Posted on 03/31/2017 9:47:25 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
Health Reform: For a week now, the conservative House Freedom Caucus has been taking hits for derailing the Republican effort to repeal and replace ObamaCare. But why are moderate/liberal Republicans who refused to support the bill getting a free pass?
The Freedom Caucus was the most vociferous in its opposition to the American Health Care Act — or at least its criticisms of the bill attracted the most attention.
The Wall Street Journal editorial page blamed the group, calling it the "Freedom-From-Reality Caucus." CNN reported that "its members … are Public Enemy No. 1 on Capitol Hill."
President Trump went so far as to tweet that "The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast. We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!"
The truth is that nobody knows for sure who would have voted against the bill — since House Speaker Paul Ryan pulled it from the floor before a vote was cast.
However, IBD examined two lists — compiled by NBC News and Heavy.com — of those who had publicly stated that they were leaning or definite "no" votes on the American Health Care Act. Combining the two lists, it adds up to 44 Republicans who could have cast "no" votes if they'd had the chance.
Of those, only 18 are members of the Freedom Caucus.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
“Guess you would have been happier if we had not removed the weasel Eric Cantor (who would have voted for Ryancare) so that the Uniparty eunuchs could have passed Rubio’s amnesty in June of 2014 as planned to clear that issue off the table for Yeb! and there would have been no President Trump.”
You used a lot of words to create that non-sequitur.
Believing the FC didn’t have to support Lyin Ryan for speaker does not equal supporting Cantor for anything. Not believing the FC is a paragon of conservative values & principals does not equal being anti-conservative. Rejecting false choices doesn’t equal acceptance of bad choices.
What we need in Congress is conservatives who can GET THINGS DONE for the country. If/when the FC gets the 1 page repeal bill to the floor for a vote then I will reassess my opinion of them.
Getting bad things done is not helpful.
Well...one introduced a bill to fully repeal Obamacare. Lets see what happens.
Because FC is red-headed step child. Always blame the stepchildren
The RINO cheerleaders will keep posting the lie.
Thanks for refuting it.
Again, I don't know that much about The HFC. This is a golden opportunity for them to sell themselves.
I would ignore whatever question The Fake News Media throws at me and use it as a launching point to advance the cause.
“Getting bad things done is not helpful.”
True. Leaving bad things in place is equally unhelpful along with presenting false choices.
Then let’s repeal it, not try to fix it as Ryancare proposed to do.
I’m 100% for appeal. I don’t care if doing so means negotiating with RATs or the Man on the Moon.
But if we can’t have a full repeal I damn sure want us to be negotiating as much of the evil out of Ocrapcare as possible.
A representative sampling of Freedom Caucus Members’ voting records, sponsorship and co-sponsorship of key conservative legislation using FreedomWorks’ ratings (100% is a perfect conservative voting record. Nancy Pelosi’s rating is 9%):
Mark Meadows: 100%
Jim Jordan: 100%
Raul Labrador: 100%
Alex Mooney: 92%
Andy Harris: 100%
Scott Perry: 100%
Andy Gosar: 100%
Ron DeSantis: 84%
David Bratt: 100%
Brian Babin: 96%
Ted Yoho: 92%
Trent Franks: 83%
Mark Meadows: 100%
Morgan Griffith: 100%
David Schweikert:: 92%
Ted Posey: 92%
Scott DesJalais: 100%
Warren Davdson: 100%
Mo Brooks: 92%
Jody Hice: 100%
Justin Amash: 100%
Louie Gohmert: 96%
http://congress.freedomworks.org/keyvotes/house/2016
Oh, I see, Took a second. “Conservatives” as in fake conservatives (RINOS).
Rod Blum 92%
Ryancare was not what Trump was running on. Mo Brooks ran on repeal of Obamacare, not some half-baked Obamacare-lite.
The House should have just resubmitted the bill from 2015. The fact that the House leadership was unwilling to do that speaks more about the leadership than the HFC.
Listen, you are complaining that by sticking to their principals they are damaging the country? Would you sell out your principals to help the country?
Also, first you agreed with me that the Mo Brooks bill should be passed, and then you complain about Mo when I point out he is part of the HFC.
I am tired of people complaining that we need to compromise principals to get the job done. We should be able to compromise on details, but not principals.
Ryancare was a bad bill, and I am glad that my congressman opposed it, and I am glad he had the courage to put out a full repeal bill. If those others who ran on repealing actually meant what they said, then this would be in front of the House for a vote. Don’t complain that Mo is the problem when he did what he said he would do, complain about those who are running away from his bill.
Here are the conservative ratings of some liberal/moderate Republican members of Congress, members of the moderate Mainstreet Partnership, using FreedomWorks ratings of voting records, sponsorship and co-sponsorship of legislation of prime concern to conservatives. 100% is a perfect conservative voting record:
Mike Bost: 63% conservative
Larry Bucshon: 63%
Ken Calvert: 64%
Chris Collins: 72%
Barbara Comstock: 68%
Paul Cook: 72%
Ryan Costello: 56%
Carlos Curbelo: 56%
Rodney Davis: 68%
Jeff Denham: 64%
Charlie Dent: 60%
Rodney Frelinghuysen: 64%
John Katko: 36%
John LoBiondo: 60%
Illeana Ros-Lehtinen: 56%
Tom Reed: 56%
Elise Stefanik: 64%
Michael Turner: 50%
Fred Upton: 64%
David Valadao: 52%
There are cuurently 69 members of the Republican Main Street Partnership. Fitting them in a phone booth would establish a new Guiness World record!
“The Republican Main Street Partnership is a group of centrist and moderately conservative members of the United States Republican Party within the United States Congress. The group is the rough equivalent of the Blue Dog Democrats.”—Wikipedia
“Listen, you are complaining that by sticking to their principals they are damaging the country?”
Nope. I’m against holding up a small group of Congress-critters as paragons of “principal” that never accomplish what they claim they represent.
“Would you sell out your principals to help the country?”
LMAO!!! Are you familiar with the term “non-sequitur”? You might want to look that up.
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.