Shutting It All Down

I went quiet for a few years.  I did so, at first, to take some time to learn.  I sat here at my desk and at the office and had my opinions but I wanted to know more about the perspectives of others.  So in 2012 and 2013 I went quiet and I just listened, asked questions, went to meetings and places that I would not normally have gone to and I learned.

 It was in 2014 that life, as it does, caught up with me and all of my time and attention had to go to it.  For the past two years I have been dedicating myself to my work and family with little time for much else.

I have learned a lot in the past two years.  Have my fiscal conservative roots changed.  No.  Has my socially moderate leanings changed.  Slightly.  What I have seen change is the party that I grew up a part of.  The party of Lincoln and Reagan has become overly hawkish and demanding.  Rather than being the party of limited government and lower taxes, it has become the party of big defense and big spending.  In fact, the only difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is that the Republicans want to spend money on national defense and the NSA while the Democrats want to spend it on entitlement programs.  Both parties talk of fiscal responsibility but both want to just kick the can down the road.

When Rand Paul declared his run for president I was hopeful.  Here was a man that was talking about limited government and had practiced it during his time in the Senate.  He talked of a stronger defense but a smaller budget to the defense department.  He talked about lowering entitlement but also getting rid of huge sentencing for petty drug convictions.  He reached out to minorities and those that the Republicans did not talk to.  Early on he was the guy to beat, but then the Republican establishment and the clown Donald Trump stepped in.

Now, the only candidate worth a damn is gone and the rest of the Republicans are talking about defense and low taxes with no real way to do things like balance the budget or get us out of all of these wars.

The Tea Party movement and those of us involved early on were a movement of people that were tired of the government as it was.  We were tired of a bloated piglet suckling on the nipple of the American taxpayer.  We were mad at both Republicans and Democrats.  We protested and we voted.  In doing so we brought about change.  Unfortunately, our two party system has warped some of those individuals into falling in line and not standing up for the people that elected them.

Then, the Tea Party movement was infiltrated and warped into a division of the Christian Right who insisted on using it as a platform for God and country.  The Tea Party movement was never about God or Christianity.  It was about low taxes and the government staying out of our business.

Now, all those original Tea Party individuals are flocking to either Ted Cruz, who has some streaks of smaller government and individualism or the clown Donald Trump who talks a good game and is the "outsider" that people have been requesting.

Short of a miracle, this country is screwed.  We are either going to have a criminal and liar as our president or a reality show narcissist.

Maybe our country has gotten too large to govern the way it needs to be.  Or maybe we have been manipulated into believing that we must fall into a two party system that are two wings of the same buzzard.

It is for this reason, I believe that we MUST shut it all down.  We must break away from the two party system.  We must hold our elected officials accountable for their inaction.

We are like the Greeks and the Romans.  We, as a nation, are fat and happy and have little disregard for what is around us.  We are not paying attention and holding our government accountable for its actions.  It is because of us and our lack of action that we too, as a nation, will fall.

If you want to change this, then break away from the two party system.  Vote Green Party, Constitution Party, Libertarian or something else.  If you do not know how you really side, go ISideWith.com and take their poll to see where you should fall.  Quit settling for the best of the worst.

Child Rights vs. Parental Rights - What You Need to Know

What if I told you that there are people who are actively attempting to control the rights of parents to raise children as they see fit. To many of my readers, this comes as no surprise but many of you may not know how close we are coming to this.

If you have not heard, there is a movement for the US to ratify The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, often called the CRC or the UNCRC. The stated reasoning behind the need for this treaty is because

the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth

That sounds great....until you read the text of the document and understand what this "treaty" is trying to do and has done to other countries.

Since its adoption by the United Nations in 1989, the UNCRC has become the most widely accepted international agreement in history and approved by every nation except for the United States and Somalia. All participant countries pledge to protect children’s rights, foster their development, and uphold their best interests by re-writing their national laws to conform to the standards set forth in the treaty.

While this sounds great, the reality is that the UNCRC allows that national governments interfere in the decisions of individual families and parents. By invoking the “best interests of the child ,” UN policymakers and government agents have the authority to substitute the decisions of the parent on behalf of the child with their own decisions if they see their decisions as in the best interest of the child. In essence, parents do not have rights to parent, and just about become only caregivers. Parents across the world are now discovering that the family is being undermined without true regard to the results for the very children they are supposed to be protecting.

You may think that the UNCRC is just words and that the US does a very good job of taking care of children. You may even think that to worry about this treaty is nothing more than paranoia. Possibly, but here is what the results of implementing this treaty has done in some countries:

• The Canadian government has taken steps toward rejecting parental discipline that conflicts with the "best interests of the child." In June 2008, a Quebec court overturned a father's decision to ground his 12-year old daughter after she posted photos of herself on a dating website, saying that the punishment was "too severe." - Full story can be found HERE.
• The Canadian Senate approved a bill which would drastically restrict the right of parents to physically discipline their children. - Full story can be found HERE
• The government of Brazil has prevented minors under the age of eighteen from being "criminally chargeable" at all. Under the Brazilian Penal Code, conduct that is usually a crime or misdemeanor is considered an "act of infraction" if carried out by a minor. Acts of infraction carry only minor penalties, including a warning, an obligation to repair damage caused, community service, or confinement in an educational institution. - More information can be found HERE
• In France, the law also grants minors access to contraceptives without the consent of their parents, and certain medicines and contraceptives can even be obtained by minors anonymously and at no cost. A minor may also have an abortion without parental consent, so long as she is accompanied by an adult of her choice. - More info can be found HERE
• In 2002, Italy’s highest appeals court ruled that parents are required by law to support their adult children until the children “find a job to their liking.”- More info can be found HERE

There are many other examples of how intrusive this treaty is. What is scary is that in 2009, the Obama administration indicated that it was reviving efforts to sign this treat.

If you think about it, though, it is not surprising. It is not surprising that this administration would want to push the concept of government control over children. If you look at it's track record with Healthcare, pushed Unionization of jobs and increased governmental dependency programs, it only makes sense that Obama and his merry band of idealists would sign on to this bill.

The portions of this treaty that are important have already independently been ratified by the US via optional protocols. On May 25, 2000, two optional protocols were adopted; the first restricts the involvement of children in military conflicts and the second bans the sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography. It is important to understand that ratification of these two protocols by the United States means that the ratification of the full UNCRC will have no positive impact with these issues.

So, I think most of my readers can understand why the UNCRC is not needed and generally bad for our country. With that said, there are those that are constantly trying to get this treaty ratified by the House and Senate. In my humble opinion, there is only one way to fight this and that is an amendment to the US Constitution. As a father, parent and concerned citizen, I believe that it is time that we amened the Constitution to affirm the rights of parents over the state. That is why I am supporting and ask each of you to review the Parental Rights Amendment.

The Parental Rights Amendment is a very basic amendment that does a lot. It reads as follows:
PROPOSED PARENTAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

SECTION 1 - The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.

SECTION 2 - Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

SECTION 3 - No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

This Constitutional amendment guarantees the rights of the parent to raise their children as they see fit while also guaranteeing that the government can step in only in extreme measures.

Naysayers are stating that an amendment is not needed and the US and state law already guarantee parental rights. With that said, we need to take preventative action before the courts can begin using this UN ratified treaty as a determination in their decisions. In some cases, the courts are already using the UNCRC to guide their decisions in court rulings, even though it is un-ratified. Rather than reprint what has already been written, read this full article here to understand what I mean.

So, what can you do? The first thing you can do is become informed. You can do that by going to the http://www.parentalrights.org/ web page and studying the proposed amendment. You can find details regarding why the wording used was used and how it pertains to Supreme Court proceedings already on the books. Additionally you can find Senators and Congressman that currently sponsor this bill. Here in Missouri, none of our Senators are sponsoring although Roy Blunt did support it when he was in Congress and in Congress Todd Akin, Jo Ann Emerson, Sam Graves and Blaine Luetkemeyer have all thrown support behind this. Pick up the phone and call your Senator and Congressman and tell them to support this bill. Additionally, you can help out by donating your time and/or money to the cause. You can find more info on how to help at the Parental Rights web page listed above.

With the government and the left generally trying to take more of our liberties away from us, we must now act to ensure that the rights of the parent are guaranteed. It does not take a village to raise children, it takes parents.

Homeland Security Intervenes on the Internet

With everything else going on, this one could have easily slipped by. Luckily, I picked up on this short article while doing some research for my day job. Take a read at this.

Homeland Security Seizes Domain Names

What is scary is how much the Obama administration is getting involved in their attempt to limit the Internet. I am in no way condoning the illegal distribution of copyrighted material, but at the same time the Department of Homeland Security should not be getting involved with shutting down websites.

With all that this administration is trying to do with Net Neutrality and the FCC wanting to play a larger role in Internet traffic, this is a scary sign of what could be coming. As I documented back in May the FCC is interested in making the Internet and its providers a public utility so that they can have more control.

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would think that this is the first step in the government taking over control of web based content. Is that too far off the mark?

Tomorrow's Election - Thoughts and Recommendations

To everyone that reads this blog, I first say thank you. I started it with the simple goal of venting my frustration. In doing so it has turned into a type of catharsis, a source of new friends and a way to pass on the knowledge that I have acquired through my years and my obsessive tendencies to research an issue, person, etc.

After tomorrow, I may post once or twice and then I am going to take a break. My wife and I have been busy helping raise awareness and campaigning for several candidates. Rather than go to a victory party, we are going to spend the evening, quietly, at home, watching the results. I will say a prayer for the winners and losers, go to bed, and go to work the next day. With that said, I feel the need for a sanity break and have chosen to take one after the election. Yes, I will probably post some post election thoughts, but afterwards I will be out of the loop for awhile.

Before I go any further, I want to take a moment and give a special hat tip to Darren over at Reboot Congress. He was one of the first people in the blogging community to welcome me as well as give advice. He does some great work that should be noticed by all. I love his recent YouTube video, which I have embedded below.





Now, on to my suggestions for the upcoming election. I am sticking to the first district and not including state representatives on this one.

• US Senate - I am holding my nose on this one and picking Roy Blunt. This is more of a vote against Robyn Carnahan than it is support of Roy.


• US Congressional Race - This is a no brainer. I am voting for Robyn Hamlin (@Hamlin4Congress )


• MO State Auditor - Tom Schweich has my vote. Susan Montee is a drunk and a fool and needs to be fired and Tom has the experience needed to do this job.


• St. Louis County Executive - Bill Corrigan has my vote. Charlie Doolie is as crooked as a country road. We need Bill Corrigan in there for St. Louis County.


• Amendment 1 - I am voting and recommending a YES vote. Any governmental assessor, city or county, should be elected and not appointed


• Amendment 2 - As much as I would like to vote yes, I am voting NO on this one. Look, we all want lower taxes, but to amend the state constitution to give tax breaks to one group of individuals over another is wrong. Everyone should have lower taxes.


• Amendment 3 - I am voting and recommending a YES vote. Leaving the possibility of any additional taxes to the sale of real estate is like leaving your front door open when you leave the house and expecting yourself not to get robbed. Just because there is not one in place, does not mean there should not be a rule prohibiting it. A tax like this can kill home sales and the real estate market.


• Prop A - I am voting and recommending a YES vote. Let the voters decide whether or not there should be a tax increase on the municipal level. If St. Louis and Kansas City choose to continue having one, let them vote on it.


• Prop B - I am voting and recommending a NO vote. Everyone hates puppy mills but there are already laws on the books to prevent them, they are just not being enforced. A law like this, as loosely written as it is could definitely hurt any and all ranching in the state of Missouri.

If all polling is correct, tomorrow could be a very good day for the GOP and the Tea Party. With that said, those that win should know that I and other bloggers will still hold them accountable, no matter what party affiliation, to representing their constituents and acting in good faith on our behalf. If they do not, they will be fired just as many already have.

Finally, make sure you get out the vote. Over 200 years ago, many brave men and women fought and died for the privilege of voting that we have today. The simple act of voting makes your voice heard and quite frankly gives you the right to complain about those that do not act in your interest. #GOTV - GET OUT THE VOTE.

It's Time For Us To Go John Galt

My friends, whenever I go away for work I always bring a book with me. You never know if you are going to be stuck in a terminal, a hotel room, waiting room, etc. You cannot always guarantee Internet coverage on your phone or an interesting movie in your hotel room. With this past week, even though it had not been that long, I decided to pull out my well worn copy of Atlas Shrugged. It being one of my favorites, I thought I would re-read it as time allowed. Considering what was supposed to be a 1 week trip turned out to be much longer, I was glad I did.

I bring this up because as I read about this and the more I think about it, the more I think it is time for each of us to go John Galt. No, I am not saying that we need to disappear in the cloak of night and come together in some secret society. No. Instead what I feel we should each do is start to disassociate ourselves from our communities. Instead, we should make do with what we can without using that which any government has to offer. Are you or your spouse a stay at home parent, then home school and make the educational choices for your children instead of having the government make them for you. Teach them the way that you think they should be taught. Give them the education they deserve instead of the education that the school system has elected to give them. This is just one of many ways you can unplug yourself from the shackles of the government. If you can, restrict your usage of any government buildings and properties. Do not purchase from companies that support non-defense government agencies. The more you remove yourself from the government, the free-er you become.

I know this sounds seperationist, but it is not. You see, the more that you become reliant on the government, the more you become enslaved by it. That is the beauty of a book like "Atlas Shrugged". Those doers of society, those of us who work hard, pay our taxes and do what we can to improve ourselves are constantly penalized by a government that is trying to create some sort of equality that is not possible or plausible. By removing yourself and as many dependencies as you have from the government, you are taking away their power and influence.

The government, and I mean all forms of government from Federal to state and local, has made each of us dependent upon them. This was done in order to make the government and each of those government employees necessary. Unlike working in the private sector where streamlining and cost efficiency is paramount to survival, the government works with what they believe is a limitless check book. They can justify their spending because of each one of us and the way we use them. By removing ourselves from them, their need becomes less and more prevalent.

The US Constitution is a set of rules and limitations on the government, not a set of rights for its citizens. This is a powerful thing. The way the government has gotten around this is by making each of us more and more addicted to what it has to offer. As of now, there is no way that I know of to be a part of a community that completely disassociates ourselves from the government, but we can slowly remove ourselves. So, as we go into the upcoming elections, vote for smaller government, vote for less government intervention and work to remove yourself as much as you can from the use of any government program.

Go Galt.

Post Script
I wrote this article late in the evening on 9/30. I decided not to post it so I could have a close friend read this article and give me any feedback. This is something I normally do when I write an article at night. This way another set of eyes can look at it and make sure I do not ramble or I made my points. After reading this article, he called me laughing,
"So you listened to Glenn Beck?"
"No", I told him, "I could not find a station it is on down there"
"Are you sure", he said.
"Yeah."
"Well then you two must be mind melding. Check out the link I just sent you."
Opening it, I read the link and started to laugh.
"Well", I said, "Maybe Glenn just got done re-reading Atlas Shrugged too."
I am glad to know that I am not the only one thinking this way.

One Week Till August 3rd - What Have You Done

It is one week till the August 3rd elections. If you STILL have not done your homework and do not know what is going to be on the ballot, click HERE to be directed to the StlToday article on what is being voted on.

While all of the measures, primaries, etc. are important, I believe there are two that are of most importance to anyone living in Missouri and specifically the first district. Those are Prop C and the Congressional House of Representatives primary. By now, I have bent over backwards to give you information on the candidates. That said, once again, here are my interviews with the three running against Lacy Clay

Candice Britton interview - HERE
Robyn Hamlin interview - HERE
Martin D. Baker interview - HERE

I will say it one more time. We HAVE to get rid of the Clay political dynasty. The Clay's have done nothing but run on their name and empty promises that the populace of north city and county continue to accept. Ask yourself one question, what has Lacy Clay done to make north city and county of St. Louis a better place. Sure, he coordinates a job fair, but that is it. He has done nothing to help bring more jobs, he has done nothing to promote economic stimulus. Instead, he is for taxation and unbridled spending. Tax the "rich" is what he wants to do.

Let me tell you who the "rich" are according to Lacy Clay. The rich are the small family run businesses all over the area. These are the franchises like the Shell stations, or the local dry cleaners, the mom and pop restaurants and sports bars, the shaved ice stands, the local electricians and plumbers, etc. These are the "rich" according to Lacy. Of course, Lacy has never really worked a job so he would not truly understand earning a living or working for his money. Instead, he sees himself as duke that can take money from lobbyist so he can pay his dues while at the same time blasting companies. Just check out these two videos.

With the first one, Lacy blasts WalMart for their employee practices

With the second one, he says he is going to keep their lobbying money anyway

This is the hypocrisy that we have in office right now. If this was a Republican, Lacy and the press would be all over this issue.

Do the right thing and vote this clown out. Let's have a November election that pits Candice Britton vs either Martin Baker or Robyn Hamlin.

In regards to Prop C. I simply say this. Do you want the option to participate in Federal Healthcare plan or do you think participation should be mandatory. That is it. If you think that it should be optional, then you should vote for Prop C. I could go on and on, but the fine people over at Citizens Commission on Human Rights of St. Louis have put together a very good piece on this that you can find HERE.

In closing, in the end it is up to you. It is up to you to show up at the polls and it is up to you to vote. Men and women for the last 200 years across the great country have died for your rights. Those rights include your right to vote. Please do so and do so intelligently.

P.S - If you have already made up your mind, please consider donating your time and or money to a candidate. $5 can make a difference. Buying a yard sign or bumper magnet can help get the word out. If you have an available day and cannot afford to donate money, donate your time by handing out leaflets or working a phone bank. Please help out however you can. I can say I have. Can you?

More Big Government Via the FCC

The FCC now wants to make the Internet a public utility. Interesting. The same thing that the president so effectively used to get himself elected and now is coming back to haung him. Now that he is President Obama and not candidate Obama, those working under him want to now change it so that it can be regulated by the US Government. Never mind that a US Court of Appeals struck down Net Neutrality. For those of you who do not know about Net Neutrality, it can best be shortly defined as

Regulations that would allow federal officials to determine how internet service providers could manage the networks they built and own, ostensibly in the “public interest.”

For more detailed information, you can go HERE.

Since the FCC did not get its way, it has now decided that it wants to make the Internet a public utility. They want to do this using the Title 2 of the 1934 Communications Act. This title was originally created to handle monopoly based telecommunications companies and force them to open up their networks to competition as well as regulate pricing. For more information, you can go HERE. In the past, the FCC was able to control the Internet providers using Title 1 of the 1934 Communications Act. You can review Title 1 HERE.

So what is the difference you may be asking. It is huge. Title 1 gives the FCC the right to intervene when necessary. Title 2 mandates the FCC regulate internet service providers. With this type of power, the FCC could force net neutrality regulations, they could tax internet services under the Universal Service Fund and even regulating Internet pricing.

Historically speaking, public utility regulation restricts entry into an environment and regulates prices to prevent firms from charging excessive prices. It’s typically used in situations where competition is believed to be impossible. Think of the classic Ma Bell (click HERE if you are not old enough to know what this reference means). Sometimes it is also used in situations where pre-existing policy decisions have created monopolies that aren’t going to go away very soon. Note, soon is a relative term.

Broadband access is in no way monopoly. We no longer live in the time where you have to purchase your Internet access through one of a few companies like AOL or Prodigy. While locally in St. Louis, many people purchase their Internet through either AT&T or Charter, you are not required to purchase it through them, you can also purchase it through a wireless company like Sprint or one of many resellers that offer equal to or discounted prices.

While ISP’s are aplenty, the network backbone is essentially an oligopoly. As defined by Dictionary.com an oligopoly is:

When a particular market is controlled by a small group of firms.

The network backbones are maintained by large telecommunication firms like AT&T, Quest, Verizon, Comcast, etc. These carriers are the ones who have laid and maintain the lines. For the small business or residential customer, they basically sell portal access to their backbones. Midsized and larger companies are a different story. Due to the nature of their business, some businesses must align directly with the telecommunications/backbone companies rather than going through a reseller due to the volume of data they will be using. For these companies the prices are dependent upon the total network traffic. These companies would then work directly with one of the backbone companies like a AT&T or Quest.

Basically put, if I am a large company and I need a lot of data, I will purchase access to the Internet that will give me plenty of bandwidth to meet my needs. That purchase may have some limitations on total data where I have to pay a penalty if I exceed the total size during a monthly, quarterly or even yearly period.

Contrary to the perception by some, oligopoly is not synonymous with “evil.” Although both monopoly and oligopoly end in “-opoly,” that doesn’t mean they are the same. Broadband providers do not charge monopoly prices. In fact, the competition to the consumer has probably had the opposite effect and driven costs down even further. Just look locally, AT&T offers a bundle discounts to residential customers and Charter does the same. Charter offers higher speeds for lower prices and AT&T matches. For business, these larger companies are all competing for these high priced contracts. While their prices may be similar they compete by offering additional services, equipment, etc.

This is not a bad thing. Residential customers, who for the most part are using a low volume of broadband, compared to companies, get the benefit of lower prices via competition. These large companies are dealing with the companies that own and maintain that line. If there are problems, there are guarantees that the providers will have the line up and running in a certain length of time, otherwise they have to pay the customer back. The larger backbone companies, while their prices may be similar, are competing on their services. There is nothing wrong with this style and companies have been doing it this way for years.

Once again, historically speaking, there is hard evidence that surface from economic literature on public utility regulation. Just about every time the federal government has tried to impose public utility regulation on an oligopoly, it has ended up enforcing a cartel. This is what happened in the past with railroads, trucking, airlines, and brokerage firms. There are a few times federal price regulation did not enforce cartels for oligopolies or competitive industries. In those cases, it usually created shortages — most notably gasoline and natural gas in the 1970s.

History shows that there is nothing that is working fine that the government cannot screw up when it gets involved. In this case, the Internet providers and backbone is working fine. Sure, we all want higher speeds and it would be great if more people in outlying areas could get easier access to the Internet but that is not something the government can fix. Should the government get involved, it will force these companies to lay cable and give high speed access to those in outlying areas and do so at either a loss or at the cost of those in larger cities. The same is true for corporations. Should net neutrality be enacted, the government will force these backbones to charge a flat fee, equally to companies no matter if they consume a large amount of bandwidth or not.

If this type of government control is to go forward, let it do so through Congress. Using the FCC to sidestep legislative and judicial authority reeks of Chicago style thuggery. Of course, should we expect anything less from the Barack Obama – Rahm Emanual style of politics which is currently in play in Washington?

Now, let’s bring this all together. Recently during the commencement speech at Hampton University in Virginia, President Obama had these two gems.

With so many voices clamoring for attention on blogs, on cable, on talk radio, it can be difficult, at times, to sift through it all…to figure out who’s telling the truth and who’s not. ..Even some of the craziest claims can quickly gain traction. I’ve had some experience with that myself.

And

You’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t rank all that high on the truth meter. With iPods and iPads; Xboxes and PlayStations; information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment. All of this…is putting new pressures on our democracy.

When the President of the United States is saying things like this and his FCC Chairman is trying to control the Internet, it is no wonder that people start becoming a little paranoid.

The Arizona Immigration Bill

OK, I have been sitting on this one for awhile. When it came out, I wrote a whole column on it and decided to sit on it. Why? I wanted to see what the response would be. Let's just say I was not surprised. People all over the place are running around screaming that this is an attack on civil liberties, it is anti-Hispanic, etc. Here's the rub, this law does nothing but reiterate the federal law. In other words, there will not be people asking to see your papers as you try and get on a commuter train like Nazi Germany.

The left are once again overreacting to a law that HAD to be made. The federal government was not taking action. Instead both the Bush and Obama administration want to look the other way. There are some who just want to grant them amnesty because it is easier and a good way to buy votes. Any time someone wants to really do something about it people the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton go on the warpath claiming it is Jim Crowe law, etc.

Think about this for a second. Michigan has a high Middle Eastern population. Some of them are here legally and some illegally. The state legislature comes out and says that we are having too many issues and cannot afford to offer free health care to the illegals. In addition, they are taking jobs for lower than standard living wages, which are keeping legal residents from obtaining these jobs. So, if this law was passed, do you think there would be as much of a stir up? Sure, the ACLU would be out there protesting this as would some of the hard core liberals, but do you think people would be talking about boycotting visits to the state of Michigan? Do you think that people would be trying to get the NFL or MLB to not hold major sports activities there? Of course not. Because in this example I am talking about people who are from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc.

The only reason Democrats and the MSM are making such a big deal about this is because Arizona's issues are with Hispanics. The Hispanic population is the fastest growing population in the US. The culture of the Hispanic community is one that tends to have the same ideals as those of many moderate and conservative Republicans. Hispanics tend to be religious, have a strong sense of both nuclear and extended family and have a sense of pride in their work and performance at work. What we are seeing here is the Democrats and the MSM lap dogs attempting to sway and eventually indoctrinate the Hispanic community into voting Democrat. No more, no less.

Will there be bad cops who take advantage of this new law to harass Hispanics. Yes. Believe me, though, that happens now anyway. There will always be bad cops. Just as there will always be good cops who will follow the law and sometimes take the extra steps to make sure justice prevails on the correct side.

The Arizona immigration law is needed and just. Let the liberals wine and cry, but at the end of the day it will remain law and other states will be doing the same thing. Hell, you know you are in trouble when Caffferty is slamming you.

The Dangerous Next Steps of This Administration

Health care passed without one Republican vote. Hundreds of thousands of voters, Republican, Democrat and Independent shout and plead their opposition. Obama, Pelosi and Reid shrug. Why do they shrug? Because they do not understand or care what we think. People, we need to wake up. The leaders within our government think they know better than us. They went to ivy league schools and many of them lived a privileged life or lived a life of politics and academia. Since they do not understand the real world, they are saying, "Let them eat cake."

Barack Obama and his various minions have long said that once health care legislation passed Congress and it was signed into law, the people would rally around it. This is dangerous thinking my friends. These highly educated politicians think the know better than the populace. History has seen this before and it was called an Aristocracy. Aristocracy is close relative to Socialism or a Communist state. These elitist think they know what is best for us and are forcing it down our throats and they are doing so with well though out and funded marketing packages.

Health care is the first step in a well thought out plan to change the way this country functions on a day to day basis. Had the economy not been tanking, there would have been no way for the government to take ownership stake in private industries. With the US in major recession, it was easy to sell the concept of the government owning stock in major corporations, or in the case of GM, a complete takeover of a publicly traded company. Had the recession not been in full effect and GM on the verge of bankruptcy, the first thing he would have gone after would have been health care. Why is that, because it is easy to paint anyone who is against health care for all as uncaring. It is also easy to make comparisons between universal health care and things like civil rights or medicare.

Now that health care has passed, it legitimizes government intervention into other areas. Just look at the student loan process. Even though it had nothing to do with health care, Congress and the Senate saw fit to add having the government run this program. This was done supposedly to save millions of dollars. That is until you find out that the payback program.

The bill will lower the monthly cap on loan repayments from 15 percent to 10 percent. Beginning in 2014 students will not be required to spend more than 10 percent of their income on loan payments. In addition, loans issued after 2014 will be eligible for loan forgiveness after 20 years rather than 25 years. As long as students make their payments in a timely manner for 20 years they can be forgiven of the remaining balance. This has the potential to cost even more money and cause continued job loss in the financial sector. In addition, it is another piece of the pie that the government is now controlling.

Next the Obama administration wants to tackle the financial sector. Of course this is done all in the name of protecting the populace. Consider the comments of VP Joe Biden in an interview with Aaron Task

"It's a simple proposition to us: Everyone is entitled to adequate medical
health care," Biden says. "If you call that a 'redistribution of income' --
well, so be it. I don't call it that. I call it just being fair -- giving the
middle class taxpayers an even break that the wealthy have been getting."

The VP of the United States is legitimizing the redistribution of wealth under the guise of fairness to the middle class. You have to wonder, though, what this administration considers middle class.

This is why it is not too far of a stretch to imagine the government trying to dictate who we can purchase vehicles from. Can't you see the government demand that all new cars be a Chevy Volt as part of some new climate change or green technology government package. What

Representative Michael Burgess had to say this week is not that far off.

The point is, the leaders in Washington are not looking out for us. They believe they know more than each of us and can tell us how to live our lives. The Republicans were just as responsible for maleficence as the Democrats are now. The difference is the Democrats are quickly making up for lost time.

There are many incumbents who are good Congressmen and Senators, both at the state and federal level. We need to support these people as candidates. In this upcoming election, each one of us needs to take a long hard look at the candidates and determine whether or not they are politicians looking to live off of the public teat or are they public servants who want to perform the act of representing the constituency. I do not know about you, but I would rather have a Congressman or Senator that I disagree with, who at least listens to and acts upon the needs and desires of his constituents versus a politician who caters to special interests, their own self interests or what they think is the best.

And since I know that you and or your staff read this website Lacy Clay and Russ Carnahan. Yes I am talking about you two and I look forward to you two being private citizens come January of next year.

Congressional Democrats - Take Notice

Consider this a public service for all of those who are ticked off with what happened last night as much as I am. Since not a one Republican voted for this atrocity, they are not mentioned in this blog entry. Instead, you will find every Democrat up for re-election or running as a candidate for another political position along with how they voted in last nights election. This is listed by state and includes their congressional district as well as their date elected into office as a Congressman in the House of supposed Representatives. I have highlighted in red any Congressman that voted against this bill. Take action as you see fit and continue the fight.

Alabama
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Bobby Neal Bright, Sr.	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Artur Genestre Davis	First elected: 2002 Running for Governor in 2010 Voted No On On Health Care Reform
Arizona
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Ann Kirkpatrick	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Edward L. "Ed" Pastor	First elected: 24 September 1991- in a Special Election Voted Yes On On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Harold E. "Harry" Mitchell	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Gabrielle "Gabby" Giffords	First elected: 2006 VotedYes On Health Care Reform
Arkansas
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Marion Berry	First elected: 1996 – Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Victor Frederick "Vic" Snyder	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Michael Avery "Mike" Ross	First elected: 2000 Voted No On Health Care Reform
California
CD 1Democratic Congressman C. Michael "Mike" Thompson	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Doris K. Matsui	First elected in a special election 8 March 2005 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman Lynn C. Woolsey	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman George Miller	First elected: 1974 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Nancy Pelosi	First elected: 2 June 1987- in Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Barbara Lee	First elected: 7 April 1998- in Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 10 Democratic Congressman John Raymond Garamendi	First elected in a special election: 3 November 2009 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Jerry McNerney	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman Jackie Speier	First elected: 8 April 2008 in a Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Fortney "Pete" Stark	First elected: 1972 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 14 Democratic Congressman Anna G. Eshoo	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 15 Democratic Congressman Michael M. "Mike" Honda	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 16 Democratic Congressman Zoe Lofgren	First elected: 1994 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman Sam Farr	First elected in a special election: 8 June 1993 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 18 Democratic Congressman Dennis A. Cardoza	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 20 Democratic Congressman Jim Costa	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 23 Democratic Congressman Lois G. Capps	First elected: 2003 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 27 Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 28 Democratic Congressman Howard L. Berman	First elected: 1982 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 29 Democratic Congressman Adam B. Schiff	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 30 Democratic Congressman Henry A. Waxman	First elected: 1974 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 31 Democratic Congressman Xavier Becerra	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 32 Democratic Congressman Judy Chu	First elected in a Special Election 14 July 2009 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 33 Democratic Congressman Diane E. Watson	First elected: 5 June 2001- in a Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 34 Democratic Congressman Lucille Roybal-Allard	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 35 Democratic Congressman Maxine Waters	First elected: 1990 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 36 Democratic Congressman Jane Harman	Returned to House: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 37 Democratic Congressman Laura Richardson	First elected in a special election 2007 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 38 Democratic Congressman Grace Flores Napolitano	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 39 Democratic Congressman Linda T. Sánchez	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 43 Democratic Congressman Joe Baca	First elected: 16 November 1999 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 47 Democratic Congressman Loretta Sanchez	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 51 Democratic Congressman Bob Filner	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 53 Democratic Congressman Susan A. Davis	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Colorado
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Diana L. DeGette	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Jared Polis	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman John Tony Salazar	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Elizabeth Helen "Betsy" Markey	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Edwin "Ed" Perlmutter	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Connecticut
CD 1 Democratic Congressman John B. Larson	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Joseph D. "Joe" Courtney	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Rosa L. DeLauro	First elected: 1990 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Jim Himes	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Christopher Scott "Chris" Murphy	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Florida
CD 2 Democratic Congressman F. Allen Boyd, Jr.	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Corrine Brown	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Alan Mark Grayson	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Katherine Anne "Kathy" Castor	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman Kendrick B. Meek	First elected: 2002 Running for Senate Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 19 Democratic Congressman Robert Wexler	First elected: 1996 Retiring in April Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 20 Democratic Congressman Debbie Wasserman Schultz	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 22 Democratic Congressman Ron Klein	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 23 Democratic Congressman Alcee L. Hastings	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 24 Democratic Congressman Suzanne M. Kosmas	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Georgia
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Sanford Dixon Bishop, Jr.	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr.	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman John R. Lewis	First elected: 1986 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman James Creel "Jim" Marshall	First elected: 2002 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman John J. Barrow	First elected: 2004 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman David Albert Scott	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Hawaii
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Mazie K. Hirono	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Idaho
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Walter Clifford "Walt" Minnick	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
Illinois
CD 1 Congressman Bobby Lee Rush	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Jesse Louis Jackson, Jr.	First elected: 12 December 1995 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Daniel William Lipinski	First elected: 2004 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Luis V. Gutierrez	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Mike Quigley	First elected: 7 April 2009 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Danny K. Davis	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Melissa Luburich Bean	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Janice D. "Jan" Schakowsky	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Deborah "Debbie" DeFrancesco Halvorson	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman Jerry F. Costello	First elected: in Special Election, 9 August 1988 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 14 Democratic Congressman G. William "Bill" Foster	First elected in a special election: 8 March 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman Philip G. "Phil" Hare	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Indiana
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Peter J. Visclosky	First elected: 1984 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Joseph Simon "Joe" Donnelly	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman André D. Carson	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Brad Ellsworth	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Baron P. Hill	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Iowa
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Bruce L. Braley	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman David Wayne Loebsack	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Leonard L. Boswell	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Kansas
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Dennis Moore	First elected: 1998 Retiring Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Kentucky
CD 3 Democratic Congressman John A. Yarmuth	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman A.B. "Ben" Chandler, III	First elected 17 February 2004 in a special election Voted No on On Health Care Reform
Louisiana
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Charles J. "Charlie" Melancon, Jr.	First elected: 2004 Running for Senate 2010 Voted No on On Health Care Reform
Maine
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Chellie M. Pingree	First elected: 2008 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Michael H. Michaud	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Maryland
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Frank Michael Kratovil, Jr.	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Charles Albert Dutch "C.A. Dutch" Ruppersberger, III	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman John Peter Spyros Sarbanes	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Donna Fern Edwards	First elected in a Special Election, 17 June 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Steny Hamilton Hoyer	First elected in a Special Election, 1981 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Elijah E. Cummings	First elected: in Special Election, 16 April 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Christopher "Chris" Van Hollen, Jr.	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Massachusetts
CD 1 Democratic Congressman John Walter Olver	First elected: in Special Election, 1991 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Richard E. Neal	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman James P. "Jim" McGovern	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Barney Frank	First elected: 1980 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Nicola S. "Niki" Tsongas	First elected in a Special Election, 16 October 2007 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman John F. Tierney	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Edward J. "Ed" Markey	First elected: 1976 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Michael E. "Mike" Capuano	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Stephen F. Lynch	First elected 16 October 2001 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 10 Democratic Congressman William D. "Bill" Delahunt	First elected: 1996 Retiring Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Michigan
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Bart Stupak	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Dale E. Kildee	First elected in Special Election, 1977 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Mark Hamilton Schauer	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Gary Peters	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman Sander M. "Sandy" Levin	First elected: 1982 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 14 Democratic Congressman John Conyers, Jr	First elected: 1964 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 15 Democratic Congressman John D. Dingell	First elected in 1955 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Minnesota
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Timothy J. "Tim" Walz	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Betty McCollum	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Keith Maurice Ellison	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Collin Clark Peterson	First elected: 1990 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman James L. "Jim" Oberstar	First elected: 1974 Yes On Health Care Reform
Mississippi
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Travis W. Childers	First elected in a special election 13 May 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Bennie G. Thompson	First elected in Special Election, 13 April 1993 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Gene Taylor	First elected in Special Election, October 17, 1989 Voted No On Health Care Reform
Missouri
CD 1 Democratic Congressman William Lacy Clay, Jr.	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Russ Carnahan	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Ike Skelton	First elected: 1976 Voted No to On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, II	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Nevada
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Shelley Berkley	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Dina Titus	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
New Hampshire
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Carol Shea-Porter	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Paul W. Hodes	First elected: 2006 Running for Senate Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
New Jersey
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Robert E. "Rob" Andrews	First elected in Special Election, 1990 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman John H. Adler	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman William J. "Bill" Pascrell, Jr.	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Steven R. Rothman	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 10 Democratic Congressman Donald M. Payne	First elected: 19968 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman Rush D. Holt	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Albio Sires	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
New Mexico
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Martin T. Heinrich	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Harry Teague	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Ben Ray Luján	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
New York
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Timothy H. "Tim" Bishop	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Steve J. Israel	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Carolyn McCarthy	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Gary L. Ackerman	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman Gregory Weldon Meeks	First elected: 3 February 1998 in Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Joseph "Joe" Crowley	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Jerrold Lewis "Jerry" Nadler	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Anthony D. Weiner	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 10 Democratic Congressman Edolphus "Ed" Towns	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Yvette D. Clarke	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman Nydia M. Velazquez	First elected: 2006 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Michael E. "Mike" McMahon	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 14 Democratic Congressman Carolyn B. Maloney	First elected: 1992 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 15 Democratic Congressman Charles B. Rangel	First elected: 1970 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 16 Democratic Congressman José E. Serrano	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman Eliot L. Engel	First elected: 1988 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 18 Democratic Congressman Nita M. Lowey	First elected: 1988 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 19 Democratic Congressman John Joseph Hall	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 20 Democratic Congressman H. Scott Murphy	Re-elected Tuesday 31 March 2009 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 21 Democratic Congressman Paul David Tonko	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 22 Democratic Congressman Maurice D. Hinchey	First elected: 1992 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 23 Democratic Congressman William L. "Bill" Owens	First elected in a special election: 3 November 2009 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 24 Democratic Congressman Michael Angelo "Mike" Arcuri	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 25 Democratic Congressman Daniel Benjamin "Dan" Maffei	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 27 Democratic Congressman Brian M. Higgins	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 28 Democratic Congressman Louise McIntosh Slaughter	First elected: 1986 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
North Carolina
CD 1 Democratic Congressman G. K. Butterfield	First elected in Special Election, 20 July 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Bob Etheridge	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman David E. Price	Returned to House: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Mike McIntyre	First elected: 1996 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Lawrence Webb "Larry" Kissell	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Joseph Heath "Heath" Shuler	First elected: 2006 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 12 Democratic Congressman Melvin L. "Mel" Watt	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Ralph Bradley "Brad" Miller	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
North Dakota
At-Large Democratic Congressman Earl Ralph Pomeroy	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Ohio
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Steven Leo "Steve" Driehaus	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman Charles A. "Charlie" Wilson, Jr.	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Marcy C. Kaptur	First elected: 1982 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 10 Democratic Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Marcia L. Fudge	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Betty Sue Sutton	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 15 Democratic Congressman Mary Jo Kilroy	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 16 Democratic Congressman John A. Boccieri	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman Timothy J. "Tim" Ryan	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 18 Democratic Congressman Zachary T. "Zach" Space	First elected: 2006 Voted No On Health Care Reform
Oklahoma
CD 2 Democratic Congressman David Daniel "Dan" Boren	First elected: 2004 Voted No On Health Care Reform
Oregon
CD 1 Democratic Congressman David Wu	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Earl Blumenauer	First elected in Special Election, 1996 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Peter Anthony "Pete" DeFazio	First elected: 1986 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Kurt Schrader	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Pennsylvania
D 1 Democratic Congressman Robert A. Brady	First elected in Special Election, 1998 Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Chaka Fattah	First elected: 1994 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Kathleen Ann "Kathy" Dahlkemper	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Jason Altmire	First elected: 2006 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman Joseph A. "Joe" Sestak, Jr.	First elected: 2006 Candidate for the Senate in 2010. Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Patrick J. Murphy	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 10 Democratic Congressman Christopher P. "Chris" Carney	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski	First elected: 1984 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 13 Democratic Congressman Allyson Y. Schwartz	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 14 Democratic Congressman Mike Doyle	First elected: 1994 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman T. Timothy "Tim" Holden	First elected: 1992 Voted No On Health Care Reform
Rhode Island
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy	First elected: 1994 Retiring Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman James R. Langevin	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
South Carolina
CD 5 Democratic Congressman John McKee Spratt, Jr.	First elected: 1982 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman James E. "Jim" Clyburn	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
South Dakota
At-Large Democratic Congressman Stephanie M. Herseth Sandlin	First elected: 1 June 2004 in a Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Tennessee
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Lincoln Edward Davis	First elected: 2002 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman James H. S. "Jim" Cooper	First elected: 2002 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman Barton Jennings "Bart" Gordon	First elected: 1984 Yes On Health Care Reform Retiring
CD 8 Democratic Congressman John S. Tanner	First elected: 1988 Retiring Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Stephen Ira "Steve" Cohen	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Texas
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Alexander "Al" Green	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 15 Democratic Congressman Rubén E. Hinojosa	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 16 Democratic Congressman Silvestre Reyes	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 17 Democratic Congressman Chet Edwards	First elected: 2004 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 18 Democratic Congressman Sheila Jackson Lee	First elected: 1994 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 20 Democratic Congressman Charles A. Gonzalez	First elected: 1999 in a Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 23 Democratic Congressman Ciro D. Rodriguez	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 25 Democratic Congressman Lloyd A. Doggett	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 27 Democratic Congressman Solomon P. Ortiz	First elected: 1982 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 28 Democratic Congressman Henry R. Cuellar	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 29 Democratic Congressman Raymond E. "Gene" Green	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 30 Democratic Congressman Eddie Bernice Johnson	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Utah
CD 2 Democratic Congressman James David "Jim" Matheson	First elected: 200 Voted No On Health Care Reform
Vermont
At-Large Democratic Congressman Peter F. Welch	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Virginia
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Glenn Carlyle Nye, III	First elected: 2008 Voted No healthcare Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Robert C. "Bobby" Scott	First elected: 1992 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 5 Democratic Congressman Thomas Stuart Price "Tom" Perriello	First elected: 2008 Voted No On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman James P. "Jim" Moran, Jr.	First elected: 1990 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman Frederick C. "Rick" Boucher	First elected: 1982 Voted No healthcare Reform
CD 11 Democratic Congressman Gerald E. "Gerry" Connolly	First elected: 2008 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Washington
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Jay R. Inslee	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Rick R. Larsen	First elected: 2000 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Brian N. Baird	First elected: 1998 Retiring Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 6 Democratic Congressman Norman D. "Norm" Dicks	First elected: 1976 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman James A. "Jim" McDermott	First elected: 1988 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 9 Democratic Congressman David Adam "Adam" Smith	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
West Virginia
CD 1 Democratic Congressman Alan Bowlby Mollohan	First elected: 1982 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Nick Joe Rahall, II	First elected: 1976 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
Wisconsin
CD 2 Democratic Congressman Tammy Baldwin	First elected: 1998 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 3 Democratic Congressman Ron Kind	First elected: 1996 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 4 Democratic Congressman Gwendolynne "Gwen" Moore	First elected: 2004 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 7 Democratic Congressman David R. Obey	First elected: 1969 Special Election Voted Yes On Health Care Reform
CD 8 Democratic Congressman Steven Leslie "Steve" Kagen	First elected: 2006 Voted Yes On Health Care Reform