Frank Guinta voted to strip all federal funding from Planned Parenthood

-

-

"Planned Parenthood running radio ads against Guinta"
By James Pindell, politicalscoop.wmur.com - February 21, 2011

After U.S. Congressman Frank Guinta (R-Manchester) voted to strip all federal funding from Planned Parenthood, the organization is running ads in New Hampshire this week targeting him.

The vote was on an amendment offered by Indiana Congressman Mike Pence. Since the 1970s, the federal government has had a ban on funding abortions directly. This bill would remove funding for women’s health and other services that are mainly geared to low income women.

----------

"War on women"
By Lucy Edwards, Northwood, NH
For the (Concord) Monitor, Letter, January 31, 2012

I wish the idea that there is a war on women going on was hyperbole, but I fear it isn't. I am annoyed not just at Frank Guinta, my congressman, but also at a great many others in what we used to call the Grand Old Party, the one my father belonged to and one that he would never recognize today. And "annoying" does not come close to describing what I see in the New Hampshire Legislature, in the presidential primary campaign and in Congress.

There's the war on Planned Parenthood in New Hampshire, in Congress and across the country. There's presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who says that a rape victim's pregnancy is a gift from God.

There's the attack on contraception, a practice which I think I can safely say is mainstream in our country and has been for decades.

Younger women than I would be well-advised to realize that when I was a teenager, contraception was illegal in my home state. It could be illegal again.

I don't know why we are targets for all this abuse. Some New Hampshire legislators think we have too much police protection when we are the victims of domestic assault, and would take us back to when beating your wife was, let's say, close-to-acceptable behavior.

Women outnumber men in our country, and we are your mothers, wives, sisters, daughters, neighbors. It's time for all of us, men and women, to stand up and say, "Enough!"

LUCY EDWARDS
Northwood, NH

----------

Frank Guinta – Radically Corrupt and Extremely Anti-Woman

Named by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington as one of the most corrupt members of Congress in 2011. According to CREW, Guinta “fudged the numbers and cooked the books to buy a seat in Congress,” including soliciting an illegal contribution from the Republican Governors Association. He is currently being investigated by the FEC for loans he made to his campaign. Guinta campaigned on overturning Roe V. Wade and has advocated a total ban abortion with no exceptions, not even to save the life of a woman. He was elected with Tea Party support from the Koch Brothers, Tea Party Express and Freedom Works, but in Congress, he wouldn’t even honor his promise to join Michelle Bachmann’s Tea Party Caucus. He believes that Obama is trying to bring socialism to the US.

Source: http://bonjupatten.com/tag/frank-guinta/

----------

Frank Guinta supports eliminating the Federal Reserve

-

-

"Guinta to question Fed Chair Bernanke"
By James Pindell, politicalscoop.wmur.com - February 9, 2011

Congressman Frank Guinta, who just last week was quoted as saying he supports the end of the Federal Reserve, will question Fed Chair Ben Bernanke at a committee hearing later today.

Bernanke will appear before the House Budget Committee that Guinta sits on.

Last week Guinta was quoted by Foster’s Daily Democrat as telling the Rochester 9/12 group when asked if he favored doing away with the Federal Reserve Board: “I would support eliminating the Fed.”

Frank Guinta voted to extend provisions of the Patriot Act

-

-

"Guinta, Bass back Patriot Act extension"
Examiner.com - February 10, 2011

U.S. Reps. Frank Guinta and Charlie Bass sided with efforts this week to extend provisions of the Patriot Act.

The two New Hampshire Republicans followed the lead of the GOP leadership in the House, but the effort to extend the act failed.

And it wasn’t because of the Democrats.

The more conservative bloc of Republicans were responsible for the failure to get the two-thirds super-majority necessary to extend the provisions.

Guinta, from the 1st Congressional District, and Bass, from the 2nd Congressional District, were among the 277 members who voted on Tuesday to reauthorize key parts of the counter-terrorism surveillance law, which expire at the end of the month.

Those voting no numbered 148, which left the measure seven votes short for passage because of the two-thirds requirement.

According to coverage of the vote by the Washington Post: “The vote was the latest signal … that on certain matters House leaders could face a sizable resistance to compromise from within their own ranks, both from the 87 GOP freshmen and from conservative veterans who have been emboldened by the newcomers.”

The House GOP leadership was considering a move to reconsider the measure later this month in a format that will require only a simple majority for passage.

----------

"Dan Innis with terrorists? A low blow from Frank Guinta"
NH Union Leader, EDITORIAL, July 25, 2014

With all of the national security revelations of the last year, it is a really lousy debate point to suggest that those who want to protect Americans from government surveillance are on the side of the terrorists.

In a debate on WGIR-AM on Wednesday morning, candidates for the Republican nomination for Congress in the 1st District got into a brief discussion of national security and civil liberties. Dan Innis brought up the issue, saying he would have voted against the Patriot Act because it violated the First, Second and Fourth amendments.

Former Rep. Frank Guinta, who in 2011 voted to extend the Patriot Act, responded forcefully. “Let me say, you either stand with the terrorists or you stand with freedom and protecting Americans,” he said.

We were a little surprised that Guinta did not follow his comment by pulling a bald eagle out of his suit jacket and playing a snippet of Lee Greenwood’s “I’m proud to be an American” on his smartphone. And how can one be against freedom by arguing that the law must not trample constitutionally guaranteed freedoms?

That kind of knee-jerk patriotism, a desperate effort to end debate (and thought) on a serious issue, is how we wound up with the current surveillance state, which ought to trouble everyone. That it does not appear to trouble Guinta is concerning.

For his part, Innis was playing some clever politics — just like a pro. After the Edward Snowden revelations, it is easy to say that the Patriot Act went way too far. But at the time things were not so clear.

Approaching 13 years after the Patriot Act’s passage, Congress has yet to strike the right balance between security and liberty. We need to keep debating this issue.

Suggesting that Americans who want stronger protections from government snooping “stand with the terrorists” is not helpful.

Comments:

July 25, 2014 -

CHRIS HERBERT said:

Innis represents a technocratic free market fundamentalist viewpoint that dominates not only Republicans but the nation generally. This version of Republican attempts to project a more centrist viewpoint in other areas, such as government violations of citizen privacy. Guinta is full on reactionary, a devotee of ideology untethered from the real world. Either way, the nation has suffered miserably because of both types. Guinta, as does Senator Ayotte, likes nothing better than fighting a war somewhere, without end. Innis likes the idea of corporations and their owners, owning the federal government; a situation described by FDR as empowering the super rich who consider our government as a 'mere extension of their private affairs.' Plutarch, more than 2,000 years ago warned that income inequality and a super rich upper class are 'fatal' to Republics. He was warning about people like Innis. It remains to be seen if the New Hampshire voter can resist the propaganda of the Kochtopus, the reactionary Union Leader, and a Republican primary full of people who behave as if the 19th century has returned. I sure hope so. It's a mistake to believe the crazies cannot take over our lives just because we're in America.

Ginger Ferrer said:

Amen to that. Although, surveillance of a kind is necessary to protect citizens against crime. As in bank camera's at an ATM. How many times have these camera's been able to reveal the criminal who stole or even killed a citizen and used their ATM card to empty out their bank accounts? How about traffic cam's who document a hit and run or other related infraction? It is a necessity of a kind. But not a total necessity in every aspect of a citizen's life.Like everything else in our country, the abuses are mounting with regard to the very necessary monitoring of the criminal mindset that is forever looking for a way to get away with their illegal acts.So it is sort of like a catch 22 issue. ****** if we do, ****** if we don't.

----------