Juan Sky of Clearly New Mexico covers the progress of the Waxman-Markey climate bill currently working its way through Congress, and asks if we can expect “more corporate welfare for polluters.”
The legislation would force energy companies to become cleaner and more efficient, yet some lawmakers have stepped in to protect these companies. Sky comes up with a wonderful comparison:
To me this is like taking away your kid’s allowance because he’s bad, then giving it right back to him because he needs the money to be good.
And more on the politics of money and the money of politics, La Politica posts the “latest outrage” in regard to tax-payer money as the state Bureau of Taxation and Revenue skirts telling where $8.5 million ended up in regard to a check made out to a film production company filming in New Mexico last year. Despite the who, what, where and when, this blogger writes:
Regardless of the strict economic impact of our taxpayer dollars on the New Mexico economy, we have a right as taxpayers to know what we’ve spent our money on.
On to federal stimulus funds, New Mexico Liberty questions the $300 signs to be placed next to stimulus projects “hyping the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.” The blog links to a news article on World Net Daily that suggests lawmakers are using the signs to merely “pat themselves on the back.”
As the media world rages on about taxpayer money, a different kind of story comes out of the SFReeper today, one that is not worth skipping over. In the face of hate crime legislation, “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and gay marriage/domestic partnership, this blog highlights many important issues regarding the “T” in “LGBTQ” – T, of course, for “transgender.” Get Cooper Lee Bombardier’s take on a whole slew of LGBT topics from a transgender point of view.