Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

LINKS See for yourself WHY the WH is cutting LIHEAP by 50%

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:30 PM
Original message
LINKS See for yourself WHY the WH is cutting LIHEAP by 50%
Edited on Mon Feb-14-11 04:48 PM by uponit7771
FACTS (we like them still no?)

White House explains cuts in LIHEAP in this post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=611473&mesg_id=611621

"...The LIHEAP program doubled in FY 2009 following an energy spike, but energy prices are now significantly lower, and the prior level is no longer sustainable. The 50 percent funding reduction brings funding back to the level before the energy price spike..."

Their explanation is justified in this graph....notice 2008-09 winter prices (most people are linking 2009-2010 winter prices which are lower than now but also lower than 08-09)

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=W_EPD2F_PRS_NUS_DPG&f=W



Someone made the point that more people need the program now than before but the White House is correct in saying the prices are lower and a credible NON purposefully sloppy source establishes their reasoning....a little.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. It's still a war against the poor, no matter how much rationalizing takes place..
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
michaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Exactly! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:07 PM
Original message
+1000% -- let me know when we have no more homeless, no more impoverished citizens ... !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. I was wondering how you are supposed to budget for heating when you have no idea what the 3 biggest
Variables are...the price of energy, the weather, and the economy.

This needs flexibility, not a firm budget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
4. Perhaps
however, do we not still have significant unemployment? Would not those unemployed need assistance? What of the 99er's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. I said a little, the spirit of LIHEAP was to help folk with heat through bad times and now is worse
...than 08.

The WH justification is correct on factual basis, there were some saying that prices now were higher than when the WH doubled LIHEAP and that is false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EOTE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. Funny, why can't tax rates for the rich return to pre-2001 levels?
I mean, there's far less justification for continued tax breaks for the wealthy now. Why is it that only the poor get fucked over? When it it be time for the rich to sacrifice anything? Is there ever a time for that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
30. Isn't that what Obama did? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EOTE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Nope. He allowed the rich to maintain their tax cuts.
While the poor had their tax rates increased and they get hit with shit like this on top of that. Obama has said a number of times that we need to make sacrifices in this economy, I agree with that. I just didn't think he'd be so disgusting as to ensure that all those sacrifices are made by the poor and the middle class while giving the rich and powerful everything they want and more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. The graph show energy costs rising toward the level it was two years ago.

They can (and will) BS all they want.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. They're technically correct but the spirit of the program is to help folk during bad times with heat
...and it's logical to state right now it's harder than it was in 08 no doubt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. If the graphs are "technically correct" you're OP comments are a lie.
How distasteful of you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. How? The WH said its cutting LIHEAP by 50% due to cost not being what they were when they doubled...
Edited on Mon Feb-14-11 04:53 PM by uponit7771
...in 08-09 winter year.

I show they're correct with a graph supplied, prices are below 08-09 winter year.

I don't see your point.

Regards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Repeat: The graph show energy costs rising toward the level it was two years ago. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Great, they are NOT what they were in winter 08-09 which is the justification the WH is using for...
...cutting the program.

People were sayin the WH was wrong and prices were higher now than then, chart shows that is false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #19
34. And it's BS because it's STILL rising.

And speaking of BS...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlabamaLibrul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Prices are about 25 cents below 08-09 winter year according to your graph - not 50%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. Correct, I misread the WH response and thought prices were 50% lower but they're cutting the program
...by 50% justifying such cuts with prices not being what they were in that year.

There's some sophistry in that more people are UE'd now than in 08 and more folk need it now regardless of the prices but people were saying prices were higher now and they're not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
7. this is so pathetic.
unrecced con brio.

oh, and 32 Senators have written a letter to officially object to these cuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Regardsless, folk were sayin the WH was wrong about the prices and they're not. Their justification
...is factually correct even though some sophistric in delivery
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. no, folks were not saying that. They were pointing out that in some regions
prices have gone up. they were pointing out that more people need help. they were pointing out that a 50+% cut when prices haven't gone down commensurate with such a cut, when we don't know what prices will be next year, is Obama slashing a program and putting his fucking boots on the back of the poor and elderly for political reasons.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. "...when prices haven't gone down commensurate with such a cut, ..."
I read more post saying prices were higher without the qualifications that you're giving now.

Either way, I understand why they're cutting the program by 50% their timing sucks no doubt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
15. Heating oil costs are up, propane is at a record high
And the number of people receiving LIHEAP assistance has broken records for the third year running.

Your rationalization rings hollow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bigmack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
17. As long as we're using Repub logic..
about a program like this.... I should point out that

"Since I don't use or need a large amount of energy in the winter, I shouldn't have to pay for it."

And then.... "It's all about choices.. those people chose to live where it is cold."

"They should get a good wood stove, like I did."

I'm sure there are more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
20. BS excuse for screwing over the poor!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
21. Seriously, have you no shame? No sense of decency or compassion?
The facts are staring you in the face.

<snip>

“We all appreciate that difficult decisions have to be made this budget cycle to restore fiscal sanity and begin to tackle the debt,” they wrote. “However, this year Massachusetts, and many other parts of the country, have seen record breaking low temperatures and brutal storm conditions. LIHEAP ensures that families can heat their homes, that senior citizens aren't forced to choose between their next meal and staying warm, and helps those who live in the North East to cope with the winter despite record high home heating oil costs.”

“By cutting LIHEAP at this critical time it is estimated that over 3 million American families that qualify for heating assistance would not receive it. As it is LIHEAP is already underfunded. We hear stories every winter from our constituents about the lack of assistance available and the difficulty they have heating their homes. We understand that increasing the LIHEAP program might not be possible this year because of the budget constraints but cutting the program in half would simply be devastating.”

Their pleas echo those of Sen. Jon Tester, a Montana Democrat who last week – before the budget had even been released – ripped the White House’s plan to reduce the program’s funding while at the same time shelling out billions for high-speed rail. “Talk about misplaced, off-track priorities,” Tester said. “I won’t support a budget that dumps billions of dollars into high-speed rail while cutting something as basic as heat for family homes across Montana and America. We need a common sense budget that creates jobs and cuts spending, but we can’t afford a budget that hurts rural America.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/02/cold-war-proposed-budget-cuts-to-heating-program-draw-swift-backlash.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. I cede the fact that their timing is horrible and somewhat sophistric but if they're basing it off..
...08-09 numbers alone (which thye shouldn't be) then they're correct only technically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. And it's sophistry to claim that your assertion has somehow been vindicated by less than a dime. n/t
Edited on Mon Feb-14-11 05:09 PM by superduperfarleft
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. OK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
35. Correct about what exactly?
If they were only cutting the program to keep costs in line with energy prices (which would be surpassingly stupid in the first place) they would NOT be cutting it by half, because energy prices have not dropped by half. Not even close. When you further consider that what small drops in prices have occurred are more than offset by the number of people in need of the assistance the only conclusion possible is that the program needs more funds, not less.

And yet here you are defending this move. Why would you do that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lame54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
24. Why couldn't they use that reason for the Bush Tax Cuts...
"We're not raising taxes, we are re-adjusting the rate back to when it worked well in the 90's."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Because democrats wont pay for the same polsters as repubs, they stick at getting simple points
...across and this LIHEAP issue is prime example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
28. Here's why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. I agree, no one wants to insult the MIC lest than be dealt with
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
33. Prices are increasing, more are poor. Bad budgetary cut, hurting the poor.
Edited on Mon Feb-14-11 05:19 PM by tekisui
But we have to pay for the bush-obama tax cuts for the wealthy somehow!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
36. Not seeing a 50% decrease here. 50 cents, maybe.
I would support a 50-cent decrease in the program.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
37. K&R!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. LOL. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-14-11 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
38. WHY? Because they extended the Bush tax cuts and love them some war. END OF STORY.
Edited on Mon Feb-14-11 05:55 PM by grahamhgreen
Their entire mindset is to cut service instead of raise revenue or cut defense - it's wrong, it's republican, it has no place in our party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC