153 Republicans Voted to curtail debate on Spending Bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll085.xml ^

[cc2k]

For the past week, I've been posting about the "Omnibus Spending Bill" that the Dems have rammed through the congress. This $410 billion monster is for Fiscal Year 2009. They refused to do their job while Bush was in office and passed a continuing resolution last year to run the government until March 6. Now, they want big increases (even bigger than Bush would have approved), and they will get them with Obama's signature.

Minority leader Boehner has been sounding the alarm on this since Februrary 5th. He was calling on the Dems to publish the bill so Republicans could read it, and so that it could be made available on the Internet. He was trying to expose their plan to pass this in secrecy.

Why then, did Boehner vote to limit debate on this bill to only one hour?

Even if your Congress critter did well and voted against the bill, if they voted to keep debate to just one hour, that was a bad call. These 153 Republicans voted to keep the public in the dark and rush this bill to a final vote. That's shameful.

If your representative is one of the "Yeas" above, you should contact them and ask them why they thought a $410 Billion spending bill for an entire fiscal year was so trivial that it should only be debated for a single hour. And why they voted to proceed with the final vote less than a day after the bill was shown to the public.

---

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 85

(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined)

      H RES 184      YEA-AND-NAY      25-Feb-2009      2:09 PM
      QUESTION:  On Agreeing to the Resolution
      BILL TITLE: Providing for consideration of H.R. 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations for 2009

	Yeas	Nays	PRES	NV
Democratic	245	3		5
Republican	153	21		4
Independent
TOTALS	398	24		9

---- YEAS    398 ---

Abercrombie Ackerman Aderholt Adler (NJ) Akin Alexander Altmire Andrews Arcuri Austria Baca Bachmann Bachus Baird Baldwin Barrett (SC) Barrow Bartlett Bean Becerra Berkley Berman Berry Biggert Bilbray Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Blackburn Blumenauer Boccieri Boehner Bonner Bono Mack Boozman Boren Boswell Boucher Boustany Boyd Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Bright Brown (SC) Brown, Corrine Brown-Waite, Ginny Buchanan Burton (IN) Butterfield Buyer Calvert Camp Cantor Cao Capito Capps Capuano Cardoza Carnahan Carney Carson (IN) Carter Castle Castor (FL) Chaffetz Chandler Childers Clarke Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman (CO) Cohen Cole Conaway Connolly (VA) Conyers Cooper Costa Costello Courtney Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Dahlkemper Davis (AL) Davis (CA) Davis (KY) Davis (TN) DeFazio DeGette Delahunt DeLauro Dent Diaz-Balart, L. Diaz-Balart, M. Dicks Dingell Doggett Donnelly (IN) Doyle Dreier Driehaus Duncan Edwards (MD) Edwards (TX) Ellison Ellsworth Emerson Engel Eshoo Etheridge Fallin Farr Fattah Filner Fleming Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frank (MA) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gallegly Garrett (NJ) Gerlach Giffords

Gohmert Gonzalez Goodlatte Gordon (TN) Granger Graves Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffith Grijalva Guthrie Gutierrez Hall (NY) Hall (TX) Halvorson Hare Harman Harper Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heinrich Heller Hensarling Herger Herseth Sandlin Higgins Hill Himes Hinchey Hinojosa Hirono Hodes Hoekstra Holden Holt Honda Hoyer Hunter Inglis Inslee Israel Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (IL) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jones Kagen Kanjorski Kaptur Kennedy Kildee Kilpatrick (MI) Kilroy Kind King (NY) Kirk Kirkpatrick (AZ) Kissell Klein (FL) Kline (MN) Kosmas Kratovil Lance Langevin Larsen (WA) Latham LaTourette Latta Lee (CA) Lee (NY) Levin Lewis (GA) Linder Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren, Zoe Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Luján Lummis Lungren, Daniel E. Lynch Mack Maffei Maloney Manzullo Marchant Markey (CO) Markey (MA) Marshall Massa Matheson Matsui McCarthy (CA) McCarthy (NY) McCaul McClintock McCollum McCotter McDermott McGovern McHenry McHugh McIntyre McKeon McMahon McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meek (FL) Meeks (NY) Melancon Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller (NC) Miller, George Minnick Mitchell Mollohan Moore (KS) Moore (WI) Moran (KS) Moran (VA) Murphy (CT) Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Tim

Murtha Myrick Nadler (NY) Napolitano Neal (MA) Neugebauer Nunes Nye Oberstar Obey Olson Olver Ortiz Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pence Perlmutter Peters Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pitts Poe (TX) Polis (CO) Pomeroy Posey Price (NC) Putnam Radanovich Rahall Rangel Rehberg Reichert Reyes Richardson Rodriguez Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothman (NJ) Roybal-Allard Royce Ruppersberger Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salazar Sánchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schauer Schiff Schmidt Schock Schrader Schwartz Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Sensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sestak Shadegg Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Sires Skelton Slaughter Smith (NE) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Snyder Souder Space Speier Spratt Stearns Sullivan Sutton Tanner Tauscher Taylor Teague Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiahrt Tiberi Tierney Titus Tonko Towns Tsongas Turner Upton Van Hollen Velázquez Visclosky Walden Walz Wamp Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Welch Wexler Whitfield Wilson (OH) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Woolsey Wu Yarmuth Young (AK) Young (FL)

---- NAYS    24 ---

Barton (TX) Blunt Broun (GA) Burgess Deal (GA) Ehlers Flake Franks (AZ)

Gingrey (GA) Issa Jordan (OH) King (IA) Kingston Kucinich Lamborn Lewis (CA)

Paul Price (GA) Rohrabacher Shuler Simpson Smith (NJ) Stupak Westmoreland

---- NOT VOTING    9 ---

Campbell Cassidy Davis (IL)

Larson (CT) Miller, Gary Perriello

Platts Rush Stark

---

Here's what the vote was about:

The text of H.Res 184:

House Calendar No. 12

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 184

[Report No. 111-20]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1105) making omnibus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 24, 2009

Mr. MCGOVERN, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

---

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1105) making omnibus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1105) making omnibus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Sec. 2. House Resolution 158 is laid on the table.

House Calendar No. 12

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 184

[Report No. 111-20]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1105) making omnibus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

[cc2k]

I'm very proud that my representative was one of the few that voted against this resolution for secrecy. And I'm sending him a big thank you note today.

[Gondring]

Dang obstructionist Roon Paul....voting against this....

[Future Snake Eater]

Well, the faster we pass these bills, the faster we’ll bankrupt the country, the faster we can get on with the next phase of America.

[shoutingandpointing]

Goodlatte voted “Yea?” The man who represents the citizens of the valley of the “I'm Voting for the Chick!” signs?

Speechless.

[Old Sarge]

Does anyone doubt any longer that we are a one-party government, and that conservatives have been marginalized?

[misterrob]

Maybe some had their earmarks in the bill, maybe some wanted the Dems to get their bill so they could go out and campaign against it. They can’t filibuster it so I don’t see what the issue is here.

[pleikumud]

Nowhere can I find exactly what the $410,000,000,000 is for. What will it be spent on? Anyone have specifics? 10% for Medicaid? 5% for the new Komsomol University? $1 billion for Acorn?

[dawn53]

I guarantee that with 9000 earmarks, not all are going to the Dems. Republicans are complicit, that’s the answer to his question.

[FarRightFanatic]

Michelle Bachmann voted YEA on this????

[HighlyOpinionated]

Where is Georgia’s Nathan Deal? Don’t see him voting at all.

I surely HOPE that the Republicans have a plan to CHANGE how this goes down.

2 things that ‘we’ did incorrectly . . . allow Congress to vote for its own raises and . . . allow Congress to vote for its own raises.

[SumProVita]

So did Marsha Blackburn!!! Grrrrr.....

[kellynla]

I give up...we support & elect Republicans to office and this is what they do?

I guess my father was right...”If a politician’s mouth is moving, he's lying.”

[cc2k]

pleikumud wrote:

Nowhere can I find exactly what the $410,000,000,000 is for. What will it be spent on? Anyone have specifics? 10% for Medicaid? 5% for the new Komsomol University? $1 billion for Acorn?

This bill is all the spending for Fiscal Year 2009. Rather than pass any actual appropriations bills last year, the Dems in Congress passed a "continuing resolution" in September to fund the federal government through March 6, 2009 at fiscal year 2008 levels. They thought Bush might veto their spending increases, and they knew they could run out the clock and kick this down the field to Obama (or maybe McCain).

I posted links to the actual bill on the thread "H.R.1105, Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Introduced in House)."

The bill itself is in legis-speak, and difficult to read. Go to the "Explanatory Statements" (links at post 7 on that thread) you will find more a more readable summary. The earmarks are all listed in the explanatory statements, and it shows the increases or decreases for the budget.

[Carry_Okie]

Tom is a yea? WTF? Already?

I want answers.

[xzins]

Republicans are no friends of conservatives. I’ve learned that over the last 6 years.

They vote for big spending when they’re in power and pretend to be against it when out of power.

It’s simply a way of building a power base to them.

I’ve left the pubbies for good. They are absolutely untrustworthy.

[cc2k]

HighlyOpinionated wrote:

Where is Georgia’s Nathan Deal? Don’t see him voting at all.

He's in the Nays. He's my congressman as well.

The ones that voted against limiting the debate to a single hour were: Barton (TX), Blunt, Broun (GA), Burgess, Deal (GA,) Ehlers, Flake, Franks (AZ), Gingrey (GA), Issa, Jordan (OH), King (IA), Kingston, Kucinich, Lamborn, Lewis (CA), Paul, Price (GA), Rohrabacher, Shuler, Simpson, Smith (NJ), Stupak and Westmoreland.

I can't explain Kucinich on there. What was he thinking? Or does he really believe in transparency and openness?

[Joe 6-pack]

Kucinich is nutty as a fruitcake...no debaqte there, but I think he at least believes in transparency. In fact, he’s probably no more insane than many on the left, but simply makes no attempts to conceal it.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

And not one peep from the media on Chairman MAObama’s complete lack of open debate and transparency that he said would be the very core of his administration.

I guess he has quickly learned that you get your agenda passed much faster when you lie, cheat and steal. And the brain dead public is completely ignorant about how this country is being ripped apart from the inside out.

[pappyone]

I agree, and would love to see a real third party. Only problem is it would probably attract too many nuts like me and you.
he he
SFC/USA/RET

[redk]

I thought for sure Bachmann would vote no to something like this.