Believe it or not, on Wednesday, 177 Republicans disagreed that "the House of Representatives celebrates the role of mothers in the United States and supports the goals and ideals of Mother’s Day" this following a 412-0 vote in favor (H.Res 1113). Flip-floppers! Why do they hate mothers so? Next they’ll vote against apple pie.
Votes of AZ representatives was along party lines. I’m sure the moms of Renzi, Franks, Shadegg & Flake are suitably impressed. Someone’s going to have to do some ’splaining come Sunday.
HT to Josh.
Comments
I don't understand...what's their reasoning? This seems like a politician coming out against baseball and apple pie.
Posted by: D | May 10, 2008 1:21 PM
Sigh. This appears to be even dumber yet, but to be fair, votes often don't mean what they appear to.
1) The original bill was done by Jeff Fortenberry [R NE].
(One can argue whether such is the highest priority use of the time of the House, but I suppose giving them something they can all agree on is occasionally nice.)
2) The 412-0 vote was by voice, but of course, if someone wants to,they can ask for a recorded vote (typically by computer, i.e., each Rep has a personal ID card to stick into one of the voting stations, or which Wikipedia says there are 46, and that 5-15 minutes is typically allowed for a vote, 5 in this case.)
2) Rep Todd Tiahrt [R KS] rose after the vote to demand a recorded vote (which I think is required if anyone asks) so that people would be on record [although one would have thought 412-0 would be good enough.]
3) I checked to see if there were some obvious political reason, like if KS Democrats happened to be away, and could be tarred with having not voted for it, or if there were a lot more Democrats away than Republicans, and could likewise be tarred, but it was 13-12 D-R, so not that either.
4) So, it's not that 177 Republicans voted against motherhood, it's that:
a) One Republican thought he should be "on "record", and it was worth taking the time to vote to reconsider.
b) and if that passed, another 5 minutes to vote on the motherhood bill itself, which presumably pass by 412-0, but be *recorded* individually.
c) Tiahrt thought a) and b), and 176 Republicans thought the additional time for b) was warranted.
d)So, the real question is:
was this just idiocy on the part of Tiarht?
OR
was this part of a more general effort to slow the (Democrat-controlled) House down and waste time?
You can watch this here,in electrifying C-SPAN coverage.
Tiarht issued this.
Posted by: John Mashey | May 10, 2008 1:52 PM
Well, it's not so surprising considering that their ultraliberal economic policies do not create favourable conditions for families, despite their "family values" rhetoric.
Posted by: Onias | May 10, 2008 1:55 PM
@ John Mashey
This seems like the likely answer, though it's probably a measure of their incompetence that they chose this resolution (of all things) and didn't realize that there would be some negative press.
Posted by: John Lynch | May 10, 2008 2:44 PM