Coburn puts potential Obamacare no-to-yes voters on notice
Sen. Tom Coburn, at a news conference today of physician members of the House and Senate regarding Obamacare:
I want to send a couple of messages to my colleagues in the House.If you voted no and you vote yes, and you lose your election, and you think any nomination to a federal position isn't going to be held in the Senate, I've got news for you. It's going to be held.
Number two is, if you get a deal, a parochial deal for you or your district, I've already instructed my staff and the staff of seven other senators that we will look at every appropriations bill, at every level, at every instance, and we will outline it by district, and we will associate that with the buying of your vote. So, if you think you can cut a deal now, and it not come out until after the election, I want to tell you that isn't going to happen. And be prepared to defend selling your vote in the House.
A bill dealing with such fundamental matters ought to be decided on the merits, not on the basis of special deals. It certainly shouldn't be voted in by "representatives" who have been promised a golden parachute job if they betray the wishes of their constituents and their constituents punish them at the polls in November. Coburn ought to extend his promise to block to include appropriations for non-profits that may hire such soon-to-be-ex-congressmen and bills that are pushed by lobbying firms and trade associations that may hire said poltroons.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Coburn puts potential Obamacare no-to-yes voters on notice.
TrackBack URL for this entry: https://www.batesline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5550
Subscribe to this blog's feed:
If a bill should be "decided on the merits," as you say, wouldn't it be wrong for Coburn to put a hold on legislation that's genuinely worthwhile?
If legislation is really good and Coburn put a hold on it because of one vote, that's being spiteful, not principled.
A congressman who would accept the bribe of a golden parachute job in the Obama administration or on the Federal bench in exchange for his vote on this issue doesn't deserve a Federal appointment. A non-profit, union, lobbying firm, or trade association that would effectively insulate a congressman from the consequences of his vote on this issue shouldn't be rewarded with Federal funds. This sort of horse-trading is evil.
And being spiteful about worthwhile legislation isn't evil, also?
Michael Bates is correct.
At Senator Coburn's news conference yesterday, the senator threatened to put a hold on any future nominee for a federal job that switched their NO vote to a YES vote in consideration of a future federal job if they lose re-election in November 2010 as a result.
Besides Federal Jobs, there is also a vast Obama support network: Soros-SEIU-Andy Stern-ACORN that had their coffers filled to overflowing with the $700 Billion Stimulus porkbarrell funding.
For example, a OSU Sociology professor received a $1.1 million grant to study Native Alaskan grandparents.
Now is that legitimate research which is only of dubious value at best, or is it actually Democrat Party Opposition Research, funded by the American Taxpayer, that is directed at former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Native Alaskan husband Todd, who qualify under the definition of this research project?
One look at the Sociology professor answered that question for me.