What: All Issues : Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful : Adequate Government Funding for a Broad Range of Human Needs : (H.R.2847) On the Tiahrt of Kansas amendment that would have deleted $250 million from the fiscal year 2010 Department of Commerce spending bill and replaced it with the same amount from the previously-passed economic stimulus legislation (2009 house Roll Call 362)
 Who: All Members : New York, District 2 : King, Pete
[POW!]
 
(H.R.2847) On the Tiahrt of Kansas amendment that would have deleted $250 million from the fiscal year 2010 Department of Commerce spending bill and replaced it with the same amount from the previously-passed economic stimulus legislation
house Roll Call 362     Jun 18, 2009
Member's Vote
(progressive
or not)
Progressive Position
Progressive Result
(win or loss)

This was a vote on an amendment offered by Rep. Tiahrt (R-KS). The amendment would have deleted $250 million from H.R. 2847, the fiscal year 2010 Departments of Commerce spending bill, and replaced it with the same amount from the previously-passed economic stimulus legislation. That deletion and replacement would have been made in the funding for the Economic Development Administration, which is part of the Department of Commerce. Congress had previously passed economic stimulus legislation designed to deal with the financial crisis the country was experiencing, and the Economic Development Administration received funding from that stimulus legislation.

Rep. Tiahrt began his remarks in support of his amendment by saying that a significant time had passed since the economic stimulus bill was enacted “and our economic woes haven't changed . . . Our government is borrowing money it does not have. It is inflating programs and projects we do not need. Recently, it was reported that over 100 wasteful projects were funded through this stimulus bill.”

Rep. Tiahrt went on to say: “(M)y amendment . . . would keep a quarter of $1 billion from our deficit by taking the stimulus dollars to pay for this legislation . . . at a time when Americans are pulling back on their spending and are saving more, our government should do the same.” Tiahrt went on to argue that: “(I)n the 1930s, we tried a similar philosophy. We borrowed money from other countries and we started programs that had never before been tried, and throughout the 1930s, we had double-digit unemployment . . . In the 1990s, Japan tried the same thing. They had a recession. They borrowed money. They started government programs, and it didn't work there either.”

Rep. Mollohan (D-WV), who was managing H.R. 2847 for the Democrats and opposed the amendment, said that the impact of the amendment would be “to jerk the rug out from under the Recovery Act at a time when the Recovery Act is beginning to stimulate and to help the recovery of our economy . . . .” Mollohan argued: “(I)f there is one agency in the Federal Government that is focused on fomenting economic development, it is the Economic Development Administration. This agency is charged with stimulating economic development in areas that are most needy head on and the amendment is trying to undermine its ability to do its mission.”

The amendment defeated on a vote of 161-270. One hundred and fifty-six Republicans and five Democrats voted “aye”. Two hundred and fifty-one Democrats and nineteen Republicans voted “nay”. As a result, no 2010 fiscal year funds for the Economic Development Administration were deleted and then replaced with an equal amount from the economic stimulus legislation.

N N W
Issue Areas:
Key: Y=Yea, N=Nay, W=Win, L=Loss