On H.R.6, passed in the House during the first session of the 110th Congress, Joe voted in lockstep with other Republicans, as expected. Although Titles III, IV and V passed by both sides of the aisle -- Civility, Fiscal Responsibility, and some miscellaneous sections -- not one Republican voted Yes on Title V to adopt the rules. In addition, 48 Republicans voted Yes on Title II, Ethics, however, Joe was one of 152 Republicans voting No. After what went on during the 109th Congress, it's mindblowing that any Congressperson wanting to stay in office the next time around would vote No on ethics reform, which comprised a number of sections under Title II. Maybe Joe was hoping for another trip to Hawaii. Following are the topics falling under Title II of H.R. 6:
Title II. Ethics
SEC. 202. ENDING THE K-STREET PROJECT.
SEC. 203. BAN ON GIFTS FROM LOBBYISTS.
SEC. 204. VALUATION OF TICKETS TO SPORTING AND ENTERTAINMENT EVENTS.
SEC. 205. RESTRICTION OF PRIVATELY FUNDED TRAVEL.
SEC. 206. LOBBYIST ORGANIZATIONS AND PARTICIPATION IN CONGRESSIONAL TRAVEL.
SEC. 207. FURTHER LIMITATION ON THE USE OF FUNDS FOR TRAVEL.
SEC. 208. EXPENSES FOR OFFICIALLY CONNECTED TRAVEL.
SEC. 209. ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE.
SEC. 210. CLERICAL CORRECTION.
SEC. 211. ANNUAL ETHICS TRAINING FOR MEMBERS, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE HOUSE.
SEC. 212. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR.
SEC. 213. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
SEC. 214. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES.
SEC. 215. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM.
SEC. 216. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.
SEC. 217. SEPARATE ORDER: NUMBERING OF BILLS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The link to the ethics reform articles has expired. Good post, though.:)
Sorry -- I didn't even realize those were links when I copied them from the site. I don't think they were supposed to be -- they were just underlined copy.
I've now corrected the formatting and a couple of references to Title II that mistakenly had Title IV.
Joe voted against adopting the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Way to go Joe. Way to protect Americans.
Actually, Joe didn't vote at all on HR1: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/1/votes/15/
Why might someone vote no on "ethics reform" as you propose?
Because "ethics reform" can mean alot of things to alot of people. It might be bad reforms.
Let's talk about the reforms he voted against - what are the actually policy changes. Then we can answer the question of whether the vote was good or bad.
Since it appears that Knollenberg voted yes on many of the reforms, and no on only a few, it may indeed be that the "reforms" weren't always fair, good policy, or justifiable. But this blog chooses not to engage in that kind of analysis.
But Chet,
It wasn't a "bad" reform bill.
The House Bill banned free rides on Corporate Jets.
It prohibits taking gifts from lobbyists, etc.
Joe voted no because he likes getting free Hawaiian vacations and other graft. Why else would he vote no?
Oh my!
There were 12 Chapters in that law!
Oh my!
Are you trying to say that Knollenberg couldn't read the bill?
That is absurd. The provisions of that bill had already been debated for months in the previous Congress.
The bill must not have been as horrible as you say because a MAJORITY voted to pass it.
No. Joe just likes his free lobbyist paid vacations and all the other gifts and perks he gets from lobbyists like Jack Abramoff.
Post a Comment