Rep. Kerry Bentivolio Votes Against $9.7 billion Sandy Package.

Spoa

Spoa

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
2,161
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll007.xml


The Club for Growth stated earlier:

They should also strip out all immaterial line items, and fully offset all expenditures with spending cuts elsewhere. Serious reform would also include a way for the states to take over the responsibility for future disaster relief funding so that accountability is more localized.
Click to expand...

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/?...:+ClubForGrowthNews+(Club+for+Growth+||+News)

Good for Rep. Bentivolio and the 66 others! :)

(If someone wants to post this in the threads for Reps. Amash and Massie, feel free to do so. They both voted "no" also. And freshmen Reps. Yoho, Weber, Mullin, Bridenstine, and several other freshmen voted "no". Anyway, just read through the roll call vote for more info.)
 
Last edited:
now that Boehner is re-elected he's going to keep putting big spending bills on the floor which get 300+ yea votes. sickening isnt it.

The next one is $50 billion dollar Sandy bill and i'm sure they'll just vote that through too.
 
itshappening said:
now that Boehner is re-elected he's going to keep putting big spending bills on the floor which get 300+ yea votes. sickening isnt it.

The next one is $50 billion dollar Sandy bill and i'm sure they'll just vote that through too.
Click to expand...

And unfortunately, most of the public will be calling these 67 brave ones "heartless" and other ridiculous names. If you have time, call these reps and thank them for voting "no". Most people don't understand the problem with HR 41 and the next $50 billion one. Encourage, donate, and help these brave reps! :)
 
Ok, for the people who always get on me for saying that Walter Jones isn't any kind of a fiscal conservative, this is yet another spending vote where Walter Jones voted the wrong way. He was never "converted" by Ron Paul. He just happens to agree with Ron when it comes to pre-emptive war and some civil liberties issues.
 
Last edited:
Were people promised insurance? If so, I suppose this should be paid so that contracts aren't violated.
 
SpreadOfLiberty said:
Were people promised insurance? If so, I suppose this should be paid so that contracts aren't violated.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. Giving the funds is not the problem. Not offseting the funds is the problem. Madison Project released a statement explaining why fiscal conservatives should oppose it: http://madisonproject.com/2013/01/good-job-by-freshmen-on-flood-insurance-bill/

If we ever plan to get our budget under control, we must offset even this type of emergency spending. There are plenty of areas where we could find an extra $10 billion to cut.
Click to expand...

Foreign aid to China should be where they start. Then give a 1-5% cut of the Depts. of Energy and Education...that will pay for the funds!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top