FINAL CAFTA VOTE ROLL CALL - How did your Congressman Vote?

CongressionalRecord ^

[Happy2BMe]

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 443(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)
      H R 3045      RECORDED VOTE      28-Jul-2005      12:03 AM
      QUESTION:  On Passage
      BILL TITLE: Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

	Ayes	Noes	PRES	NV
Republican	202	27		2
Democratic	15	187
Independent		1
TOTALS	217	215		2

---- AYES    217 ---

Aderholt Akin Alexander Bachus Baker Barrett (SC) Bartlett (MD) Barton (TX) Bass Bean Beauprez Biggert Bilirakis Bishop (UT) Blackburn Blunt Boehlert Boehner Bonilla Bonner Bono Boozman Bradley (NH) Brady (TX) Brown (SC) Brown-Waite, Ginny Burgess Burton (IN) Buyer Calvert Camp Cannon Cantor Carter Castle Chabot Chocola Cole (OK) Conaway Cooper Cox Crenshaw Cuellar Culberson Cunningham Davis (KY) Davis, Tom Deal (GA) DeLay Dent Diaz-Balart, L. Diaz-Balart, M. Dicks Doolittle Drake Dreier Duncan Ehlers Emerson English (PA) Everett Feeney Ferguson Fitzpatrick (PA) Flake Foley Forbes Fortenberry Fossella Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Gallegly Gerlach

Gibbons Gilchrest Gillmor Gingrey Gohmert Goodlatte Granger Graves Green (WI) Hall Harris Hart Hastert Hastings (WA) Hayes Hayworth Hefley Hensarling Herger Hinojosa Hobson Hoekstra Hulshof Hyde Inglis (SC) Issa Istook Jefferson Jenkins Johnson (CT) Johnson (IL) Johnson, Sam Keller Kelly Kennedy (MN) King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kirk Kline Knollenberg Kolbe Kuhl (NY) LaHood Latham LaTourette Leach Lewis (CA) Lewis (KY) Linder Lucas Lungren, Daniel E. Manzullo Marchant Matheson McCaul (TX) McCrery McKeon McMorris Meeks (NY) Mica Miller (FL) Miller, Gary Moore (KS) Moran (KS) Moran (VA) Murphy Musgrave Myrick Neugebauer Northup Nunes Nussle

Ortiz Osborne Oxley Pearce Pence Peterson (PA) Petri Pickering Pitts Platts Poe Pombo Porter Price (GA) Pryce (OH) Putnam Radanovich Ramstad Regula Reichert Renzi Reynolds Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Ros-Lehtinen Royce Ryan (WI) Ryun (KS) Saxton Schwarz (MI) Sensenbrenner Sessions Shadegg Shaw Shays Sherwood Shimkus Shuster Skelton Smith (TX) Snyder Sodrel Souder Stearns Sullivan Sweeney Tanner Terry Thomas Thornberry Tiahrt Tiberi Towns Turner Upton Walden (OR) Walsh Wamp Weldon (FL) Weldon (PA) Weller Westmoreland Whitfield Wicker Wilson (NM) Wilson (SC) Wolf Young (AK) Young (FL)

---- NOES    215 ---

Abercrombie Ackerman Allen Andrews Baca Baird Baldwin Barrow Becerra Berkley Berman Berry Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Blumenauer Boren Boswell Boucher Boustany Boyd Brady (PA) Brown (OH) Brown, Corrine Butterfield Capito Capps Capuano Cardin Cardoza Carnahan Carson Case Chandler Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Conyers Costa Costello Cramer Crowley Cubin Cummings Davis (AL) Davis (CA) Davis (FL) Davis (IL) Davis (TN) DeFazio DeGette Delahunt DeLauro Dingell Doggett Doyle Edwards Emanuel Engel Eshoo Etheridge Evans Farr Fattah Filner Ford Foxx Frank (MA) Garrett (NJ) Gonzalez Goode Gordon

Green, Al Green, Gene Grijalva Gutierrez Gutknecht Harman Hastings (FL) Herseth Higgins Hinchey Holden Holt Honda Hooley Hostettler Hoyer Hunter Inslee Israel Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Jindal Johnson, E. B. Jones (NC) Jones (OH) Kanjorski Kaptur Kennedy (RI) Kildee Kilpatrick (MI) Kind Kucinich Langevin Lantos Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lee Levin Lewis (GA) Lipinski LoBiondo Lofgren, Zoe Lowey Lynch Mack Maloney Markey Marshall Matsui McCarthy McCollum (MN) McCotter McDermott McGovern McHenry McHugh McIntyre McKinney McNulty Meehan Meek (FL) Melancon Menendez Michaud Millender-McDonald Miller (MI) Miller (NC) Miller, George Mollohan Moore (WI) Murtha Nadler

Napolitano Neal (MA) Ney Norwood Oberstar Obey Olver Otter Owens Pallone Pascrell Pastor Paul Payne Pelosi Peterson (MN) Pomeroy Price (NC) Rahall Rangel Rehberg Reyes Ross Rothman Roybal-Allard Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Sabo Salazar Sánchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanders Schakowsky Schiff Schwartz (PA) Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Serrano Sherman Simmons Simpson Slaughter Smith (NJ) Smith (WA) Solis Spratt Stark Strickland Stupak Tancredo Tauscher Taylor (MS) Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Tierney Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Van Hollen Velázquez Visclosky Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Wexler Woolsey Wu Wynn

---- NOT VOTING    2 ---

Davis, Jo Ann

Taylor (NC)

---

[PhilDragoo]

From your 281 above:

Everyone wants to be a millionaire, but nobody is willing to pay the price of products or services made by millionaires. This is why so many of our jobs have been moved overseas, and why so many jobs right here in the U.S. are filled by illegal immigrants. We simply don't want to pay "American" prices for the products and services we use every day, but we insist on believing that we can charge "American" prices for the products and services we produce every day. That's really all there is to it, and as long as we insist on maintaining this illusion of affluence we are going to be facing the same recurring dilemma.

And from your 299 above:

By the mid 1980s many U.S. consumers were willing to pay more for a Japanese car than for an American one -- simply because by that time the quality of the Japanese car was far superior.

In 1983 our company built a home for Mort Myerson partner of Ross Perot which was used as a retreat for EDS officers as well.

The stone mason a grand character named John who was featured on a "This Old House" episode needed a new truck.

He returned to the site with a Toyota flatbed (the cabinet guy from Boston had a Datsun flatbed) which brought on the attack by four carpenters from Dallas Fort Worth who'd finished the airport tower there and bled union.

John replied, "Why should I pay a guy in Detroit forty dollars an hour?"

I stayed out of it, happy with my 57 Chevy stepside, but John's comment was apparently amplified judging by market trends since that time.

Roger Hedgecock filling in for Rush favored the passage of CAFTA; no caller could enunciate a cogent argument against it.

Roger explained it has strategic value as a counter to Chinese influence in the hemisphere noticeably with Venezuela, but Brazil, Cuba and elsewhere as well.

New Mexico's Republicans Steve Pearce and Heather Wilson voted Yes; Democrat Tom Udall voted No.

Udall represents the sanctuary city Santa Fe whose city council resolved noncooperation with the former INS, now CIS.

[Alberta's Child]

That's an excellent post. Where on the curve do you think we are right now?

[Alberta's Child]

Here's the irony of that story about the stone mason in Texas who bought a new Toyota truck . . .

If he were to go out 18 months from now and buy a 2007 Toyota truck, there's a good chance that the thing will be built in the brand-new $800 million manufacturing facility that Toyota is building in San Antonio, Texas.

[MonitorMaid]

TANCREDO '08!!!

You bet!

[DTogo]

Nice tagline!

[Past Your Eyes]

Mine voted for it (Bass). I didn't much care one way or the other but I'm generally a free trader. But Bass is really a weenie RINO. He's soft as a sneaker full of marshmallows on lots of things that are much more important than CAFTA, particularly LIFE:(

[Dat Mon]

Hmmmmm...tough call! Its even more complicated than I suggested...I didnt want the inital post to get too far out of hand.

First problem is getting the right statistics or metrics to measure real wealth of an American family....one possible measure may be rate of savings or asset to liability ratio.

Second problem is the fact that cause and effect may lag each other in time. An increase in outsourcing may not show up as a change in wealth until a couple years later.

Third problem is that there may be different curves for different economic and career brackets. One of my gut instincts is that the curves for different income levels diverge as you increase the level of outsourcing. For example...lawyers or financial consultants would be the last group affected...factory workers the first group.

This problem is at a level suitable for a PHD thesis in economics. My point is that the economics may not be as simple as some proponents or opponents of free trade believe.

Go ahead....take your best guess guys.

[billbears]

Which is why he's teamed up with Dennis Kucinich on the Iraq war.

Well as I've pointed out to you before, even a stopped clock is right twice a day..Ron Paul is of the Old Right, a limited government conservative. I know those views are foreign to the Republican party faithful but it's what most used to call a conservative

[ohioWfan]

Yes. Dennis Kucinich fits perfectly into the 'old conservative' mold. (Do you still have his bumper sticker on your car? ;)

I like your definition of 'old conservative,' though. It's what most of us around here call 'new liberal'.....

[billbears]

So again I ask. You would call George Washington a liberal? John Adams a liberal? James Madison and Thomas Jefferson liberals? Why I thank you. That's pretty good company to be in. These men, as much as Republicans invoke their names without reading their words, would not continue a war (sorry it's no longer a 'war' is it, it's GSAVE) to 'spread democracy' as they recognized it is not our business to determine what form of government other nations choose.

Yes, they may have worked to influence other governments to choose a republican form of government but not to the point that Republicans gleefully desire 'regime change' worldwide. No the first President that did that on a grand scale was Woodrow Wilson. Hmmm, which company would I as a conservative choose to keep? Wilson and FDR, or the Framers? I see you've made your choice gladly

[ohioWfan]

So, even though terrorists are plotting to kill and mame Americans both in the United States and abroad, and have waged war upon us and attacked us on our own soil, you believe that the President and the Congress do not have the Constitutional power to 'define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations?' (remember that the Congress approved the military action against the regime of Iraq, well within their Constitutional bounds).

They have the Constitutional duty to protect us, and the Commander in Chief is acting within his Constitutional authority.

btw, it is the Iraqis who are creating their own democracy (although here again, you are in perfect alignment with leftists if you see us as Imperialist occupiers imposing democracy on the poor Iraqis who just wanted to be left alone and brutalized by Saddam.....), and we are protecting them while they build it.

You, once again, see only one half of the equation, and presume your own views on what the Founders would have done.

I make my choice gladly that President Washington, if faced with the same decision about how to protect American citizens against attacks on our soil, would have made the same choice as the 43rd President has made.

[PhilDragoo]

Indeed. The Japanese menace has become part of the economy; Godzilla pulled up a chair and said pass the mashed potatoes.

A friend graduated USNA, did computers for the Navy, did computers for Toyota Motor Corporation USA, now does consulting, remarked favorably on TMC's culture, just didn't want to leave CA for OH.

A brother was a vice president for Ford which has been using international plants for quite some time.

The market will determine business decisions and the less government interference the better.

NM Governor Richardson was in Japan last week talking to twenty companies to come take advantage of incentives, space and the highest concentration of technology, PhDs, etc.

[billbears]

So, even though terrorists are plotting to kill and mame Americans both in the United States and abroad, and have waged war upon us and attacked us on our own soil

Ah, so now we're striking those who are plotting. Mind you they haven't acted but they're 'plotting'. Pre-emptive strikes were not the standard in the past. I could discuss the concept of 'just war' with you but I think you would ignore it in your support of Republican talking points (that's not an insult, just an observation). By your argument, we may as well attack China and half of Africa next year as I imagine they're 'plotting' too...

As for citizens traveling abroad, you're using the one of the same arguments Wilson used to help get us into WWI. You travel outside the borders of this nation of states, you have made a willful choice to remove yourself from protection by the Armed Forces. Wilson's view was wrong then and it's still wrong today

you believe that the President and the Congress do not have the Constitutional power to 'define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations?' (remember that the Congress approved the military action against the regime of Iraq, well within their Constitutional bounds).

Please provide the declaration of war as passed by Congress. Not an open-ended passage of power to the President but one that specifically named the enemy and the scope of the war. The only possible foe in this 'war' would have been Afghanistan, whose 'democracy' BTW you don't hear a lot about lately (wonder why that is....)

Also considering the administration has dropped the 'war on terror' phrase in place of GSAVE, the administration has all but admitted this was not an official war as outlined in Article I, Section 8. Contrary to Republican talking points, the purpose of war as seen by the Framers (again according to their words) was defense only, not 'spreading democracy', not focusing on violence in other nations, not pie in the sky ideals, but defense of the borders of this nation of states

btw, it is the Iraqis who are creating their own democracy (although here again, you are in perfect alignment with leftists if you see us as Imperialist occupiers imposing democracy on the poor Iraqis who just wanted to be left alone and brutalized by Saddam.....), and we are protecting them while they build it.

The Iraqis could only have began to create a democracy (although our own Framers warned against democracies) after the removal of Hussein. In effect, our actions directly brought about the change. Something the Framers again would not have desired. And you would be hard pressed to find an argument for our intervention to help in any form for establishment of a republic anywhere in the world.

You, once again, see only one half of the equation, and presume your own views on what the Founders would have done.

No, not my 'own views' but their own words

[ohioWfan]

(that's not an insult, just an observation).

No more conversation, bill. (I stopped reading at this line).

I have analyzed the War in Iraq deeply from the philosophical and theological standpoint of a just war, and determined that it met the criteria required. I have investigated it from the standpoint of whether there was adequate evidence that Saddam was connected with terror and provided a threat to our safety (with or without WMD).

And I did so well before March of 2003 when Iraqi Freedom began.

Your constant insults about my thought process and ability to think for myself (calling them 'observations' reveals an even deeper condescension on your part), are sickening, and for me to continue a discussion with your pre-set condescension would be unwise.

I know you have well thought out reasons for your position......even though I think they are wrong, and I believe history will prove me to be right and not you. But deep down inside, you really do think anyone who supports the war in Iraq is a non-thinking fool, and that, sir, is absolutely disgusting.

You probably know that my son spent 15 months of his young life helping defend this country from terror, and if you don't think I thought deeply about whether or not this was a just war, you are an idiot. It doesn't matter if 40% of the country doesn't understand why we are there (your extremist colleages, and the democrats), because the truth is, that Iraq was a viper's nest of brutality and terror; a brutal dictatorship that is now gone. And it needed to be done to PROTECT the American people from those who want us dead.

And that was a determination I made based on investigation of facts before he was deployed. The idea that I blindly follow RNC talking points is so derogatory that it's nauseating. It would be like my actually believing that you look to Dennis Kucinich for your views on the war, just because you agree with him. It would be patently absurd, wouldn't it? But you assume because I agree with the administration, that I haven't thought it through. Arrogance. Just plain arrogance.

If Nazi Germany had been taken out before they invaded and attacked most of Europe, thousands upon thousands of innocents and brave American soldiers would not have died. That's what has happened in Iraq. Because it was pre-emptive, the potential deaths were prevented.

And as one who loves America, and knows that God loves all the people of the world, I happen to believe that it's a good thing to save lives.

This war on terror is far from over, but at least we have a President and Commander in Chief who is fighting, and doing his Constitutional duty to defend the country that he leads.

Praise GOD that a weak, isolationist (the kind of President you would support) has NO chance to win the Presidency. This country would not survive.

That's all I'm going to say on this for now. It is off topic for the subject of this thread, and since you are not capable of responding without insults, please don't.

[ohioWfan]

btw, when you get a moment, go back to that other thread where you made that strange accusation about someone else's insulting your ancestry, and explain it to me, please?

I found it very odd based on what had been said to you......

[billbears]

you really do think anyone who supports the war in Iraq is a non-thinking fool, and that, sir, is absolutely disgusting.

Now wait a minute, I don't think that at all. I believe a lot of people that support the war support it based on the ideal of 'America'. Or at least the ideal they were brought up to believe in. This doesn't make you non-thinking at all. I see it as an attitude that was taught back in schools prior to the 1970s. Now some went on to instill that same view within their children, some didn't. God knows my parents tried. It didn't stick. The faith they taught me did, but faith in government and government actions went right out the window. Doesn't make me 'anti-American'. It may make me anti-establishment, but heck what else would you expect from a libertarian?

I do hope you are right that somehow something good could come out of Iraq. However my gut, and history of the region, tells me we may not always get what we want.

[ohioWfan]

Now wait a minute, I don't think that at all.

Then why do you continue to accuse anyone who supports the war as blindly following RNC talking points? Try to be consistent here, bill.

As for the 'ideal of America'........I believe in it. I believe in American 'exceptionalism'.......that for some reason, by God's grace alone, we have been allowed to liberate millions upon millions of oppressed people over the world, and stand as a beacon of freedom in a dark world.

I was in elementary school in small town America in the 1950's, and raised in a family that loved America. I went through the dark '60's where I observed the attack of the left on the country I loved (that continues to this day), and went through the floor when a man I had worked to elect, Richard Nixon, stupidly got himself involved in covering up a silly crime. I watched the country go deeper and deeper into darkness with the administration of Jimmy Carter, and saw the sun rise again with Ronald Reagan, only to watch it nearly all come to an end because the corruption and debauchery of Bill Clinton. And in George W. Bush, I saw a hope that the country I had grown up in was still there.

I LOVE this country, and I am not ashamed of that fact. We have had horrible sins in our past........slavery and racism, and attempted genocide of Indians........and now we have the horrible sin of the slaughter of millions of pre-born babies.

This is not a perfect country. This is not a perfect administration. But it is a country that seeks to be good (because of the wisdom, foresight and GOODness of our Founders), and we have a President who seeks wisdom from God, and acts accordingly.

I trust him. I trust the wise people he has chosen to join him in leadership. If it comes to believing what Rumsfeld says, and the NY Times, I'll pick Rumsfeld every time.

The difference between you and me, is that you'll believe the Times first because of your distrust of all government, and that's why we will never agree about this war.

Thanks for being one of the only......maybe THE only rightist on this forum, who is not rude and mean (even though you are frequently condescending). You are an anomoly among those with your libertarian ideology.

[VictoryGal]

Works for me...!

Mr. President, now that you've got the wage-lowering CAFTA snugly in place, how about we enforce our border laws now please?

::crickets::

[sheltonmac]

The difference between you and me, is that you'll believe the Times first because of your distrust of all government, and that's why we will never agree about this war.

The biggest difference between the Times and the federal government is that the Times doesn't have control over the lives of hundreds of millions of people. The Times is incapable of taking my liberty or sending people off to kill and die in a foreign country.

A distrust of government is healthy. It was a distrust of all government that drove the Founding Fathers to design the kind of government they did.

[ohioWfan]

So............you're putting the NY Times and the Bush administration at the same level in terms of trustworthiness and honesty?

The NY Times is known to print blatant lies. And you are saying that while both are guilty of lying, the Bush administration is actually WORSE, because they are killing people with their lies, and taking away our freedom?

Please clarify what you are saying, because I can't believe you really mean what you seem to be saying....

(And if you do, then those of you on the far right are literally NO different than extreme leftists).