Republican Hardball - Will of the People?
My Senator, Jolie Justus, has distinguished herself with energy and hard work during her first term in the Senatorial Chamber. I could not be more pleased that she is representing this district, and I'm proud that I supported her.
It seems that even Jolie's enthusiasm, determination and good ideas can run into the occasional brick wall of Republican hypocrisy, though. When she introduced a resolution disapproving of the President's escalation strategy in Iraq, she ruffled a few feathers, even though polls show that the vast majority of Americans reject the Bush administration's ill-thought-out plan.
Senator Vogel of Jefferson City, however, has seen fit not only to disagree with the electorate of Missouri, he is abusing his chairmanship of the Senate Ways and Means Committee to punish both Jolie Justus AND the poor people of Missouri. He has admitted that he is bottling up legislation which would help Missouri's working poor and homeless, as political revenge for Justus' introduction of the resolution against the Iraq war escalation.
It says something profound about Republican values that they would punish the poor and defend war. WWJD, indeed.
Labels: GWOT, Justus, Missouri, poverty, republicans
posted by Dan at 3/19/2007 06:10:00 AM
3 Comments:
It says something profound about Missourians' values that they would elect someone who would punish the poor and defend war.
Too bad they had to pick on a freshman. The upperclassmen/women on both sides of the aisle know full well how to play this game. It's disgusting and we pay them for this!
The article Dan links definately makes the implication that Republicans want to punish Senator Justus for introducing the anti-war bill. However, after re-reading the article, I question it's veracity.
First off, when given the chance, apparently Sen. Justus chose to offer up on the anti-war bill to a vote before the other two bills intended to help low income workers? Doesn't she share at least part of the blame for giving that her priority?
Secondly, although the writer quotes several republicans that clearly disagreed with the bill, that doesn't put the entire party to blame for excluding the other two bills from a vote - only Senitor Vogel is implicated in that action.
So, what about Senitor Vogel? The writer links one quote of Vogel saying he is disappointed in the bill with the fact that he will not consider her other two bills. I don't think his article adequately establishes the link between those two positions. There are probably more significant reasons why Vogel does not want to entertain those other two bills. Republicans typically do not favor anything that smacks of income redistribution - and although I admittedly do not have the details of either bill, they both sound like they lean that way. If you disagree with that reason, then say so - don't drag the war into it!
SO - it's a bit of a stretch from one, (albeit powerful) senior's comment that he doesn't care for the anti-war bill, to the assertion that he will not entertain two other bills based on that, to the conclusion that all republicans would rather "punish the poor to defend the war".
Post a Comment
<< Home