What: All Issues : Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful : (H.R. 1) On an amendment prohibiting the use of funds provided by a “continuing resolution” (which funded government agencies and programs for the remainder of the year) for the salaries and expenses of White House czars--high-ranking policy officials with interagency authority who were not subject to congressional oversight. This amendment was offered to a continuing resolution funding the federal government through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs. (2011 house Roll Call 87)
 Who: All Members : New York, District 2 : King, Pete
[POW!]
 
(H.R. 1) On an amendment prohibiting the use of funds provided by a “continuing resolution” (which funded government agencies and programs for the remainder of the year) for the salaries and expenses of White House czars--high-ranking policy officials with interagency authority who were not subject to congressional oversight. This amendment was offered to a continuing resolution funding the federal government through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs.
house Roll Call 87     Feb 17, 2011
Member's Vote
(progressive
or not)
Progressive Position
Progressive Result
(win or loss)

This was a vote on an amendment by Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) prohibiting the use of funds provided by a “continuing resolution” (which funded government agencies and programs for the remainder of the year) for the salaries and expenses of White House czars--high-ranking policy officials with interagency authority who were not subject to congressional oversight.. This amendment was offered to a continuing resolution funding the federal government through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs.

Scalise urged support for his amendment: “…We've seen over the last 2 years under President Obama a very disturbing proliferation of czars, these unappointed, unaccountable people who are literally running a shadow government, heading up these little fiefdoms that nobody can really seem to identify where they are, what they are doing. But we do know that they're wielding vast amounts of power, many of them making six-figure salaries, and yet you can't find out exactly what they're doing…. So the bottom line is it's time that we reestablish our responsibility as a legislative branch. Let's get back to those constitutional principles, and let's get rid of these czars….We shouldn't have the government running the shadow government, and we shouldn't have all these czars.”
 
Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) opposed the amendment: “This is a complex world. A president needs an ability to govern. The president relies on many of these executive positions to effectively govern this country. It is not a Democratic or Republican thing. It is about having an effective executive and effective administrative branch…. and while I certainly oppose this amendment, I would love to work with the gentleman and others to look at these positions one by one. We have discussed a proposal to eliminate the drug czar, for instance. The drug czar's office spends $21 million a year, and yet drug use has gone up since its inception, illegal drug use. There are ways that we can work together, but a blatant removal of the ability of a President to effectively govern the country is not a wise measure, and one that I rise in opposition to.”

The House agreed to this amendment by a vote of 249-179. Voting “yea” were 236 Republicans and 13 Democrats. 178 Democrats and 1 Republican voted “nay.” As a result, the House agreed to an amendment prohibiting the use of funds provided by a continuing resolution for the salaries and expenses of White House czars--high-ranking policy officials with interagency authority who were not subject to congressional oversight..

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