David A. Fahrenthold of The Washington Post published an interesting piece looking at the “Tea Party’s vision for America” through the voting record of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives.
Fahrenthold pointed out the regressive voting record of the House GOP, and asked, “What would America look like” if these policies succeeded in becoming laws? He suspected:
It would no longer have a far-reaching health-care law. The House voted to repeal that legislation in January. It would no longer have federal limits on greenhouse gases. The House voted to ax them in April. And it would not have three government programs for homeowners who are in trouble on their mortgages. The House voted to end them all.
Fahrenthold suggested that the Tea Party’s vision for this country is aimed at destroying progressive and Democratic priorities—without plans to replace them:
On major issues such as health care, climate change and bad mortgages, the House has affirmed that fixes are needed - if it can ever manage to repeal the old ones. It hasn’t said exactly what those changes should be.
‘The Republican Party is sort of united in terms of what they’re against. But there’s not a great deal of consensus right now in terms of what they’re for,’ said Michael D. Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute and an expert on health-care reform and recent GOP history.
The most well-known aspect of the House GOP is their extreme attitude toward government spending. Fahrenthold observed that “the House’s measures have gone far beyond the budget.”
Some of the obscure topics that House Republicans have aggressively attacked are light bulb efficiency standards, National Public Radio funding, and the Environmental Protection Agency efforts against “mountaintop-removal coal mines.”
Fahrenthold highlighted three specific instances when the GOP’s vision was simply to strike down the Democratic agenda without a replacement plan of their own:
1. On January 19, the Republican-dominated House voted to repeal President Barack Obama’s health-care law. Fahrenthold wrote:
In place of the legislation, Republicans had said they would craft their own solutions for problems involving high costs and the denial of coverage for preexisting conditions. Their slogan, outlined in last fall’s Pledge to America, was “Repeal and Replace.” No replacement has occurred.
2. In April, the House voted to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from requiring larger power plants and industrial facilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and obtain new permits. Apparently, environmental groups have said that the House’s bill would leave the nation powerless to fight an escalating global problem.
3. In March, the House voted to close down three federal programs that help burdened homeowners with payments on loans.
Click here to read Farenthold’s entire article.
Mr. Levinson, if the Republican Party were offering “a stray from any animal shelter,” they would be offering a candidate far more qualified than any they have on the field now.
“It would no longer have federal limits on greenhouse gases” sounds like yet another reason to vote straight GOP at the Federal level next year! Cap and trade is a scam whose purpose is to enrich special interests (GE, and Senator Gillibrand named Goldman Sachs, the New York Stock Exchange, and J.P. Morgan Chase explicitly) at the expense of working Americans. It won’t even reduce carbon dioxide because exasperated manufacturers will move energy-intensive jobs (e.g. high-wage jobs often held by blue collar Democrats) to China. I am glad Perry called this scam out for what it is.
Re: “And it would not have three government programs for homeowners who are in trouble on their mortgages.” Paid for by whom? People who did not buy homes they could not afford? People who did not live above their means and use their homes as sources of cash? Why should they pay higher taxes to bail out profligate spenders? (There are admittedly some who fell behind through no fault of their own.) King Barry got $8000 for first-time home buyers too; nobody gave me $8000 toward my house, so he can take a running jump when he asks for my vote next year. My advice to NJDC is therefore to find a decent human being (Manchin, D-WV comes to mind) who will actually force me to think for even one second before I cast my vote for President next year. Right now, the R has it—even if the party nominates a stray pet from any animal shelter.