B4DH
Posted on 09/05/2007 12:45:30 PM PDT by Calpernia
Throughout the next few weeks, I will examine the congressional records of Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter. Today, I start with the 104th Congress (1995-1996), Mr. Thompson’s first. These are the two men that conservative activists in the party tend to support. Both Hunter and Thompson supporters believe their candidate is the man to knock out the Rudy-Mitt-McCain axis of moderates, and ultimately, the socialist that the democrats nominate. A side by side comparison of the congressional records, during the years that Thompson served, will prove useful in determining what motivations and priorities each man embraced. Fred supporters claim their man is a conservative, small government federalist, while Hunter is a big government nanny-stater. Hunter fans believe their man is no-nonsense, America-first Reaganite hawk, while Thompson is a limp wristed moderate.
Fred Thompson – Sponsored Legislation
S.J.RES.21 : A joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment to limit congressional terms.
S.1358 : A bill to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel CAROLYN, and for other purposes.
S.1388 : A bill to designate the United States courthouse located at 800 Market Street in Knoxville, Tennessee, as the "Howard H. Baker, Jr. United States Courthouse".
S.1536 : A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to permit Federal firearms licensees to conduct firearms business with other such licensees at out-of-State gun shows.
S.1584 : A bill to authorize appropriations for the preservation and restoration of historic buildings at historically black colleges and universities.
S.1931 : An Act to provide that the United States Post Office and Courthouse building located at 9 East Broad Street, Cookeville, Tennessee, shall be known and designated as the "L. Clure Morton United States Post Office Courthouse".
S.1952 : A bill to amend the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, and for other purposes.
S.2049 : A bill to reform the budget and oversight processes of the Congress
S.AMDT.618 to H.R.956 To limit the applicability of the uniform product liability provisions to actions brought in a Federal court under diversity jurisdiction.
S.AMDT.756 to S.534 an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill (S. 534) to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide authority for States to limit the interstate transportation of municipal solid waste, and for other purposes; as follows: On page 56, line 18, strike after `delivered,' through `provision' on line 21.
S.AMDT.2086 to S.1026 To authorize a land conveyance, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Memphis, Tennessee.
S.AMDT.2231 to H.R.2020 To provide that no increase in the rates of pay for Members of Congress shall be made in fiscal year 1996, and for other purposes.
S.AMDT.3696 and S.AMDTs 3707-3720 to S.J.RES.21 To amend the joint resolution to change the length of limits on congressional terms to 12 years in the House of Representatives and 12 years in the Senate.
S.AMDT.3981 to S.CON.RES.57 To express the sense of the Senate on the funding levels for the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.
S.AMDT.5264 to H.R.3756 To authorize the Administrator of General Services to conduct a pilot program involving States' participation in the FTS2000 program.
Duncan Hunter- Sponsored Legislation
H.CON.RES.100 : Expressing the sense of Congress that the national security policy of the United States should be based upon a national strategy for peace through strength.
H.R.482 : To direct that certain Federal financial benefits be provided only to citizens and nationals of the United States.
H.R.756 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act and other laws of the United States relating to border security, illegal immigration, alien eligibility for Federal financial benefits and services, criminal activity by aliens, alien smuggling, fraudulent document use by aliens, asylum, terrorist aliens, and for other purposes.
H.R.1018 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act and other laws of the United States relating to border security, illegal immigration, alien eligibility for Federal financial benefits and services, criminal activity by aliens, alien smuggling, fraudulent document use by aliens, asylum, terrorist aliens, and for other purposes.
H.R.1228 : To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide a limited exemption from the child labor provisions of such Act.
H.R.1308 : To withdraw and reserve certain public lands in the State of California utilized in the mission of the Naval Air Facility, El Centro, California.
H.R.1658 : To enhance border security in the vicinity of San Diego, California through the construction and improvement of physical barriers at the United States border and through the forward deployment of Border Patrol agents to the border.
H.R.2166 : To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a minimum tax on certain foreign and foreign-controlled corporations.
H.R.3690 : To limit the types of commercial nonpostal services which may be offered by the United States Postal Service.
H.R.3984 : To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a child tax credit and a deduction for taxpayers with whom a parent or grandparent resides, and for other purposes.
H.AMDT.1240 to H.R.3675 Amendment limits loan guarantees for international railroad projects until studies relating to criminal activities have been completed and made available to the public.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been numerous arguments made that Fred Thompson’s record in the US Senate was not so important for what he supported, but rather what he refused to support. His supporters have painted a picture of a man standing against his party to shrink the size of the government and not spending his time offering up amendments and bills of his own. Well, right out of the gate in his 1st Congress, Fred offered up more bills, resolutions, and amendments (30) than Hunter – in his 15th year (12). However, the important aspect is not the number of offerings, rather it is what their proposed legislation contained.
For Thompson, he went right after term limits. He sponsored the joint resolution calling for a Constitutional Amendment and he offered up about a dozen amendments to his own bill on the language of this Senate resolution. I shall assume he ran his campaign for the senate seat promising he’d move this legislation, and he certainly gave it a good faith effort. In addition, he sponsored bills to deregulate firearms transactions at gun shows, limit congressional raises, and to strengthen the budget oversight system in Congress. These all deserve conservative kudos (though I do not believe term limits to be a worthwhile endeavor).
However, the rest of his sponsored legislation ranges from “well, okay” to abysmal. S.1358 and S.1388, S.1991 and S.AMDT 2086 fall into the “well, OK” category, though it should be noted that he is attempting to name a building after his mentor, Howard Baker, a Rockefeller Republican. With S.AMDT.618, Thompson kicked off his career as a protector of the trial lawyer lobby. And S.1584 certainly does not reinforce his federalist reputation, assigning federal dollars to restore and renovate Tennessee’s black colleges. Also, S.3981 was Fred’s entry into prominence on Campaign Finance Reform (CFR), which is a subject of another day.
But the real stink bomb here is S.1952, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1996. It certainly has an impressive name. But this bill, written by Thompson, is a federal government boondoggle at its worst. First, the idea that the feds need to stick their noses into state business (juvenile crime) flies in the face of federalism. Second, it amends prior law and threatens to cut off state funds if they do not abide by this new law. A sampling:
`(b) ADMINISTRATOR- The Office shall be headed by an Administrator (hereafter in this title referred to as the `Administrator') who--
`(1) shall--
`(A) be a career appointee (as that term is defined in section 3132(a)(4) of title 5, United States Code) having experience in juvenile justice programs; and
`(B) report to the head of the Office of Justice Programs; and
`(2) may prescribe regulations consistent with his Act to award, administer, modify, extend, terminate, monitor, evaluate, reject, or deny all grants and contracts from, and applications for, funds made available under this title.';
And:
(a) IN GENERAL- In order to be eligible to receive formula grants under this part, each State shall--
`(1) ensure that not less than 75 percent of the funds made available to the State under section 222, whether expended directly by the State, by the unit of general local government, or by a combination thereof, or through grants and contracts with public or private nonprofit agencies, shall be used—
`(A) for prevention and nonincarcerative intervention, including drug and alcohol treatment activities, and programs that encourage courts to develop and implement a continuum of post-adjudication restraints that bridge the gap between probation and confinement in a correctional facility, including graduated sanctions for youth offenders; and
`(B) for implementing a system whereby every offender receives some sanction for every crime, except that such funds shall not be used on initiatives that the organization created by section 241 determines do not prevent or reduce youth violence;
`(2) provide for records to be kept by recipients of funds made available to the State under section 222 sufficient for the organization created by section 241 to monitor whether the use of said funds has prevented or reduced youth violence;
`(3) ensure that juveniles who are charged with or who have committed offenses that would not be criminal if committed by an adult (other than an offense that constitutes a violation of a valid court order or a violation of section 922(x) of title 18, United States Code, or a similar State law), or alien juveniles in custody, or such nonoffenders as dependent or neglected children, shall not be placed in secure detention facilities or secure correctional facilities, except that the juvenile or family court may detain, after a hearing, in a secure detention facility for a limited period of time, not to exceed 72 hours, a runaway, truant, or incorrigible youth, if the youth--
Fortunately, this turd died in the Senate. However, its death does not relieve Fred Thompson from the charge that he wanted to institute a social program for juveniles in lieu of strict punishment, and force states to swallow it. He took the time to write up this monstrosity instead of participating in the immigration debate that raged during this congress.
As for Duncan Hunter’s 104th Congressional record, his proposed bills, resolutions and amendments are typical for his career. He sponsored a joint resolution proclaiming that the US government’s policy must be Peace through Strength, something that everyone needed to be reminded of during the Clinton years. Three bills (H.R.s 482, 756, 1018) and one amendment (H.AMDT 1280) are direct assaults on the open borders and coddling of illegal immigrants already here. H.R. 482 attempts to cut of federal benefits from illegals, something Fred Thompson voted against during the Senate debates on immigration reform. H.R. 1658 is the genesis of the funds to build the successful San Diego border fence.
Two other Hunter bills are attempts to give tax cuts, one declaring tips as nontaxable income, and the other a credit for families with children or parents/grandparents living with them. He also goes after foreign corporations that set up operation to avoid US taxes, in his efforts to level the playing field for US employers. And finally, he attempted to weaken the onerous child labor laws that the federal government imposed.
Reviewing the voting records of both gentlemen on bills and legislation that they did not sponsor, it is most useful to concentrate on their votes where they did not follow party lines. In Thompson’s case, in 1995, he most often voted against the GOP and with the democrats on amendments to H.R. 956, the Product Liability Reform Act. He was indeed the trial lawyers’ best Republican friend in the Senate. And he famously voted against his party on the Exon amendment which cut off benefits to illegal aliens. In the 1996 session, Fred does have some money saving votes, for example, attempting to limit sugar subsidies and mental illness services, but he also bucked the GOP on slashing the funds for the Endangered Species Act (H.AMDT 3479) and he got busy with his CFR supporting votes, much to the chagrin of his colleagues, other than John McCain.
Hunter’s contrarian votes with the GOP have generally revolved around ‘free trade’. Or as he likes to frame it, ‘anti-sovereignty’. Hunter voted against creating the WTO in 1994. During the 104th Congress, Hunter voted against the term limits constitutional amendment and, more significantly, he voted in opposition to granting China Most Favored Nation status (H.J. RES 96), a position he holds to this day. Interestingly, Hunter also voted for the Product Liability Reform Act, which the majority GOP House members did not. And just as importantly, he voted against the GOP and the democrats when they approved the Omnibus appropriations for fiscal year 1996, calling it “pork laden”.
This comparison is certainly not complete. Both men generally supported the GOP positions, as outlined in the Contract With America. But it does provide a good view of the priorities that each man had in the 1995-1996 session. Different people can spin the significance of a particular vote to favor their candidate, but you cannot spin the overarching goals that Thompson and Hunter pursued in their careers. You will see those goals amplified in my forthcoming analysis of their records in subsequent Congresses.
But Duncan Hunter is unelectable. He has all the charisma of Potato Buds.
>>>S.1952, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1996.
The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prev. Act has similar results as Same-Sex Marriage. Fred Thompson is FOR giving the rights on Same - Sex Marriage to the STATES. THAT would mean the marriage wouldn’t be federally recognized. This would change the legal definitions of parental rights to ‘family rights’. Parents become stakeholders of their own children with the schools and states becoming primary guardians.
In Canada, the controversial law that brought about same-sex marriage quietly included the provision to erase the term “natural parent” across the board in federal law, replacing it with the term “legal parent.”
With that law, the power in defining who a child’s parents are shifts precipitously from civil society to the state.
In Spain, after the recent legalization of same-sex marriage the legislature changed the birth certificates for all children in that nation to read “Progenitor A” and
“Progenitor B” instead of “mother” and “father.” With that change, the words “mother” and “father” were struck from the first document issued to every newborn by the state.
Similar proposals have been made in other jurisdictions that have legalized same-sex marriage.
In New Zealand and Australia, influential law commissions have proposed allowing children conceived with use of sperm or egg donors to have three legal parents.
In the United States, courts often must determine who the legal parents are among the many adults who might be involved in planning, conceiving, birthing, and raising a child. Judges in several states have seized upon the idea of “psychological” parenthood to award legal parent status to adults who are not related to children by blood, adoption, or marriage. They have done so even over the objection of the child’s biological parent. Advances in the same-sex marriage debate have encouraged group marriage advocates who wish to break open the two-person understanding of marriage and parenthood.
The National Health Education Standards has gone further and envoked in loco parentis by redefining parents as families. Families have been classified as stakeholders. Children’s stakeholders are being identified as any entity that is seen as a resource in a child’s community.
http://www.nationalguidelines.org/guideline.cfm?guideNum=0-12
>>Schools often have insufficient resources to provide a comprehensive and multifaceted continuum of interventions. By having direct contact with families and key informants in the community, schools are better able to identify barriers to student success and well-being and better equipped to develop solutions that overcome these barriers. Schools can enhance home-school links by sharing concerns with families and developing solutions that address students’ unique needs.
In addition to the benefits for students’ education and well-being, students’ families, and school staff, there are reciprocal benefits for community agencies who partner with schools. Businesses, the justice system, community health and safety systems, and others may benefit from a healthier population. Community agencies and organizations that provide services to children and families often gain a more visible profile when they become partners with schools.
Examples of neighborhood stakeholders in student health and well-being are students themselves, as well as their families and teachers. Other school staff, community business owners, police, faith-based institutions, universities and colleges, local health departments, health and mental health service providers, dentists, emergency medical services, educators of first-aid, departments of health, justice, education and social services, and other agencies that serve families have stakes in the well-being of the student population and school staff. Communicate regularly with partners and potential partners in order to learn what each has to offer.<<
Substance over style, consistency, confidence and competency.
We are not confusing charisma, which is a personal quality, with name recognition, which is something granted by the MSM. I have met Hunter, talked with him, and listened to several of his speeches. He is not lacking in charisma
So, touche
He’s not going to win.
Any bets who will win?
Nor is Fred.
Not L.Ron or Duncan. Sorry.
Nobody cares.
bttt
Here's a good comparison.
While Duncan Hunter is a good cosnervative, he's proven himself to be a poor presidential candidate. Hunter`s 1%-3% of national support doesn't bode well for the future of his campaign.
Fred Thompson is also a good cosnervative and thus far, he's been doing very good. Fred is at 23% in the latest Rasmussen daily poll. Just a point back of Rooty. We conservatives asked Fred to run, because most of us didn't like the three alternative first tier choices. Now we'll see if Fred can sell himself to conservatives as the real deal. I like his chances.
They never have any real defense for Fred.
Touche on that one too.
At least you’re honest about when you’ve been had.
And what was it that had me?
Reality.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.