« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The House Republicans Caved — Roll Call Votes Included

By: alanjoelny (Diary)  |  January 1st, 2013 at 11:18 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The House passes the Senate bill

257-167 was the vote tally.

Here’s the official list of yeas and nays:

—- AYES 257 —

Ackerman
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barletta
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boehner
Bonamici
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Curson (MI)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DelBene
Denham
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luján
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Marino
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McGovern
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schwartz
Scott, David
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Speier
Stivers
Sullivan
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner (NY)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Womack
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

—- NOES 167 —

Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berg
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boustany
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman (CO)
Conaway
Cooper
Cravaack
Crawford
Culberson
DeFazio
DeLauro
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hensarling
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latham
Long
Lummis
Mack
Marchant
Massie
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McDermott
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (NC)
Moran
Mulvaney
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rehberg
Renacci
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Smith (NE)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Terry
Tipton
Turner (OH)
Visclosky
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woodall
Yoder
Young (IN)

—- NOT VOTING 8 —

Buerkle
Burton (IN)
Graves (MO)
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Paul
Stark
Woolsey

Thoughts?

Crossposted at alanjoelny.com

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • WmCraig

    Yeah. I got a thought, This narrows down the list for the speaker of the house in the 113th congress. After this I bet we can get the committee chairs and memberships reassigned and the speaker as well.

  • Dave_A

    There was nothing wrong with TARP. Not one thing – it accomplished what it intended to, without spending any taxpayer money.

    As for Ryan and the auto bailout… Well, that’s home-state politics. He had a significant auto-industry presence in his district, and his constituents wanted a ‘YES’ vote – they got it.

    What the did not get, was to keep their jobs….

    • commonsenseobserver

      Wasn’t the bill meant to reallocate already appropriated funds from an existing Energy Dept. program so that the President wouldn’t be able to take from TARP to pay for an auto-bailout? Ryan did vote for the bill, but did it pass, and didn’t Bush and Obama use TARP instead anyway?

      Of course, constituents’ interests did play a part, and he’s supposed to be their voice after all, while trying to strike a balance and stick as much as possible to his principles, of course, which is why he didn’t endorse increased spending through TARP, but instead chose to get the money by cutting another program.

      Of course, many dislike TARP, saying that it’s cronyism and anti-free market, but, ideally, it was meant to prevent a financial collapse, which it did, and open the way to real reform which would minimize risk and remove the need for future rescues, which it didn’t, but Ryan voted against Dodd-Frank, so it’s not his fault.

      When we actually dig below the surface on these votes, it’s a bit preposterous to dismiss Paul Ryan’s entire record based on them alone as being fiscally irresponsible, pro-crony, and pro-big government, given that they turned out to be fiscally neutral and the first was meant to prevent a worse alternative (actually, much like now, although hopefully it will actually work this time).

      Now, on No Child Left Behind, Part D, and a few appropriations bills, perhaps the critics are getting nearer. But NCLB was a genuine bipartisan effort to expand accountability and choice in schools, meant to make sure that if money was spent, it should actually produce results without being squandered by union bosses, and even though it was too timid in that area, while too bold on spending and regulation, it was well-meaning, built on at least some measure of Conservative principles (with bungled implementation due to sabotage from the Democrats), and thus should not count against someone either. Many otherwise sterling Conservatives would have voted for it to take on the unions and finally instill some accountability and choice in schools.

      Part D did expand the benefits package, and many Republicans did vote against it, but it was probable that if it had failed, Bush would have united with House Democrats and Congressional RINOs to pass an even more expensive bill, without the redemptive features like HSAs and increased choice through Medicare Advantage, which allowed it to come in significantly under-budget. Yes, the bill was very flawed, but it also had some merits which many Republicans would understandably have supported. It also included a spending trigger on Medicare, for instance, which would have been a powerful motivation for real entitlement reform if it had not been repealed by the Democrats, who then promptly proceeded to cut Medicare by $700 billion, which would be okay if they hadn’t rejected efficiency, reform and competition in favor of crude bureaucratic rationing, which was then double-counted to fund Obamacare. And Paul Ryan has more than adequately compensated for this by being a pioneer on pushing for real entitlement reform, not just pushing buttons and making speeches, but actually putting forth and speaking up for innovative and substantive ideas, bringing them into the mainstream debate.

      I won’t comment on the appropriations bills, though Ryan did vote against the farm bills, for instance, and has an excellent record with Citizens Against Government Waste- ““Chairman Ryan’s 92 percent lifetime rating with CCAGW has earned him the status of ‘Taxpayer Hero,’ a distinction that he has earned both in the aggregate and during each of the 12 years that his votes have been rated”

      • commonsenseobserver

        A 90%+ rating from ACU, consistent Bs and above from NTU (lifetime rating of 75%), 88% from the Club for Growth, 92% from CAGW, 75% from Heritage Action (still above the House GOP average and comparable with many reasonably trustworthy Representatives), a rare positive rating from the Madison Project, and 100% from NRLC, as well as great ratings from many other social Conservative organizations. Of course, the recent votes may pull his score down, but he has usually been quite good.

    • electconstitutionalists

      TARP is one of the worst pieces of crony capitalist legislation in history. Real free marketers will oppose such garbage. Like Jeff Flake, Jim Jordan, and Ron Paul. Anyone who voted for TARP will never get my vote.

      • Dave_A

        First off, Ron Paul is not an example of anything positive.

        Second, the alternative to TARP was a deflationary spiral. Which is why Paul was so opposed to it – he actively WANTS a deflationary spiral, so he can live out his fantasy of destroying the United States & bringing back confederation….

        TARP:

        1) Prevented a deflationary spiral

        2) Did so without spending one penny of taxpayer money (because TARP paid for itself, vs-a-vs buy-low-sell-high investments)

        3) Did so without actually allowing the government to sieze control of any portion of the financial sector.

        It was the most free-market solution possible, unless you consider ‘let it all burn down’ an acceptable option.

        Most of us do not.

  • littlehouse18

    I think Cantor was allowed to vote No to help him in his home district. I doubt he’s challenging Boehner.
    I am disappointed in Ryan as well. Don’t know what he’s thinking.

    • commonsenseobserver

      It was obviously meant to help him look good, plain and simple.

      Maybe Ryan didn’t think that bigger tax hikes with little more in spending cuts was a better alternative to keeping taxes as low on as many people as possible with this deal.

      Many say that letting it burn would let people feel the burden of government spending, but they also forget that when big government policies wreck the economy, they also expand the entitlement class, and the tax hikes will be little compared to the largesse they will enjoy, while everyone else will certainly suffer the impact of higher taxes on work, saving and entrepreneurship. Of course, it might pose a little challenge to the Democrats in balancing government workers and welfare queens, but I’m not sure that’s a terribly wise trade-off.

  • http://twitter.com/biggator5 BigGator5

    Cowards! Thieves! All those who voted for the so-called deal has, once again, only delayed the Day Of Reckoning! On pox on all those who voted yes!

  • lawstudent

    I’m very, very concerned about getting rolled on the upcoming debt ceiling
    debate. We have failed to articulate the cuts we are looking for, and
    have not made the case for aggressively reforming our failed entitlement
    programs. We should be pounding medicaid every day 24/7, as it is
    essentially a give away to welfare queens and moochers.

    By signing the terrible fiscal cliff deal, we no longer have the
    leverage of the under $250k tax cuts that Obama promised to keep in
    place. Essentially, we have very little that Obama wants, other than
    even more tax revenue from high income earners, which would turn us into
    Greece or Sweden.

    I see the endgame here as us refusing to raise the debt limit, and
    then being portrayed as hostage takers and crazies by the media. At that
    point the squeamish among us (Boehner) will negotiate a mini-grand
    bargain, giving more revenue in exchange for modest entitlement cuts and
    a raised debt ceiling. It’s going to be a massive and disastrous cave,
    all because we already gave Obama what he wanted, and don’t have the
    fortitude to shut down the government. Troubled times ahead – we really
    need new leadership.