working in the Colorado legislature. If you’re working for Romanoff it would explain why he’s behind in every poll.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

64 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!

Colorado Pols