How Our State’s Members Of Congress Voted Last Week
Here’s how area members of Congress voted on major issues in the week ending June 8. (A little background about why I’m re-posting this roll call report can be found here.)
House
MEDICAL-DEVICE TAXES: Voting 270 for and 146 against, the House on June 7 passed a Republican bill (HR 436) to repeal a 2.3 percent excise tax that the 2010 health law would levy on manufacturers and importers of certain medical devices starting in 2013. The tax would raise about $30 billion over 10 years. This bill also would remove the health law’s ban on using Health Savings Accounts to pay for over-the-counter drugs. Now awaiting Senate action, the bill would pay for itself by reducing subsidies to help low-income people buy policies in the new law’s insurance exchanges.
Dave Camp, R-Mich., said the tax threatens to impose “higher costs, job loss and reduced investment here at home. … Plain and simple, this tax is a job-killer and it must be repealed.”
Sander Levin, D-Mich., said: “We Democrats want more Americans to have access to medical devices. (The health law) helps do this by expanding insurance coverage to over 30 million individuals, which indeed will help the growth of and the innovation in the medical-device industry.”
A yes vote was to pass the GOP bill.
Voting yes: Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-3, Doc Hastings, R-4, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-5, Dave Reichert, R-8
Voting no: Rick Larsen, D-2, Norman Dicks, D-6, Jim McDermott, D-7, Adam Smith, D-9
Not voting: None
MEDICAL DEVICES, OVERSEAS JOBS: Voting 179 for and 239 against, the House on June 7 defeated a Democratic motion that sought to retain the 2010 health law’s tax on medical devices (HR 436, above) for any company that sends American jobs overseas in its manufacturing process.
Tim Bishop, D-N.Y., said: “The best way to kill a job isn’t a regulation and it isn’t a tax. (It) is to have that job done by someone overseas instead of by an American simply because it’s cheaper to have that job done overseas.”
Erik Paulsen, R-Minn., called the motion “a distraction from the real issue, and that is stopping a massive, job-killing tax increase from taking place on the medical-device industry.”
A yes vote backed the Democratic motion.
Voting yes: Larsen, Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Not voting: None
1 PERCENT BUDGET CUT: Voting 157 for and 261 against, the House on June 6 defeated an amendment to inflict a 1 percent across-the-board cut on a bill (HR 5325, above) that would appropriate $32.1 billion for civilian and military energy programs in fiscal 2013. The savings of $321 million would be applied to deficit reduction.
Sponsor Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said across-the-board cuts “effectively control the growth and the cost of the federal government. They … do not pick winners and losers.”
Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., said the bill prioritizes spending and cuts programs as warranted. “Yet the … amendment proposes an across-the-board cut on every one of these programs.”
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: McMorris Rodgers
Voting no: Larsen, Herrera Beutler, Hastings, Dicks, McDermott, Reichert, Smith
Not voting: None
U.S. NUCLEAR ARSENAL: Voting 138 for and 281 against, the House on June 6 refused to cap spending at $7 billion in fiscal 2013 for programs to upgrade the U.S. nuclear arsenal and apply the $298 million in savings to deficit reduction. The amendment was offered to a bill (HR 5325), later passed, that would appropriate $32.1 billion for civilian and military energy programs in fiscal 2013. Backers said the amendment would leave America unchallenged as the world’s foremost nuclear power, while opponents said it would slow a needed modernization of the U.S. arsenal.
Edward Markey, D-Mass., said: “The Cold War ended 20 years ago. We won. Since that time, there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of nuclear weapons that both the United States and the former Soviet Union deploy … Yet here in this budget, there is additional profligate spending on new nuclear weapons programs.”
Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., said: “Assuring funding for the modernization of our nuclear weapons stockpile is the most critical national security issue. … We have put off for too long the type of investments that are needed to sustain our nuclear capability as our stockpile ages.”
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Larsen, McDermott
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Dicks, Reichert, Smith
Not voting: None
HOMELAND SECURITY BUDGET: Voting 234 for and 182 against, the House on June 7 approved a $46 billion Department of Homeland Security budget (HR 5855) for fiscal 2013 that will fund operations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Transportation Security Administration, Coast Guard and Secret Service as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The department has 230,000 employees. The bill increases disaster relief and most frontline activities but cuts the transportation security budget by $422 million from 2012 levels. Additionally, it requires at least 34,000 beds for detaining illegal immigrants; increases cybersecurity funding; provides extra security funding to the nation’s 25 most at-risk cities and authorizes grants to help cities hire new firefighters and recall those who have been laid off. The bill awaits Senate action.
John Carter, R-Texas, said the bill “funds frontline security operations at their highest level in history, ensuring that our (border and immigration) officers have the resources they need to secure our borders.”
Jared Polis, D-Colo., said the bill would “appropriate billions of dollars … to enforce our broken immigration laws. That means they spend this money to continue deporting hardworking immigrants, separating families, and kicking out students who have lived in this country their entire lives, all at taxpayer expense.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Voting no: Larsen, Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Not voting: None
DETAINING IMMIGRANTS, PROTECTING CHILDREN: Voting 167 for and 249 against, the House on June 6 refused to transfer $40 million from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement budget for detaining illegal immigrants to its budget for combating sex trafficking and other forms of child-exploitation overseas and in the U.S. The amendment was offered to HR 5855 (above).
Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., said: “ICE is one of the key global partners aimed at dismantling criminal infrastructures engaged in child exploitation. … We can all work towards eliminating child exploitation … by putting this money into this account.”
Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., said the amendment “seeks to gut detention operations just as the administration has tried to do.” He added that the bill already funds ICE and Secret Service efforts against child exploitation.
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Not voting: Larsen
IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT BY LOCAL POLICE: The House on June 7 voted, 250 for and 164 against, to fully fund a program in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been training local police in some 100 communities nationwide for help in enforcing immigration laws. Offered to HR 5855 (above), the amendment would retain $17 million for this program in 2013. Defenders argue the so-called “287(g) program” has helped root out illegal immigrants, while federal auditors say it has spawned civil-right abuses, including racial profiling in Maricopa County, Arizona.
John Sullivan, R-Okla., said the program “has been highly successful at not only apprehending immigration offenders but in facilitating the incarceration of dangerous criminals, and it has contributed to overall public safety.”
Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., said: “In some notorious cases, there have been flagrant violations of civil rights, and the Department (of Homeland Security) has had to go in and yank contracts.”
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Voting no: Larsen, Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Not voting: None
2 PERCENT BUDGET CUT: Voting 99 for and 316 against, the House on June 7 refused to cut the Department of Homeland Security’s 2013 appropriations bill (HR 5855, above) by 2 percent or $640 million. The cut was to be applied across the board to all departmental programs except FEMA grants and counterterrorism operations.
Jared Polis, D-Colo., said: “There are 10 to 15 million people in this country illegally. The Department of Homeland Security has failed. … Are we going to reward failure by increasing their budget, or are we going to penalize failure?”
David Price, D-N.C., said the bill “reflects the third year in a row that funding for the Department of Homeland Security has decreased. I think this amendment would do damage to our security” by harming “critical programs such as border security, immigration enforcement and transportation security.”
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Larsen
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Dicks, McDermott, Reichert, Smith
Not voting: None
Senate
FEMALE-MALE PAY EQUITY: Voting 52 for and 47 against, the Senate on June 5 failed to reach 60 votes for ending GOP blockage of a bill (S 3220) giving women more legal tools for gaining pay equity with male co-workers. The so-called Paycheck Fairness Act would require equal pay for comparable work except when differences can be justified by narrowly defined business necessities or factors such as education, training or experience. The bill also would prevent employers from retaliating against those who inquire about co-workers’ wages or disclose their own pay in the course of investigations and require employers to regularly provide the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with payroll data broken down by sex, race and national origin. The bill, which closes loopholes in the 1963 Equal Pay Act, exempts businesses with revenue under $500,000 per year.
Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., said: “Women fight every day for equal pay, and when they do, they are sidelined, redlined and pink-slipped. Right now in the marketplace, it is legal to fire a woman if she asks about pay, whether she goes to the personnel director or whether she asks the person next to her at the water cooler.”
Dean Heller, R-Nev., said: “Pay discrimination based upon gender is unacceptable. … The question is, will the Paycheck Fairness Act actually address workplace inequality? The simple answer is no. Unfortunately, the only winners under this legislation would be trial lawyers, giving them a windfall, exposing employers to unlimited punitive damages.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: Maria Cantwell, D, Patty Murray, D
Voting no: None
Not voting: None
FIVE-YEAR FARM BILL: Voting 90 for and eight against, the Senate on June 7 began weeks of debate on a bill (S 3240) to renew federal agriculture and nutrition programs for five years at a projected cost of nearly $100 billion over 10 years, down $23 billion from current spending levels. About $80 billion of the outlay is for food stamps and other feeding and nutrition programs, with the remainder allocated to programs to protect farm incomes, boost exports, expand domestic markets, promote land conservation and fund rural development. The bill ends the decades-old system of direct payments that sends checks to farmers for crops they don’t grow, relying instead on taxpayer-subsidized crop insurance to help growers turn a profit in the face of weather risks and price drops beyond their control.
Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said the bill “does not set a government price. It focuses on what is happening in the marketplace. The farmers are choosing what to plant from the market. We make sure no farmer goes off the cliff when a price drops immediately and that crop insurance is there for them as well.”
Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said: “We need to get the farm bill passed. The current law expires on Sept. 30 of this year. Failure to pass the bill means we revert to permanent 1949 law that would provide absolute chaos in the countryside.”
No senator spoke against the bill.
A yes vote was to advance the bill.
Voting yes: Cantwell, Murray
Voting no: None
Not voting: None
— Thomas Voting Reports Inc.
