« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

More Proof We Need More Conservatives in Congress

By: Daniel Horowitz (Diary)  |  July 1st, 2012 at 05:14 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Every Republican swears up and down that he/she supports limited government, a balanced budget, and free markets.  Yet, once again, only a fraction of Republicans in Washington were able to stand for those ideals.  The House and Senate passed the Obama highway bill/student loan stimulus on Friday with overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress. [Read more about the bill here and here.]

Among other things, this bill bundled together three major policy extensions.  Republicans pledged to end that practice – a practice which forces members to vote for or against one component because of another extraneous portion of the bill.  Although we believe that conservatives should have opposed every aspect of the bill, some members possibly wanted to support just the flood insurance provision and not the student loan or transportation extension.  It makes no sense to bundle them together for the purpose of getting out of town before the holiday week.  Yet, that’s exactly what they did.

Just 52 Republicans, 21% of the conference, voted against this budget buster, which violated several tenets of the GOP Pledge to America.  Only 19 Republicans in the Senate voted no.

Here’s a color-coded spreadsheet of the House vote sorted by Cook PVI (most Republican to least Republican district).  We’ve got a lot of red state Republicans who have no interest in balancing the budget, limiting government, or restoring free markets.

It’s votes like this that separate the men from the boys.  Upon closer scrutiny, you will find that only a small fraction of the party actually supports the principles of the Republican Party.  As we’ve pointed out a number of times, and will continue to show at The Madison Performance Index, many of our most conservative districts are represented by statists.

After the Supreme Court failed to uphold our Constitution, we must focus our attention on Congress.  We applaud the 52 GOP House members and 19 senators for supporting limited government.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • renny

    and we will get them in Nov.

    • mikeymike143

      richard mourdock and ted cruz will make some great additions to jim demint’s crew over in the senate.

      • gravelyvoicejim

        Don’t overlook the Missouri Senate race either. We have the establishment Republican from D.C. Todd Akin, who voted for the H.R. 525 expansion of Obama Care last year, running against two “outsiders” from a D.C. standpoint – John Brunner and Sarah Steelman.

        Akin’s “did not vote” vote on this bill is interesting since there is an upcoming Missouri Senate Primary debate at Washington University this coming Friday, July 6. It appears the “Principled” “Tested Under Fire” Akin couldn’t decide whether it was more important to vote for fiscal conservatism or to pander to students the week before a debate a a major university, so he punted.

        Then again I could be reading more into his vote than I should. As Akin has done for the last two years, he could have merely been following the lead of his fearful leader – John Boehner – who also didn’t vote.

        With either Brunner or Steelman in the Senate from Missouri we will have a chance to beef up Team Demint. If Akin’s recent history is any indication of how he will behave if elected to the Senate, he will run with the establishment dogs.

  • evilbloggerlady

    We need the most conservative to run and who can win. That varies. In Massachusetts it may be Scott Brown. Mr. Brown would be completely unacceptable in a more conservative state, but for MA he is hands down better than Elizabeth Pseudojawea Warren.

  • ghostship

    Party majorities are not what advance conservative agendas. Only ideological majorities can advance a conservative agenda. Please remember this conservatives the next time fellow republicans start complaining about conservatives wanting to apply a litmus test to republicans.

    Otherwise, be prepared to see breaking news once again how republican doesn’t mean conservative and that water is still wet.

    • goodgovernance

      There’s just not enough conservatives in the country to elect truly conservative majorities into Congress. And I don’t buy the “moderates and independents will choose true conservatives over a moderate or independent every time” argument. Even the liberals can’t get majorities of true Nancy Pelosi types, even though they’ve got the entire MSM working on their behalf.

      Conservatives are never going to be able to wield as much power as we’d like. Disgust with Obama’s failed policies will definitely help this election cycle, but in the long term it’s hard to see how the GOP grows the base with some of its current stances on issues. Everyone knows there are big changes coming to the party in the future, it’s just nobody knows exactly when it will happen. My guess is not until after a couple of humiliating defeats at the presidential level.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        Fess up. We can tell these things.

        • goodgovernance

          You shouldn’t just go calling everyone you disagree with on a few things a Democrat. If you do, you wind up putting everyone in the Democrat column.

          By all means, put the most conservative people you can in office, where you can, when you can. But would you seriously prefer no loaf of bread to half a loaf? Because you can’t get the whole loaf, at least not in the short term. Dreams of a big push in the next couple of election cycles that will cause the complete collapse of the Left are just as nonsensical as the Left dreaming they can cause the collapse of conservatism, if they just push a little harder.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I notice you don’t even try to claim you’re a Republican.

            Let me guess: You’re ‘independent’?

          • goodgovernance

            that some of the moderators here appear to go out of their way to provoke posters they happen to disagree with. Which is certainly safe for them to do, with all the power being on their side.

            But it doesn’t lead to any meaningful discussion, or prove whether anyone is right or wrong.

            So this will be my final response to you on this thread, good sir.

          • gekster

            True sign of a liberal.
            If you are a Democrat or Independent, it doesn’t matter.
            We’ve had them here before, but they were not shy of stateing thier afilliation.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            You don’t get to just ignore moderators.

            I notice you still haven’t claimed to be a Republican.

            This is a Conservative and Republican site.

            Behave.

          • blooch

            Get over it. This is a staunchly conservative site, and yet, here we are wishing nothing but complete victory for Mitt Romney in November. And here you are, chiding us for tunnel- vision, all-or-nothing conservatism. If you are a moderate or independent and share our goal of building the monorail from Midway International to the Hyde Park P

          • blooch

            Presidential Library, then let’s do this thing. Just don’t start worrying about what the MSM, or a bunch of people who don’t vote, think about you…or us.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            It even spawned the whole ‘elaborate troll’ running gag.

          • blooch

            *

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            .

          • blooch

            sailing toward the edge.

      • blooch

        It’s hard to take this without a grain of salt. I’ll start with the standard, “Who’s this ‘we’ you’re talking about?”. Would “we” prefer that conservatives wield as little power as possible? And these big changes…We don’t know *when* they will be. Do we know *what* they will be? Are you saying the knives and forks, so to speak, are out for conservatives?

        And those “humiliating defeats at the presidential level”…I gauge by the thrust of your argument that Romney is to be the first of these defeats. Exactly how is that to be laid at the feet of conservatives?

        Or you can answer Neil. Either way is cool with me.

        • goodgovernance

          I am assuming other conservatives are like me in that they’d like to have more power over the processes of government than conservatives currently possess. Certainly it’s possible for conservatives to make gains this cycle.

          I’m just pointing out that there aren’t enough “true” conservatives as a voting bloc to see to it there are true conservative majorities in Congress, especially when it comes to the Senate. You may not like that fact, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to ignore facts, because once you ignore reality in favor of ideological visions, you’re really no better than a Democrat, are you?

          • blooch

            Now could you elaborate on how moderates and independents will not elect a true conservative, and how that relates to Mitt Romney and “a couple of humiliating defeats at the presidential level”? And if you could tie this to your thesis about conservatives, that would be bonus.

          • goodgovernance

            moderates and independents won’t ever elect a true conservative. The truth is moderates and independents will vote for a conservative or a liberal, depending on the times, their mood, and whoever’s been in office for a while. But the reason they aren’t entirely conservative, or liberal, is they distrust both to a degree.

            As for Mitt Romney, I personally don’t think anyone except Obama’s re-election team would label him a true conservative. And I’m not sure Romney is headed for a “humiliating defeat” either. My earlier comment was not directed toward this fall, but looking years, maybe even decades down the line.

          • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

            that maybe the “voting block” isn’t the problem? It’s going to take more than going to the polls every 4 years to fix our problems. We have to get involved and stay involved in the process from the local level all the way to the top in order to effect change in who runs for office in the first place.

            Are you an active member of your local GOP and/or tea party?

          • goodgovernance

            I do think active involvement is what helps conservatives leverage the power they do have, when most of the electorate only pays attention intermittently, if at all.

            I’ve been active with the local GOP in the past, though admittedly not so much this year. But I will get more involved in the future.

      • ghostship

        I personally know quite a few former republicans who left the party and became independents because they were disgusted at big government republicanism.

        So if the GOP wants to get them back, electing more conservative candidates who will fight for limited government and cutting spending is the way to get some of that independent vote.

        You might be surprised at how much independents will respond to true conservative ideas. Reagan certainly didn’t have any problems getting independents to vote for him.

        • PowerToThePeople

          are ignorant spineless morons who are unable to make their mind up politically and instead rely on soundbites to make their mind up for them.

          Does that describe the people you know pretty well? Bet it does!

          By the way, thank those friends of yours for me with a nice big middle finger and let them I appreciate their ball taking home mentality that gave us Clinton when they voted for Perot or stayed home. Started us down a wonderful track that ended with what we see around us now.

          If they left, let them stay gone. We do not care about the lazy morons who were unwilling to stick things out and make real change through their personal effort.

          • ghostship

            I know I’ve been tempted to just throw my hands up and leave the party.

            It’s hard not to be disgusted sometimes when the GOP seems dead set on proving how much they want to be the party of dem-lite. I haven’t left so I can still vote for the most conservative in the primary although sometimes I feel like maybe I’m just a sucker for punishment.

            I think your wrong about letting them stay gone. They haven’t given up on conservatism. They’ve just lost faith in the republican party to be willing to fight for conservatism. I think it would be a lot better if we could prove to them that the GOP will fight for conservative ideals.

            However, to do that the GOP needs a reformation. It needs to become a party that advances a conservative agenda. However, it won’t become that as long as the establishment republicans and RINO’s are in charge of the party.

          • gekster

            if they were all that conservative as you say we wouldn’t have a rino problem.
            They would be voting for the most conservative enmass.
            I believe you should rethink your premiss.

        • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

          and then complain about how things aren’t run the way they’d like. Maybe if more people would get involved and actually engage in the process, they’d have a little less to complain about. But then that would require a little effort, wouldn’t it?

  • Tbone

    Get re-elected to their personal gravy train. Expecting them to have any ideology past that is like expecting your dog not to sniff other dog’s butts. Being self-centered egotists is the core component of any politician including 95% or Republicans.

    If you want real world solutions, start electing real people, not career scumbags like Boehner and Cantor.

    • anjinconsulting

      Is to amend the constitution to enact congressional term limits, to end the congressional retirement system and make them pay into Social Security and to have a balanced budget except in times of national emergencies.

      • gekster

        It’s called elections.
        It’s up to us to inform the voters just who they are voting for.
        When the people know what they are voting for,
        they will enforce the term limits.

        • Tbone

          My congressman is Gallegly who is finally retiring after 26 years of milking the system while enjoying a gerrymandered district. It is easier to get rid of a plantar wart than an incumbent Congressman.

  • rebcyy

    If we are ever to turn around the ship of state, we need to do better than vote for the non-liberal. Perhaps in the national elections we are forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, but we must get real conservatives NOMINATED by the Republican Party.

    Opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens is one a few crucial issues that seperate a real conservative from a political nonentity whom we will never be able to trust when the heat is on.

    Opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens is one critical issue that will seperate the conservatives from the — what evers.

    Excuses for one mini-amnesty after another provides a constant supply of incentives for foreigners to enter the U.S. illegally and stay here (illegally) and evade arrest. Amnesty equeals no laws, no borders, no country.

    According to Americans for Legal Immigration Marko Rubio “gutted” 31 bills in the Florida legislature that were intended to fight illegal immigration. Yet I am told that Rubio is some type of Tea Party hero. Are “conservatives” that naive and gullible? Don’t tell me he is the only Republican who can win in Florida — please. Then there is Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry’s (‘no heart” comment) nonsense about illegal aliens.

    This is not a matter of “ideological purity.” It is critical that are able to trust, or at least intimidate, those whom we empower. Not on all minutia, but on only a few critical issues.

    We are talking national sovereignty for God sake. Are we going to be a sovereign state or merely an area on a map without any coherent law, government or social stability? This will happen if we do not stop illegal immigration cold.

    • spoasteph97

      Senator Marco Rubio compared to Charlie Crist and Kendrick Meeks is a THOUSAND times better of a senator than they would be.

      Consider: The senior senator of Florida is a Democrat. The chairwoman of the DNC is from Florida. Florida is not South Carolina. Florida is not Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, or another pretty GOP state. It is a swing state that was won by President Obama in 2008.

      I’m not trying to make excuses for Senator Rubio, but I do believe he is building up an okay conservative record considering the state he comes from..

      Now commenting on the OP: I was again proud of my representative, Tom Graves for voting correctly. I also want to thank the other 51 representatives and 19 representaitves who voted correctly.

      I was a little surprised by a few representatives who are usually more conservative: Stutzman, Chaffetz, Pence, and a few others. I’m willing to forgive and forget on this one, but I hope they will do better next time.

  • checkmate2012

    And I’m not happy with my Congressman Pete Sessions on this one either although he usually votes the same way with Cornyn. I will drop him an email to let him know my dismay, Sessions that is.

    Perhaps we’d get repeat performances for the few that voted against it by writing them to let us know we appreciated their vote. Reward their behavior :)

    I agree that this bundling crap needs to end, especially on a bill that was huge to begin with and encompassed massive scope.

    • cbartlett

      Proud to say my TX Congressman, Gohmert, voted NAY! And so happy to see Cornyn did too. SO very glad that squish Hutchison is getting out. GO TED CRUZ! (Wonder how Dewhurst would have voted on this? hmmmm…)

  • http://EasyOpinions.blogspot.com Andrew_M_Garland

    Incentives drive everything. There is no incentive to become a congress(wom)man who downsizes government and removes government power. There is no money in it. So, who is going to change the system to favor the taxpaying citizen? The supposed conflict between the political parties creates more opportunities to raise money for campaigns.

    There may be a partial fix. I think congressmen are underpaid. Each should receive $1+ million per year.

    Congressional seats inspire costly and determined campaigns. This is not because people are willing to spend fortunes to serve in honor and principle. Most issues affect business interests, and most congressmen leave Congress quite rich.

    A truly honest and principled man is rare in Congress, because he must trade favors to make a big income. The path to success is there for the dishonest man, but not for the honest one. Pro rata, the US spends about $5 billion per congressman in taxes raised. $1 million per year is cheap for a good thinker and administrator handling that flow of wealth. Current fraud and pork costs about $5 million/year, and those other billions are misdirected. A large salary would make each congressmen more independent from bribes and schemes, and would allow people to run for Congress who are not already millionaires or pawns of some interest group.

    A million/year would identify a congressman as a privileged member of society, as he truly is. He would be watched more closely, and any fraud would get no sympathy. We should make the job of congressman a directly profitable job to hold, for the best and honest people, rather than a job which pays that million only as side deals to the dishonest.

    In my town, the town leaders are unpaid, and I suspect (an opinion) that they have long-standing interests in businesses which carry out the town’s good works. A reform councilman would have to be personally rich and interested in good government rather than money. Still, the other 5 councilmen could outvote him. We would need to elect four wealthy saints at the same time to break up the deals within town government. This will never happen. My town will never pay a salary to the town leaders. They will always serve out of a heartfelt interest in directing the town’s resources to quality companies.

    EasyOpinions.blogspot.com

  • 4loveofus

    …you’ll discern that no one but Roberts in the majority had the opinion that the law was unconstitutional on the basis of the Commerce Clause. The dissent did not join him in that opinion and neither did the 4 liberals in the majority. For an opinion to be of valid, it must be accompanied by “it is the opinion of the court”, or words to that effect. No where did either side apply that to the Commerce Clause. So the notion that the opinion somehow narrows the Commerce Clause is simply false.

    • checkmate2012

      after all the high fiving on the Commerce Clause was going around. But back to this post, we need to hold our elected to sound conservative principles!

  • teapartypatriot4ever

    This is why we the patriotic constitutional conservative American people from every walk of life in American Society, must elect as many Reagan Tea Party Conservative to Congress this 6 Nov, replacing as many of these worthless colluding collaborating progressive Republicrat RINO’s as possible, and put some actual backbone into the govt that is supposed to represent and protect the People.

  • gravelyvoicejim

    On March 8, 2011 a bill was brought up by John Boehner for a vote in the House of Representatives. This was one of the early bills brought to a vote by the new Republican House Speaker. The bill, if eventually passed into law, would have expanded Obama Care. Red State reported it, the mainstream media, including FOX News, did not.

    http://www.redstate.com/russvought/2011/03/09/house-leadership-let-obamacare-expansion-pass/

    This day in 2011 was the day our republic died. The significance of this bill was that it exposed a willingness on the part of John Boehner and the House establishment REPUBLICANS to actually vote to EXPAND the very program they were elected by the American people a mere 4 months earlier to “repeal, replace, or defund”.

    Two essential questions need to be asked regarding this vote:

    1) Why in the world did John Boehner even bring this bill to a vote? (Was this a payback for a previous political deal?)

    2) How did our respective Republican representatives vote?

    95 establishment REPUBLICANS supported this bill as it eventually passed in the House. Sadly for those of us in Missouri, the Congressional Record shows that with the exception of Billy Long the entire Missouri Republican delegation voted FOR the bill. Among those casting a “yea” vote from Missouri was now establishment Senate candidate Todd Akin.

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll164.xml

    This vote was a canary in a coal mine. It should have served as an early indication to the American people that the Republican House we had just ushered in to power in 2010 had neither the political will nor the courage to stand on principle and fight to do whatever it took to stop Obama Care in its tracks. This lack of political will was later demonstrated throughout 2011 when this same Republican House cut deals with the Democrats to pass a series of CRs which raised the debt while funding the government through FY12. These 2011 CR deals funded early Obama Care programs, Planned Parenthood, the EPA, and a list of agencies and departments as long as Todd Akin’s arm that all Republicans will be campaigning against between now and November 6. Pledges and promises from any Republican who voted for the Obama Care expansion bill or any of the ensuing CRs (For the record – the CR votes implicate Missouri?s Billy Long as well) should be taken with a grain of salt in light of their voting record in 2011. House establishment Republicans extended a funding life-line to Obama Care throughout 2011 to get us to the point to relying on the opinion of a single Supreme Court Justice. So here we are, getting what we deserve because we allowed it to happen.

    Contrary to the opinion of some, John Roberts did not kill our republic with his ruling on June 28 2012. It had been dead for over a year at that point, at least since March 8 2011 if not before then. We just didn’t realize it. We had put our trust in the newly elected Republican House of Representatives then went back to sleep. Although I do not agree in any way with Roberts? ruling, we got what we deserved for putting all our faith in the Republican establishment in November of 2010 then going back to bed. Instead of insisting that the House use the power of the purse 1n 2011 to grind the government to a halt in order to force the Dems to come to the table to negotiate on Obama Care, we whistled past the graveyard as the establishment Republicans cut deals with the Democrat devils to fund Obama Care and increase the debt in order to support the goal of electing more Republicans in 2012, all the while hoping the courts would bail us out of the Obama Care mess.

    Result: It’s 2012. Obama Care is now enshrined as the law of the land. The establishment House Republicans who played us for fools and voted to keep the Obama Care ball in the air by funding it in 2011 are running for re-election opposing Obama Care in 2012. Are we awake yet, or is the Republic truly dead?

    • commonsenseobserver

      But the alternative is far worse. With the GOP, you move slowly back from the edge of the cliff. With the Democrats, you run off the cliff.

      • gravelyvoicejim

        Notice I referred to the “Republican ESTABLISHMENT”, I would NEVER support a Democrat. The key to change is through the primaries. Missouri has an upcoming August 7 Senate primary pitting the DC establishment candidate Todd Akin against John Brunner and Sarah Steelman who are both “outsiders” from a D.C. standpoint. Although Akin is currently in the House, his election is no less significant than Mourdock’s primary challenge against Lugar in terms of having a chance to defeat an establishment candidate.

  • gmhunt

    Title should be “We need more Constitutional Conservatives” since we have people in both psrties and both houses that do not Uphols the Consatitution and several in the Republican House & Senate that are RINO’s until they are up for re-election…….problem, they keep getting re-elected or new ones that lie and deceive to get elected as in the case of Rubio and his statement: “I love Representing Floridians” , then he shows who he really represents with “Dream Act” for illegals………..

  • Pingback: read more