The Darcy Burner campaign now concedes that Congressman Dave Reichert is the most moderate and independent member of the Washington state congressional delegation. Seriously. Courtesy of the Burner campaign, I produced this graphic which shows that Reichert has joined with the opposition and voted against his own caucus more often than any other representative from Washington state.
[Click for a larger version]
The Burner campaign has tried to smear Reichert as a rubber-stamp, claiming, misleadingly, that he has voted anywhere from 93% to 97% of the time with the Republican leadership. Okay, so Burner hasn't said in so many words that Reichert is the most moderate and independent member of the House from Washington state, but the data she's using reveals that he is --
The Burner campaign home page now claims that "Reichert has voted 93% of the time with the right-wing Republican leadership in Congress". (The 93% figure is misleading, but grounded in facts. I have no idea where their earlier claim of 97% comes from and the campaign hasn't answered my inquiry). The campaign home page includes this link to the Washington Post database of Congressional roll call votes. The 93% figure means that in 93% of the roll call votes, Reichert voted the same way as did a majority of fellow Republicans. But that number by itself is largely meaningless, because most roll call votes passed with majorities in both parties. So it is also true but just as meaningless to state that "Reichert has voted most of the time with Nancy Pelosi and the left-wing Democratic leadership".
A better indication of a representative's degree of independence would be the number of times they vote with the opposition party on disputed votes (i.e. where the two parties take opposite sides).
I downloaded into a database all of the roll call votes from 2005-2006 (using a Perl script, thank you) and crunched the numbers. Out of 770 votes, Reichert voted as follows:
With bipartisan majority: 372The bar chart ranks the House members by the number of times they crossed the aisle. The fact that Reichert voted with the Democrats on 44 occasions makes him more independent and bipartisan than nearly 87% of his fellow Republicans, nearly 80% of all members of the House and every other representative from Washington state. (by way of comparison, Jay Inslee and Cathy McMorris crossed respective party lines on only 10 votes, and the 2nd most moderate Washington congressman, Democrat Adam Smith, crossed party lines on only 36 votes).
With Republicans on disputed vote: 327
With Democrats on disputed vote: 44
Against bipartisan majority: 8
Quorum vote (everybody votes present): 3
Did not vote: 16
Of course, some conservatives might not like the fact that Reichert voted against the majority of his caucus so many times. But I suspect that most residents of the district would appreciate that he thinks for himself and votes his conscience even if it means voting across party lines more often than most members of Congress are willing to do.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 21, 2006 05:38 PM | Email This"HINTON is 'unimpressed'"
Assuming Burnout is elected, will we see this 2 years from now?
"She's voted with the Democrat leadership 93 percent of the time," he told Wednesday's fund-raiser. "This is not someone who is in any reasonable sense of the word a moderate."
In the interests of full disclosure, even the most leftist member of Congress there votes with "Republican leadership" at least SOME percentage of the time. Republican leadership RUNS the place, and ANY time ANYONE votes FOR a bill, they're usually "voting with Republican leadership." Brian Baird CERTAINLY voted with "Republican Leadership" when he voted "yes" on that Terri Schiavo bill. Does that mean he's not a "moderate?"
Of course, you'd never point that out in any of your campaign pieces, would you?
It's not easy being a sacrificial donkette for the seattle libs - poor little darcy donkette - cry me a river.
What do you think about The Stranger being so in love with Burner? Will that help/hurt her with Eastsiders?
There's also the National Journal vote ratings that list Reichert as Mainstream and Moderate.
Posted by: Patrick on April 21, 2006 06:47 PMA vote for Burner is a vote to reduce the republican majority in congress.
The choice is simple. No matter where you stand.
You like what's going on in DC, vote for Reichert.
You don't like what's going on in DC, vote for Burner.
It doesn't get any simpler...
Posted by: TomMolto on April 21, 2006 08:09 PMExecutive was the description in an AP story. We went to her Web site and found this description:
Darcy went to work for Microsoft in 2000 and became the lead manager for an initiative to change the way software was built. It was very successful and enhanced Darcy's reputation as a successful executive.
"We'll keep your suggestion in mind when we write about her in the futgure.
Executive was the description in an AP story. We went to her Web site and found this description:
Darcy went to work for Microsoft in 2000 and became the lead manager for an initiative to change the way software was built. It was very successful and enhanced Darcy's reputation as a successful executive.
We'll keep your suggestion in mind when we write about her in the futgure."
So much for investigative reporting.
And neither do you.
You would willingly forgo an honest man who does his best to represent all of his constituents, and go for a rubber-stamp who won't win and wouldn't represent if she did.
Bravo.
I hope that for our country's sake your strategy fails (just like most things liberals do)
Posted by: alphabet soup on April 21, 2006 08:56 PMThe fact that her particular program was cancelled doesn't indict the quality of Darcy's work at all. Instead, it just shows how non-executive her role was that less than two years after her primary effects on the program, partners no longer saw it as important to them. One would think that it would be a requirement for an executive to have more visibility than a single program that basically had the shelf life of an extended marketing campaign.
Posted by: Marc on April 21, 2006 09:01 PMLets see If I vote for democrats what do I get.
1. Cut border security.
2. Increase in Taxes(Tax cut will never be made permanent)
3. Increase in unemployment. More Illegals taking away jobs from US citizens.
4. Weaker Defense. Cut Military.
5. Abandon IRAQ to terrorists.
6. Higher Taxes means less jobs.
7. No chance at all for any new drilling for oil anywhere in the US. But will send money to CUBA to help Castro drill for oil 50 miles off our shores.
8. More spending on Health Care and Education 2 or three times current levels.
9. No attempt to fix Social Security.
10 Support the UN to dictate what we can or can not do. (The uncorrupted UN which is above all laws and could never be corrupted at least in the eyes of Democrats. Food for oil was just one program that got corrupted right)
Vote For Republicans
1. Entitlements???? more or less unknown.
2. Oil exploration increase.
3. Maybe more refinery capacity but doubtful.
4. Tax cuts made permanent.
5. Increasing job market.
6. Stronger Border patrols but do not know if they have the will to put up the wall.
7. Stronger Economy if breaks are made on excessive spending(Some cuts have been made but need to see more leadership and identifing areas that should be defunded)
8. Slower growth in Government encrouchment on our rights.
9. Stronger Military and Stronger response to terrorism.
10. Maybe enforcement of immigration laws that are on the books today. If Mccain has his way it will cost a number of republicans thier jobs. Too Weak of a response and no attempt at border security. The flood gates will be open for millions more of illegals entering the US.
Overall it is a tough choice. republicans have been pretty weak on fixing things. Corrupted by Washington DC Special interests. Democrats are too busy destroying any good that this administration has attempted to do.
As the world looks at us. A Democrat majority means a weak US that any two bit dictator can make demands on the US. Because they will not stand up to any thought that someone may not like them. A republican majority. World will not know if they can bully us or not. Some will try and if they are put down hard then others will not try. If we do not respond well that means more countries will try to destroy the US way of life. But under republicans it will be fewer fires to put out around the world.
Posted by: David Anfinrud on April 21, 2006 09:16 PMWe need to stick it to Islamic Fanatics now, before they get any bolder, stronger or better organized. The vote for Republicans like Reichert is an easy one.
Darcy Burner is not ready for the big leagues. Her cheesy letter to Cheney may have impressed the sophmoronic Horses Ass, but it's one more reason she doesn't stand a chance with real voters.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 21, 2006 10:47 PMI agree it couldn't be simpler - vote for Reichert to support Washington DC status quo. Vote for Burner to suggest change is in order.
David's points are SO one sided, it's hard to know the most intellctually honest way to respond. So I won't...I'll let the American people do it -- and they are speaking in VOLUMES that the status quo is bad and change is necessary.
David, your republican talking points are all so biased -- it only serves to support the other rush kool-aid drinkers out there. That group is getting smaller and smaller....
You got what you wanted in the last several elections and look where it has gotten us.
Status quo? Not for me or the 63% of other Amercians who feel it's wrong. But party on with the 37% -- they love your stuff (as noted by the comments following)....
fade away........
Posted by: TomMolto on April 22, 2006 08:39 AMThe facts don't support your wishes. You may think that polls, which are usually wrong, prove your point, but the facts show that the country has been steadily becoming more conservative and the last several Federal elections prove that out. In addition many governorships, and other offices have become Republican. It's easy to put on your Blue Blinders in a state like WA where we have politicians like Murray and McDermott, but the reality is that it is not going your way.
And there is a good reason for that, which is quite simple. The majority of America does not want to turn tail in the face of Islamic Fanaticism. Most people took a look at Bush and then Kerry and the choice was simple. And it's going to continue to be that way, because if you have not noticed, Iran's leadership is becoming more and more hysterical and fanatic, and they are getting closer and closer to a Nuke.
Your fantasies and polls are of no consequence, polls showed John Kerry winning. The defining issue of our age is the confrontation of Islamic Terror, Theocracy and Fanaticism and that will be the issue that continues to set the tone of America. Most Americans have a strong sense of life. And that sense tells them that we must stand up for our values and our way of life.
You are in the minority. Good luck.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 22, 2006 08:55 AMIndeed, look. Open your eyes. The country is doing very well economically, we've finally begin to confront Islamic hatred, after more than 30 years of appeasement and isolationism started by Jimmy Carter. The death rate in the US is the lowest it has ever been. More and more Americans are starting there own businesses. Consumers are optimistic. And despite our immigrant problems, they pale in comparison to what is happening in other countries like France. By any metric, we are the envy of the world. Look where you have chosen to live. Think about why you stay in the US.
If we are really so far off track here in your eyes, why not move to a country where the ideas that you wish for are already in place? Socialist Europe perhaps?
I think you've been reading a few too many Bush Hating, Left Wing sites which have colored your perceptions. The reality is that America is doing well, and most Americans know why and will vote to continue the prosperity. Again, good luck.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 22, 2006 09:05 AMPull your head out of the sand and/or where the sun don't shine and ask yourself if you want your country overrun by illegals from third world countries just so your Demoncat party (in spite of Howard Dean said has little interest in enforcing existing immigration laws) can recoup the power it lost back in the 90's. That is a huge sacrifice for the rest of us to pay to lose our country. We won't buy it, so go peddle your half-baked ideas to the secular progressive kool aid drinkers at Horsesass.org.
Posted by: KS on April 22, 2006 09:46 AMNot surprisingly, one of you calls for me to leave the country. Anyone who disagrees with the leadership in DC should leave the country? I guess the extreme views of your side shock no one any more.
The rest of you suggest that I have blinders on. I'm told the country is doing great. People will vote to continue the leadership we have in DC. You can't even find a Fox poll to come close to supporting that argument. Or a newsmax story.
The reality train still has places for folks...it's not too long to get on...
Posted by: TomMolto on April 22, 2006 10:31 AM"...it's hard to know the most intellctually (sic) honest way to respond. So I won't..."
Bravo! A (brief) moment of clarity from a lefty!
Posted by: alphabet soup on April 22, 2006 10:34 AMI do not look at Republican Talking points. I look at what Democrats stand for. What they vote for over the past 25 years. I was an independent. I spent 20 years in the US Navy. Just to clarify that I do not follow talking points. I analysis. I listen then I make my decision. I can discuss many things because I love to read and discuss issues.
Republicans are not perfect. I do not defend them with every word. There are a few Democrats that show that they support the troops. Lots of lip service but when you look at what they say and how they vote on important issues you can not hide behind words said one time.
What Government program has ever solved a social issue? Democrats over and over again demand more money and more social programs. IF we got rid of 10% of the failing social programs we could balance the federal budget.
But overall my negative feelings to Democrats are more due to State Democrats.
WE have a problem with Transportation. We have billions of backlog work to do. WE have a surplus in money and where is the money spent not on helping fix some of the transportation issues. If you want a working transportation system the number one issue is movement of goods from point a to point b.
When US Citizens are put behind illegals for getting on the state health insurance plan.
When property rights are limited more and more by regulations that democrats demand. It is not hard to see that the have no consideration for any rights of an individual.
When a law firm can give free lawyer time to get an initiative to fail. and use their lawyers to attempt to silence any voice for an initiative and that is not considered a political contribution. BUt talk radio is a political contribution. By the way that law firm could make millions of tax payer dollars because they are the firm that will bond the money. A conflict of interest you bet.
Overall the Democrats make rules that everyone but themselves have to follow. It may be a minority of the democrats believe this in this state. but overall it is the appearance because they are always seen.
Yes some Republicans do the same thing. But normally republicans will hold it against their politicians. And at least they attempt to clean house. Not always effective because of political power but at least I look at standards that must be met to get my vote.
How long have we been at war with drugs? That started decades ago. WE have had some successes but the will to win has never been there. If we do not have the will to continue the war on Terror it will be with us killing us for decades also.
Democrats have proven they do not have the will. They want to treat it like law enforcement. Take people to jail after they kill americans.
Look at each state and you will find some corruption from each party that controls a state yet the most outrageous attacks on personal freedom and constitutional rights seem to come from Democrat ruled states. CA, MA, OR, or WA Constitutional rights are being taken away not by republicans but by democrats either by legislature or the courts appointed by These same Democrats. Freedoms are not freedoms when limits are placed on them. Eventually you get to the point that there is no freedom.
Silence the blogs using campaign finance. Force the fairness doctrine on Talk radio. Both of which are headed by democrats or their special interest groups. Why only liberal point of views can be heard? Air America the liberal talk radio network I do not see them expanding but I do see them loosing market share. I listen to them on line once in a while to hear their talking points. All I hear is hate. Nothing positive. Always negative maybe that is why they are not expanding and have to pay stations to stay on the air. Where conservative talk radio has radio stations paying them to broadcast what they have to say. Why is that?
Where are the ideas? Where are the solutions? It always seems for democrats the solution is more money. And hope you forget that they got more money 3 years ago to fix a problem when they demand more money.
Republicans on the whole have ideas the biggest problem is our politicians do not listen to them. But at least we are trying to get them to hear our voice. And listen to our ideas.
For democrats is it you are a racist if you do not agree with what I say. You are close minded. You dont care. It is always the standard lines from the closed minded.
What is wrong with discussing issues? Make good points I will listen.
My point is that if the US is in as bad a shape as you think, then why are you still here? I'm not asking you to move, I merely suggesting that you square reality with your statements.
As for your reliance on Fox for info, they are just as much a part of the mainstream media as NBC, ABC, CBS. Go read a few blogs. But more importantly, just read beyond the headlines. The US is doing well. You are simply wrong.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 22, 2006 01:12 PMDemocrats responsible for war on drugs failing? "Just say no!" worked better?
I live in Bellevue. You do a great job stereotyping each and every kind of voter in our district. You throw out ridiculous name calling...it's not worth taking any of those points seriously.
War on terror? That's like saying war on agent orange! Terror is a *tactic*..you don't go to war on tactics. You go to war on enemies. Enemies use terror...that's just one example of the ineptness of this whole thing. If Bush had just been truthful and said "Saddam's a bad guy and we are going in to get him out" -- it would have been...are you ready...intellecutally honest.
But no, he had to lie and lie and lie (as shown by the swarms of reports from folks leaving his own cabinet) making the whole thing ridiculous.
And you say democrats are weak?
Transportation? Only recently the dems got control of the state government and for the first time PROGRESS! With republican control in one place or another, all transportation things were on hold or shelved UNLESS they included TONS of pavement heading toward republican owned businesses. Basically, eastside politics had been controlled by Mr Bellevue Developer himself!
Now that his supported candidates were failing to get elected...progress began!
The goal of transportation planning is not to create TONS of streets and only streets and wide streets heading toward Bellevue Square Mall! Hard to believe, I know...but it's true.
You go anywhere else in this country and you see better results. How you can even mention transportation as a republican-positive and democrat-negative is beyond me.
You are right that republicans are not perfect. And democrats are not perfect.
But a hell of a lot more progress has been made these past 2 years than any of the previous state leglislatures.
And just because I think some things can be improved...doesn't mean I should leave the country...geez. Did you leave when Clinton was president and the dems owned congress? Your argument is ridiculous.
Posted by: tommolto on April 22, 2006 03:31 PMBefore that...there was *mixed* government...mr. history lesson. That means the republicans prevented progress as they refused to pass out leglislation that we badly needed.
Posted by: TomMolto on April 22, 2006 04:12 PMNice job bozo's!
This state can't survive very much more of your kind of "progress" malto-meal.....
Posted by: alphabet soup on April 22, 2006 06:05 PMI just vote for goverment who protect our border and not naive and dont play politic and who really good leader.
when washington state have law like georgia ?, 100 billion dollar we spend for all illegals allien benefits even they have making dangerous gank in the world MS-13 spread in 33 state and this senator still again bill 4437,
guest worker will kill middle class and most mexicans women breeder baby and their baby will cost for US tax payer,they invation our country but senate still ignore arogant not doing their job for US citizen ,your vote and your salary from US ccitizen not from illegals and not from coorporation ,this really stupid and this is like corruption by illegal,STOP NOW 20 MILLION MORE RAPE OUR TAX PAYER Posted by: john on April 22, 2006 09:16 PM
I can the extreme litany of Rush-based talking points, nicely packaged in Washington state terms.
Actually, this is good. It reinforces my original point that the folks with these extreme views are becoming more and more the minority. All the data (jobs, roads, education, etc. are UP over the past 2 years when progress finally happened).
Facts? Check out 1) unemployement 2) housing 3) transportation projects 4) increase in folks moving here (hmmm, why would they do that if things were as dire as y'all suggest????)
Boeing doing well....Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon, Nordstrom...big companies doing great. Smoking eliminated in public places. SAT scores up across the board. Geez....doesn't seem dire to me!
Hey, rents are up (don't you apartment-building owning Rs love that????).
Unprecedented businesss leaving the state? Can you name any that we'd recognize? Nice talking point...just lacks all credibility.
On immigration...check with your cum-Rush leader, Michael Medved. He actually has it right (good for him to buck the extreme in this case and support the correct, reasonable thing after all).
And, to use the logic above, if you think it's so awful here...so terrible...why are so many people pouring in here from the places where republicans rule the government?
Posted by: TomMolto on April 23, 2006 06:26 AMDeliberate circumvention of I-601, Democrats. Taking 65% of rural landowners property via regulatory taking without compensation In King county and then taking the landowners to Court to keep them from being able to vote on it. Democrats. Closing All of the County owned parks and Swimming pools and forcing local jurisdictions to pay to take over operations with additonal tax burdens, NO reduction in County taxes, NO significant JOB REDUCTION comensurate with closing facilities. Democrats.
40 Million Dollar losses on Computer system upgrades. Democrats. 60 Million Dollar losses on floating bridge repair. Democrats. forcing long time state employees to join a union or be fired, even though they were already non-voting dues paying employees. Democrats. Thousands of illegally registered felons, illegal aliens and Dead people on the voter rolls. Democrats. Hundreds of absentee ballots processed at poll sites and COUNTED. Democrats. Who doctored the concurrency study so that Triolgy and Northridge could be built near Redmond on Novelty Hill road without proper infrastructure in place to support it? Causing current and futre residence to pick up the County's and Developers part of the bill? Oh yes the Democrats.
I am suprised you would mention Boeing considering they are now Headquartered in Chicago and outsourcing more and more manufacturing to Off shore builders. Microsoft? Which adminstration tried to break-up Microsoft again? Oh yeah The Democratic Clinton administration. I guess Bill Gates and Company didn't attend enough coffee meetings at the White House. Education? Do you really want to go there, Ok Graduation rates, WASL Dumbed Down, Seattle School Closings, Budget crisis?
When you get a chance get off the pipe and pick up even a local Newspaper.
1. Anything the republicans say or do is 100% right and anything the democrats do is 100% wrong.
2. Rush is god.
3. Bush is god.
4. The evil mainstream media is a left wing plot. Fox is fair and balanced.
5. All good things in WA state are because of republicans. All bad things are because of democrats.
6. Stefan is god.
7. Rossi is god.
If you ever, really, really, really, want to be honest, you will understand your talking points are as valid as the democrats.
In the end -- BOTH sides are the same...they lie about the other side and exaggerate their own success.
Ultimately, they are there to support their powerbases (e.g. Mr. Bellevue Square Mall for the republicans and Mr. Union for the democrats). And keep/use power.
Posted by: TomMolto on April 23, 2006 10:45 AM1. vote for Reichert if you like what's going on in DC and want it to continue
2. vote for Burner if you want to change what's going on in DC.
Easy as pie..and completely proven per above.
Burner has my vote without a doubt.
Posted by: tomMolto on April 23, 2006 10:47 AMNever mentioned Rush or anyone else in the media.
Never mentioned Bush.
Never mentioned Evil Mainstream Media, Although I did suggest you read a Newspaper once in a while.
Never mentioned all good things in WA state because of Republicans, They are not the ones in power and in contol of all of the agencies I mentioned above, during the timeframes I mentioned above.
Stefan is not God, Rossi is not God, do you even have a God besides the Democratic Party?
You cannot argue the points so you deflect. Darcy Burner is not qualified to be in Congress an I will work to ensure that she is not elected. You profess that both sides are the same, so you want Darcy to replace the only representative from Western Washington State who is not a Democrat?. Vote however you want, I think any rational individual would vote for Reichert. Your Vote for McGavick to change from Cantwells pro-war stance will be the mark of your consistency, or will that be a Green party throw away vote. Posted by: Smokie on April 23, 2006 11:12 AM
Support that it was only rhetoric - there were a few points that you were challenged on, which you convieniently ignored.
I don't see ever getting an honest answer from Molto - you are using Howard Dean's talking points, which are as disingenuous as the day is long. Also, I don't listen to Rush - he tends to be a Republican kool aid drinker and I like more objective viewpoints, although he is correct about mainly the things you disagree with him about.
I guess Tom embraces being a victim - and accepting handouts from the Democrat party, whose main goal is to keep you on their plantation - looks like they are doing that.
SS is asserting that OPPOSING the batshit crazy agenda of Delay, Bush, Rove, et al., is a GOOD THING, and therefore Dave Reichert is a good candidate?
The logical corollary of such a notion, of course, is that the Bush, Delay, Rove, et al., have sold us a bill of batshit goods that is clearly BAD FOR AMERICA.
Your smirking chimp in chief boasts that he does not read the papers, but are any of you familiar with the term COGNITIVE DISSONANCE?
I can't wait to see the gymnastics involved in reconciling this....
She will call on her local supporters from Mercer Island, photo op with Ron Sims, Wine tastings with Dave Ross and maybe a little Liberal value swapping with Sandeep and Dwight at the pub. You remember Liberal Values don't you bartelby "Drinking and and F#%king" as described by the King County Executive spokesman and the State Party Chair. I can hardly wait for Darcy to start Door-belling in rural King County, make sure she wears her Pro CAO button proudly.
Posted by: Smokie on April 23, 2006 09:26 PMIt is because of politicians like Reichert that I will not be voting this year.
The Republican Congress has spent money and expanded government just as much as the Democrats did when they were in control. Well, actually that isn't true. - THEY HAVE INCREASED THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT AND SPENT MONEY FASTER!
Thought you were conservative. I now see that I was wrong.
Posted by: Conservative, Not Republican on April 24, 2006 06:35 AMPoliticians like Reichert is the reason this is the case.
A vote for Reichert is saying to the powers that be in Washington DC that we like what is going on there.
But Staying Home in 2006 will send these people a message!
Reichert is a RINO who doesn't deserve the support of True Conservatives. And from the people I talk to, he won't get it. Conservatives are giving up, stopping voting, and just trying to live out their lives the best they can while they can.
Posted by: Republican, in Name Only on April 24, 2006 06:41 AMWhat would Darcy Do? You know like the bracelet. Will Darcy spend less? No. All she can talk about is spending more. Will Darcy take a strong stand for clean and fair elections at all levels? Well if she could manage to get the polls herself on a regular basis and maybe show up at some public meetings maybe we could find out. Will she do more for Washington State as a strong independant voice? Like who? McDermott? She is a self described Dave Ross supporter (socialist) who has no problem advocating for even MORE government, higher Taxes and less personal freedoms. But we really don't know exactly what Darcy is, because she is a Fiction is progress by the Democratic Party Committee that is supporting her. She is still being molded and trying to get her story straight. Darcy is still an unqualified, Still has no history of public service, and is still unknown by folks who should know her best, her neighbors.
Posted by: Smokie on April 24, 2006 07:20 AMFOAD bartleboob.......
Posted by: alphabet soup on April 24, 2006 12:02 PMWhat matters is what Reichert did on the key votes, legislation where the majority position among Democrats in the House was different from the majority position among Republicans in the House.
When you look at these key votes, Reichert voted with Republicans on all of these (and his vote was the deciding vote for 4 of them):
House Roll Call 31, the REAL ID Act
House Roll Call 38, Class Action Fairness Act.
House Roll Call 48, Job Training Improvement Act.
House Roll Call 102, Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act.
House Roll Call 108, Bankruptcy Prevention and Consumer Protection Act.
House Roll Call 144, Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act.
House Roll Call 204, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.
House Roll Call 296, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.
House Roll Calls 369, 370, 371, and 372, the Occupation Safety and Health bills.
House Roll Call 443, CAFTA. (Cast deciding vote)
House Roll Call 445, Energy Policy Act of 2005.
House Roll Call 475, To Establish the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina.
House Roll Call 493, School Readiness Act.
House Roll Call 519, Gasoline for America's Security Act. (Cast deciding vote)
House Roll Call 533, Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act.
House Roll Call 534, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
House Roll Call 553, Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act.
House Roll Call 559, Online Freedom of Speech Act. Note: this is the only time when I would have dissented form the Democrat majority position.
House Roll Call 601, Deficit Reduction Act. (Cast deciding vote)
House Roll Call 621, Tax Relief Extension Reconciliation Act.
House Roll Call 627, USA Patriot Act Improvement and Reauthorization Act.
House Roll Call 628, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006. (Cast deciding vote)
House Roll Call 661, Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act.
House Roll Call 670, the budget.
and he only voted with Democrats on these three votes:
House Roll Call 282, the Henry Hyde United Nations Reform Act.
House Roll Call 506, Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act.
House Roll Call 635, Pension Protection Act.
You evidence stands a further proof that Republicans, not democraps, are the party of inclusion and progress!
Posted by: alphabet soup on April 24, 2006 09:49 PMYour evidence stands a further proof that Republicans, not democraps, are the party of inclusion and progress!
Posted by: alphabet soup on April 24, 2006 09:50 PMI had no idea that a blog with the limited readership of Sound Politics would so completely panic the lefties. They seem to be spending hours on this board posting various responses under multiple handles. (Kind of pathetic, but cute in a moronic way.)
Also, we are treated to more brain farts from Tom Molto. Thanks Tom. Whenever I wonder what side of the issue I should I should be on, I read your silly rants and instantly know that logic is on the other side of the argument.
Congratulations to the Sound Politics group for keeping these morons busy so they can't write yet another letter to the editor of the Times or P-U which they will sign with the name of some union member that they haven't even met.
Posted by: johnny on April 24, 2006 10:49 PMAll in the eye of the beholder. The "independent" voter probably looks at this a little differently than you do. The problem for Reichert is that his votes on those issues mirrors that of bad boy Tom DeLay. Reichert, try as he might, can't shake being damned by association with the tainted representative from Texas. The fact Dave Reichert has taken $20000 from Tom DeLay's ARMPAC doesn't help matters for him either.
Posted by: Daniel K on April 25, 2006 12:15 AM
Frankly, if someone wanted to challenge Reichert I would have expected someone a lot less...ordinary from the Democrats than Burner. She appears to be no different from any East Coast machine Democrat, only without the experience.
Posted by: Marc on April 25, 2006 01:08 AMJust take the list of key votes, where she most likely would have voted with the majority Democratic position on all of them, where Reichert voted with the majority Republican position on all but three of them.
I applaud people for taking the time to look at the voting record. The Library of Congress makes these rollcalls available in an easy to review fashion, and it is important to look at what your congressional leaders are voting on, and to look closely at what the bills entail.
What you dismiss as Burner's "ordinaryness" is a strength in my view. She's genuine, down to earth, and passionate about the issues that matter to regular people. She is hardly the "East Coast machine Democrat" you would wish to portray her as. She entered this race not because a party hand picked her, but because of her own belief she could provide better representation in D.C. for the residents of the 8th.
In the past the Republicans have benefitted from a weak or diluted Democratic challenger, and Jennifer Dunn's political strength. However, this year the tide is turning. GOP problems in D.C., Bush's terribly approval ratings, and Burner's early campaign start, and solid grassroots support and impressive fundraising numbers, in a district that is leaning Democratic, mean that freshman congressman Reichert is going to have the biggest battle for this seat the GOP has experienced in many many years, and it is going to take more than just a good head of hair to win re-election.
Posted by: Daniel K on April 25, 2006 09:18 AMShe Doesn't speak at public meetings in her own area. She hasn't been an advocate on any of the local issues for or against. She has no record of service in the community. Other than being a lap dog of Dave Ross(Socialist)campaign last time around, who knows what she is about except Microsoft Money?
Are you connected to the Burner Campaign Daniel? Do you care that 100% of Western Washington would have only one party representing it in the other Washington?
Posted by: Smokie on April 25, 2006 11:18 PMI guess I have to ask how you really "know" what you know. I mean, Darcy seems to change her story on even minor things a whole lot.
It seems like just a few days ago she was a high flying Microsoft Executive and now she's just a regular joe like you and me. Imagine that.
More party hack bs. Don't you guys have KOS, Democraticunderground and every single freakin page in the Seattle PI to play your blatantly partisan games?