"No" votes and not showing up to vote doesn't make Reps look good.
As far as the vote to withdrawal troops and to cut spending, President Bush's strongest allies for the war in Iraq, Sen. John McCain didn't even show up to vote, because he was too busy campaigning in Iowa at the time. What kind of message is this sending to the Senators constituencies in Arizona?? Is he too concerned with his own campaign and his own career to be apart of a vote that affects millions of dollars and thousands of American troops in Iraq. Also can someone explain to me why Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California would not vote when support for the Democrats is so crucial?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think it has to do with the fact that if there is something that is done where we leave Iraq and then all hell breaks loose, it is a good chance that we will have to go back over and help settle the situation. Which in turn will make the people of this country even more upset and look to the people who decided to take our troops out in the first place. If you didn't vote then it is easy to escape the blame.
Given those Democrats listed as voting against party lines are members of special interest group factions of (or caucuses within) the Democratic House caucus, and given that the primary constituencies of those factions tend to favor policies out of the mainstream, it seems to me that Lee, Jackson, and Cheeks-Kilpatrick were voting on principle to maintain voter loyalty within their home districts. Insisting on immediate troop withdrawal despite the obvious fact that any sizable withdrawal will have to wait until 2008 or so (due to the location of the status quo and proximal compromise coalitions) is just acting a show horse.
I completely agree with both of the comments made. I just think its too convienent
I completely agree with both of your comments. I think it is too convenient for house members to not vote or to avoid the vote altogether.
Post a Comment