Maybe because he’s NOT a conservative? Look at his voting record (which he politely never mentions). It’s big government spending all the way, and he even gave his union buddies a break by voting AGAINST the right to work law.
RE: Look at his voting record (which he politely never mentions). It’s big government spending all the way,
ALL THE WAY? AS IN ALL THE TIME?
SOURCE: http://www.issues2000.org/senate/Rick_Santorum.htm
Rick Santorum on Budget & Economy
Voted YES on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005)
Voted YES on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on 1998 GOP budget. (May 1997)
Voted YES on Balanced-budget constitutional amendment. (Mar 1997)
_____________________________
Rick Santorum on Health Care
Voted YES on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000. (May 2006)
Voted NO on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006)
Voted NO on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted NO on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on increasing tobacco restrictions. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on Medicare means-testing. (Jun 1997)
Voted NO on blocking medical savings acounts. (Apr 1996)
Rated 0% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record. (Dec 2003)
As a Senator representing a state which had long opposed “right-to-work”, Santorum voted against a FEDERAL LAW that would force the state to adopt right-to-work against it’s own desires.
That would be a state’s rights argument.
He has said that, as President, he would sign such a bill, which is not a state’s rights argument. But his argument is that, as President, he represents the country, not Pa., so he would not be obligated to vote for the interests of the state he represented.
You can disagree with his reasoning of course. I over it to show that it wasn’t a love for unions, or opposition to right-to-work (which he pushed at the state level), that led to this vote, but a desire not to have the federal government force it’s will on his state which opposed that will, even while he personally supported right-to-work.
And since the federal budget expenditures increased every year Gingrich was speaker, it’s hard to argue that Gingrich was against big-government spending while Santorum was for it. The biggest big-government spending item Santorum voted for, the medicare prescription plan, only passed the house because Newt Gingrich was called in and personally twisted the arms of opponents to get them to vote for the bill. Santorum was an unneeded vote in the senate — Gingrich is the reason we have that law today.
I would expect both Gingrich and Santorum to sign any bill supported by conservatives in congress to cut spending, so I don’t see it as a big issue. They are both campaigning on cutting spending.