.....
A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
Bad post Soul.
Several points.
A)Screw what they may think, they're wrong. Most of them don't think at all or else they wouldn't vote heavily democrat. Harsh? True. Sheeple need conservative representatives to protect them from their own MSM fueled ignorance.
B)It's most certainly NOT in their "interest" that this passes. This bill would lead to heath care rationing for the poor. Only the insurance companies that own the DNC benefit from this.
C)Most of the 49% of people in the low turnout election that actually voted for Cao likely do not support this and are not happy with this vote.
D)He's not going to win reelection anyway. If he did it wouldn't be by voting identically to a democrat. Urban voters need an alternative to liberalism. Me to RINOism is pointless and will never succeed in electing Republicans in heavily rat areas.
Now it's possible several rat nay votes here were "catch and release" meaning if Pelosi had needed their votes she would have gotten them.
Assuming there were none (which is likely not true, perhaps Cao was catch and release for the GOP side) then we failed stopping this by 3 votes.
1 lost NY special election (the rat that succeeded Gillibrand voted nay, the newly elected Owens voted yay), 1 stolen Ohio seat in 2008 and 1 Cao. Or alternatively 1 Rosanna Pulido, David Harmer, and Betty Chu away (more lost special elections all in dem districts, only Harmer got major support and it was too little too late). Boo. GOP allowed the rats to steal a few too many seats.
Also if Cao votes “his district’s preference” on everything that means he’d have to vote for Pelosi as Speaker.
Impy’s points are all good ones. The most important one from a practical, selfish perspective, which is the reason Cao voted as he did, is that a rep should vote thinking of the voters he’ll face the next election, not the time before. Cao has no chance of winning reelection in that district (unless somehow William Jefferson wins tge Democrat nomination from prison, and even then Cao may lose), and his next real race, assuming tgat he wishes to stay in politics, will be before much more conservative voters.
Look at it this way: Democrat Congressman Artur Davis represents a black-majority district in Alabama, and has until recently had a reflexively liberal voting record, but Davis voted for Stupak-Pitts and against passage of Obamacare despite being from a district very similar demographically to Cao’s. Why was that? Because Davis is running for governor, and voting like a typical urban liberal would make him unelectable statewide.
Cao supporting Obamacare won’t increase his odds of reelection in the LA-02 at all and kill any chance he had of being elected statewide.
I believe Nazi P had the votes or she would not have risked the bill. Despise tho I do, she does know how to play the game.
Cao lets them crow that it was “bipartisan”, because the stupid among us don’t bother to do more than scan headlines. If he is going to vote with the dumbles, it doesn’t matter one whit that ooooo, he is a wepublican.
I am disgusted.
I’m willing to cut him some slack on most votes, but this was a make-or-break vote for our nation’s history.
However, Impy's also right that if Cao voted “his district’s preference” on everything that means he’d have to vote for Pelosi as Speaker. I don't know his ACU rating since it's his first year in office, but I'd say it's close to 65% conservative as compared to Kirk's 40%. I would certainly guess Cao's overall record is to the right of the "average" voter in his district.
Cao had been saying for weeks that although his constituents want universal health care, he can't in good conscience vote for any legislation that would fund abortion. The Catholic church applauded him for that. Then the Stupak amendment passed, and it gave pro-life Democrats and Cao "cover" to vote for this bill like their liberal constituents demanded. The thing to watch for is whether abortion funding gets put back into the bill during conference committee (that's assuming the Senate passes the bill anyway, though Joe LIEberman and Lindsey Graham say it will never make it thur the Senate). If the bill comes back the House with the Senate version, Cao and the pro-life Dems will have to vote against.
Personally if I was in Cao's shoes and represented a super liberal moonbat district that always elects commies, I don't think I'd support universal health care but I'd probably lay low during major legislation up for a vote during my freshman term (this bill would be a good excuse to be on a "fact finding" mission about "AIDS relief"). If he somehow managed to survive re-election, he probably won't be secure in Congress enough to vocally oppose his constituency on major bills until 3 or 4 terms into office. Bottom line is every time he puts his neck out there for the GOP he's giving his RAT oppositon ammo to use against him in the next election.
Bottom line is yes, cowardly act by Cao, but he's still 10X better than a full fledged moonbat in that district and as the Republican represented the most lopsided district in the country (no Republican has won that seat since the 1870s!) I understand the problems he has dealing with a moonbat constituency constantly attacking him.
In 2010, a Repbulican should be able to defeat Congresswoman Melissa Bean, of Illinois’ 8th District. Phil Crane, a conservative, had that seat for 35 years. The majority of the state legislators, in that district, are Republicans.