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.
Sorry, without a miraculous intervention, Hunter doesn’t stand a chance.
And the only bandwagon I might jump on in the near future is the Fred Thompson expresstrain to the White House. You might consider the same before too long.
Well thanks. He needed a good showing.
It irritated me listening to Hugh Hewitt afterwards congratulating him, then pondering who his supporters would move to “when” he dropped out. Grrrrr.
Correction: Without hard work and volunteers and being the most solid man running, he wouldn’t stand a chance.
Only Hunter will confront China. Only Hunter scares the mullahs. Only Hunter will stop illegal immigration cold. And Only Hunter has the experience and knowledge to be CIC. That’s good enough for me.
Pure sophistry. ;^)
Perhaps. He’s got the 1st and 3rd points down. Just needs a few thousand more volunteers. Fortunately, he’s been starting to get them.
Madison does a great job of cutting through the spin and getting at the truth. You know I thought all this time, we, the people got to choose our nominee for POTUS. It seems it’s no longer “we, the people” but “they, the polls”.
I have seen taunts about polls yet no refutation or rebuttal of the facts Mr. Madison so eloquently presented. Instead, it’s the same old browbeating Hunter with poll numbers and conjecture about electability that the Rudy supporters utilized so readily.
When did conservatives become so enamored with polls? Why are we so willing to compromise our principles for poll numbers and empty promises? When did we become so easily seduced by spin and double-speak? When did we become spin doctors for trial lawyers and lobbyists? Do we understand that when we condemn Edwards yet spin for another we come off as hypocrites?
When did we abandon Ronald Reagan for Howard Baker? Why are we so willing to, once again, trust what someone says while discounting what another has done? Perhaps I will get some answers tonight during the debates, but I don’t watch O’really or Leno, so many questions, will go unanswered.
Well, it certainly won’t be aboard the FRaudhead Express to Leno’s couch.
>Sorry, without a miraculous intervention, Hunter doesn’t stand a chance.<
:) I am expecting one any day now. Patience is a virtue.
He already is “somewhere” nationally, unless you think only the name recognition polls are the barometer. Hunter has the best record. He has the strongest message. He is the clearest and most concise. He has more gravitas than anyone else running. He knows our military better than all of them combined, including McCain. He hasn’t had to backpedal and explain things away. And he is the only guy who will bitch slap the chicoms.
Sorry, there is simply no other choice.
If Hunter had the “best record” and the “strongest message”, he wouldn’t be at 1%-3% in the national polls.
Your infatuation for Hunter has destroyed your commonsense nature.
A candidate needs a steady flow of hard cash
Believe it or not, that steady flow is starting to build. You may not see it change from day to day, but there are those out there who are filling his bank account. I personally saw a MAJOR contribution go to him this past weekend. SO...put that in the bank.
Through the 2nd quarter, Hunter received $1.1 mil, compared to $2.2 mil for the man who finsihed just ahead of him, Tom Tancredo. That doesn’t look good.
Duncan Hunter is loaded with charisma - even Mark Levin said so. Hunter is energetic, down-to-earth, personable, presidential and did I say ENERGETIC!
Go Hunter!
FRaudheads certainly have their panties in a twist worrying about those “1%-ers”....He came out from behind Hannity’s skirt straight to Leno’s couch. The only difference between the Tennessee Spud and FLIP Romney is acting classes. Both require million-dollar media consultants to shape what they “believe”.
Hunter, on the other hand, can write his own speeches.
Not quite. You know darn well that if Hunter becomes ‘viable’ in your eyes, you will jump onto his team. I’m trying to give you that option.
I assume you realize that Mitt’s and Rudy’s records are that of liberals. McCain has way more negatives than positives. Tancredo is Hunter’s apprentice on immigration, but certainly not on military matters. Paul is Paul. Brownback is weak. Huckabee even weaker. That leaves Fred. If you want to argue Fred has better credentials and experience and vision than Hunter, fine. Argue that. But this “Hunter has no chance” stuff is boring me.
The thing about him announcing on Jay Leno is exactly like Swortsnayger all over again!!! DE JA VU, babies!!!
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.