Smith joined the vast majority of the Congress to support a Resolution that condemned the withholding of information by the Bush Administration related to corruption within the Iraqi government. And in response to Bush trying to classify a report that contained this information, they went as far as to call that an abuse of the classification process to withhold broad assessments of the extent of the corruption. In doing this, it makes one wonder if Adrian Smith is also having to acknowledge that things aren’t as rosy in Iraq as he’s tried to claim they are.
Smith also joined the vast majority in voting on a bill that would protect journalists from being pressured to release information from sources. The exception would only come if a judge ordered it based on a preponderance of the evidence, or when national security is directly threatened.
The House also passed a bill with overwhelming bipartisan support that prohibited states from being able to tax internet access, along with most internet commerce, as has been done since 1998. There are exceptions for those that passed laws before the 1998 laws were passed, but those exceptions do not allow increases. Of course, in leading up to this vote, Smith had to make it a big issue through statements and his weekly column that he (most likely his staff) writes. He tried to make a small controversy because it wasn’t made permanent, and announce that HE is cosponsoring a bill that would do just that. But here’s the irony: Republicans had control of the House and Senate for 6 years. In 2001 and 2003, they could have push through a permanent ban on taxes for the internet. They chose to limit the ban, forcing ongoing reauthorization. Why, now, is it a big issue?
The fact is that, as internet becomes more and more the method of choice for people to communicate and make purchases, there may come a time where sales taxes are dropping for local governments, and creating major problems. These taxes are used to pay for basic infrastructure locally, and for some governments, even covering the cost for schools. You can’t close a door to something like that permanently. But unless it becomes an absolute necessity, there is nothing wrong with renewing the law every few years.
Smith also supported (again with the vast majority) a bill regarding railroad safety issues.
The big vote this week, however, was the vote to try and override Bush’s veto of the SCHIP bill. As I’ve reported repeatedly, Smith once again voted against the needs of the children, and stuck with the House leadership in blocking this at every chance possible. He then turned around and made highly disingenuous statements, coupled with completely dishonest claims about the effects of the bill.
Smith cosponsored 3 more bills, but he remains at the bottom of the pack of freshman’s, continuing the pattern of being one of the least effective members of Congress.
Smith found time to do self promotion by appealing to hunters, even though he did little more than join the rest of the members of Congress in showing support for hunters. He also joined with Republicans in trying to create another false controversy. They are moving to try and permanent ban the Fairness Doctrine. This is a policy that was ended over 20 years ago, but called for broadcasters to always give opposing viewpoints on hot button issues. They fear that Democrats will reinstate it, and it would have the most immediate impact on the entire Fox News network, and Rush Limbaugh. But, at the same time, there has been no move to reinstate it. But, you’ve got to keep the base worried that the liberals are going to take over and destroy this country, and what better way than to tell the base that they are going to find a way to silence their most important media assests? God knows, Bill O’Reilly would be completely lost if his “No Spin Zone” actually had to provide time for the actual truth for a change!!
ROLL CALL VOTES
H.RES.741 - Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 734) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the withholding of information relating to corruption in Iraq.
This sets forth the rules for debate and consideration of H.Res.734.
Two votes: Ordering the Previous Question and Agreeing to the Resolution. Both votes party-line: Democrats for, Republicans against. It passed.
H.RES.734 - Title: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the withholding of information relating to corruption in Iraq.
PER the CRS Summary:
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that:
(1) as Congress considers the President's request for over $150 billion more for the war in Iraq it is essential that Congress and the people of the United States know the extent of corruption in the Iraqi government and whether corruption is fueling the insurgency;
(2) it was wrong to retroactively classify portions of the report titled "Stabilizing and Rebuilding Iraq: U.S. Ministry Capacity Development Efforts Need an Overall Integrated Strategy to Guide Efforts and Manage Risk" which was released October 4, 2007, and other statements that do not meet the criteria for classification;
(3) it is an abuse of the classification process to withhold from Congress and the people of the United States broad assessments of the extent of corruption in the Iraqi government; and
(4) a directive that prohibits federal officials from providing Congress and the people of the United States with broad assessments which characterize the quality of Iraqi governance and that they should be rescinded.
Surprisingly, this was very bipartisan.
The resolution PASSED on a vote of 395-21-15.
Only 21 Republicans voted against it.
Smith voted for it. Is he having to admit that things aren’t are rosy as he’s parroted them to be??
H.RES.742 - Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2102) to maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing conditions for the federally compelled disclosure of information by certain persons connected with the news media.
This sets forth the rules for debate on H.R. 2102.
Two votes: Ordering the Previous Question and Agreeing to the Resolution. Both votes party-line: Democrats for, Republicans against. It passed.
Why do I keep posting these votes? Because it shows the pattern of how Republicans want to fight every bill every step of the way regardless if they actually support the bill. Adrian Smith joins right in with them. It’s important for readers to really understand that.
H.R.2102 - To maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing conditions for the federally compelled disclosure of information by certain persons connected with the news media.
This bill is known as the Free Flow of Information Act of 2007. It’s a bill that is supposed to protect journalists, so that judges or members of the executive branch cannot compel them testify or produce documents unless a court orders it based on a preponderance of the evidence. That content must be limited. The bill also applies to “communications service providers” with regards to transactions between them and journalists.
There were 2 amendments, each adopted by voice vote. They provided for exceptions that directly relate to national security.
After debate was complete, a Motion to Recommit was made, with instructions to report “forthwith”. The amendment stated:
(b) AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST.--For purposes of making a determination under subsection (a)(4), a court may consider the extent of any harm to national security.
The Motion PASSED on a vote of 388-33-10.
Smith voted FOR it.
H.R. 2102 then PASSED on a vote of 398-21-12.
Only 20 Republicans and 1 Democrat voted against it.
Smith voted FOR it.
H.R.3678 - To amend the Internet Tax Freedom Act to extend the moratorium on certain taxes relating to the Internet and to electronic commerce.
Known as the Tax Freedom Act Amendments Act of 2007, this widely supported bill extends the moratorium on state taxation of Internet access and electronic commerce until November 1, 2011, with exemptions for states that had previously enacted such laws. Those with exemptions would have restricted authority to continue taxing. They made sure that emails and instant messaging were included under the definition of internet commerce, as well as non-utility telecommunications (such as cable service).
With little debate, a Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass was made (this requires a two-thirds vote to pass.)
The bill PASSED on a vote of 405-2-25.
Basically, everyone supported it.
Here’s the interesting thing. This was not a big deal. This was what everyone wanted. There was no controversy. But Smith, in his infinite wisdom, put a lot of time and energy into making it sound like it was a big controversial topic. Why would he do it? Well, for starters, in doing that, he gives the impression to constituents that he’s really stepping up to defend their rights against the big, bad Democrats. Too bad he has to keep making it up as he goes along.
Smith wrote one of his (always entertaining and full of BS) weekly columns on “Internet Tax Freedom”.
Recognizing the potential of the Internet and wanting to make sure it had the chance to succeed Congress enacted the Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA) in 1998, and has temporarily extended the moratorium twice - once in 2001 and once more in 2003.
Though it has been extended twice, ITFA has never been made permanent despite repeated attempts.
There is broad, bipartisan support for renewing the law banning taxes on Internet access, including cable modem and digital subscriber lines or DSL as it is more commonly known. What is in question, however, is whether the tax moratorium should be made permanent or simply extended for a few years as has been done the last two times Congress tackled this issue.
Adding to the drama is the fact the current moratorium expires on November 1, 2007 - a little more than a month away - and precious little has been done to either extend the moratorium or make it permanent.
If the moratorium elapses without Congress taking action, there exists a very real possibility some states could leap at the opportunity to pass new laws taxing Internet access, raising the cost of Internet access for users.
Oh my god! The Sky is falling!!
Oh...wait...just a moment. When this was released, the bill was already working its way through. Matter of fact, in the end, it was all passed and signed by the President by 10/31/07. Maybe he shouldn’t have gotten all worked up over nothing.
After the House’s vote, Smith also sent out a Press Release to announce that HE VOTED FOR THE BILL (failing to state that so did the rest of Congress, with the exception of 2 people).
Congressman Adrian Smith (R-NE) today voted to pass a four year moratorium on taxes leveled against Internet access, while calling on Congress to make the tax ban permanent.
Congress enacted the Internet Tax Freedom Act in 1998, and has temporarily extended the moratorium twice – once in 2001 and once more in 2003. The current moratorium will expire on November 1 of this year. Smith is also a cosponsor of H.R. 743, legislation which would make the moratorium permanent.
Repeated attempts to make the access tax permanent or extend it beyond four years were defeated at the committee level.
Wait a moment...are we creating yet another “false” controversy? The big, tough Republican is suggesting that Democrats are blocking this from being PERMANENT, and that is what is SO IMPORTANT in this matter. The committee just wouldn’t make it permanent after “repeated attempts”, but by GOD he’s cosponsoring a bill that would do just that!!
Of course, he fails to explain that the bill he talks about was introduced on 1/31/2007, and it took him 2 1/2 months until he signed onto it. Also, he fails to explain that the committee considering the bill that passed approved it UNANIMOUSLY, so maybe making it permanent wasn’t really as big of an issue as he thought it was.
H.RES.746 - Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3773) to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to establish a procedure for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence, and for other purposes.
This sets forth the rules for debate and consideration of H.R. 3773.
Can you predict the votes? Yep...the usual: Democrats for, Republicans saying ‘we don’t want to!”
H.R.3773 - To amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to establish a procedure for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence, and for other purposes.
This bill revisit’s the FISA Court and the warrantless wiretapping issue. Debate was started, but then postponed until a later date. No votes were taken on passage.
H.RES.724 - Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2095) to amend title 49, United States Code, to prevent railroad fatalities, injuries, and hazardous materials releases, to authorize the Federal Railroad Safety Administration, and for other purposes.
This sets forth the rules for consideration of H.R. 2095.
Republicans once again voted against considering it, but then FINALLY (in a rare move) consented to passage by voice vote.
H.R.2095 - To amend title 49, United States Code, to prevent railroad fatalities, injuries, and hazardous materials releases, to authorize the Federal Railroad Safety Administration, and for other purposes.
This is known as the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act of 2007. Pretty self explanatory, but it addresses many safety issues and regulations.
There were 4 amendments offered, all of which were passed by a voice vote.
A Motion to Recommit was then made, asking that an amendment be inserted and reported back “forthwith”. The amendment would be to NOT change the name of the Federal Railroad Administration to the Federal Railroad Safety Administration. Rep. Bill Sali said it was a waste of money to make the change. Those opposed said cost wasn’t even an issue. For example, stationary would be used up with the old name before replacing with the new name.
The Motion FAILED on a vote of 198-222-11. There were 13 Democrats that joined the Republicans in voting for this, while 11 Republicans joined with the Democrats to vote against it.
Smith voted for it.
The bill then PASSED on a vote of 377-38-16
Only 38 Republicans voted AGAINST the bill.
Smith voted for it.
-------------------------------------------------------
For the last bill of the week, the day started with Republicans trying to block progress.
They made a motion to vote on approving the previous days journal.
The Journal was APPROVED 219-187-2-23.
FOR: 203 Democrats, 16 Republicans
AGAINST: 12 Democrats, 175 Republicans
PRESENT: 2 Republicans
NO VOTE: 16 Democrats, 7 Republicans
Smith voted AGAINST approval.
H.R.976 - An act to amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children's Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes.
This vote was to override the Presidential Veto of the first SCHIP Bill, which would require a two-thirds vote.
The Veto Override FAILED by a vote of 273-156-4
FOR: 229 Democrats, 44 Republicans
AGAINST: 2 Democrats, 154 Republicans
NO VOTE: 2 Democrats, 2 Republicans
Adrian Smith voted AGAINST providing for the most needy children of the Third District, completely for political reasons.
Only 13 more Republicans were needed to override the veto. If it had passed the House, the Senate already had a veto-proof majority, showing that this was very much a bipartisan bill.
The Omaha World Herald published a story about the issue, “Lawmakers squirm over kids' health insurance”. They pointed out the very bogus argument by Smith:
Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., said he supports SCHIP, but the proposed expansion extends coverage too far.
"We need to be very careful in terms of growing government and especially as it relates to government-run health care," Smith said.
He took particular issue with the use of cigarette taxes to fund the expansion. The funding source is likely to prove unreliable, he said, as higher taxes prompt smokers to cut back.
Smith said he supports the president's proposal of increasing funding by $5 billion.
Except, that $5 Billion over 5 years would do nothing to account for inflation, or the skyrocketing costs of healthcare. That amount would not even continue coverage for the kids currently in the system. Many would get pushed back out. How very Christian of him.
There were additional statements published during this time as well:
KOTA: SMITH DEFENDS SCHIP VETO VOTE
NEBRASKA CONGRESSMAN ADRIAN SMITH SAYS HE COULDN'T SUPPORT THE VERSION OF THE S–CHIP PROGRAM VETOED BY THE PRESIDENT.
SMITH WAS AMONG REPUBLICANS VOTING TO UPHOLD THE VETO OF THE EXPANDED STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM. THE THIRD DISTRICT CONGRESSMAN SAYS IT WAS TROUBLESOME THAT THE BILL WOULD HAVE MORE THAN DOUBLED THE CURRENT PROGRAM.
"THAT, TO ME, SHOWS SIGNS THAT MAYBE THE PROGRAM NEEDS FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IF IT NEEDS MORE THAN DOUBLE IN FUNDING," SAYS SMITH. "BUT IN MANY RESPECTS, THE PROGRAM IS WORKING FOR THOSE CHILDREN WHO NEED IT THE MOST AND WE NEED TO BE THERE FOR THOSE FOLKS."
SMITH SAYS HE COULD SUPPORT A MODEST FUNDING INCREASE IN S–CHIP, ESPECIALLY IF IT ENCOURAGES THOSE WITH PRIVATE INSURANCE TO CONTINUE THAT COVERAGE.
In other words - those kids eligible and NOT under the system due to lack of funding - well, let’s just ignore them because the system is working fine without them.
OWH: Compromise on insurance for children sought
Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., said the bill would have covered families with high incomes and relied on the "unstable funding source" of cigarette taxes.
Smith called on Congress to proceed in crafting a "sensible bill" that ensures the country's poorest children are covered.
And yet, we now know he never did anything to try and add to that discussion if it was such a concern to him. Lot of hot air being pumped out there....
Then Smith wrote a small Blog entry on The Hill:
The Hill: SCHIP Debate NOT about Low-Income Kids (Rep. Adrian Smith)
Yesterday, I voted to sustain President Bush’s veto. This debate is not about providing health care to America’s low-income children. That idea has widespread support — including mine — and SCHIP is an important part of reaching that goal. Instead of working to ensure those who need this assistance receive it, earlier this year Congress passed a bill that opens loopholes for illegal immigrants, expands the program to cover individuals with high incomes, encourages more federal spending, and forces the program to rely on an unstable funding source — increased cigarette taxes. The President was wise to veto it.
Now we must move forward and craft a sensible bill that makes sure the poorest children receive coverage. But time is of the essence. Political gamesmanship has delayed this matter for far too long already.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.....of course, now we know he was lying with every breath.
-------------------------------------------
The remaining bills passed with little or no opposition:
H.RES.738 - Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the Government of Syria's continued interference in the internal affairs of Lebanon.
H.R.2089 - To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 701 Loyola Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the "Louisiana Armed Services Veterans Post Office".
H.R.20 - To provide for research on, and services for individuals with, postpartum depression and psychosis.
H.R.2295 - To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the establishment of an Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Registry.
H.CON.RES.182 - Recognizing the need to pursue research into the causes, a treatment, and an eventual cure for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, supporting the goals and ideals of National Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Awareness Week, and for other purposes.
H.CON.RES.222 - Commending NASA Langley Research Center in Virginia on the celebration of its 90th anniversary on October 26 and 27, 2007.
H.RES.549 - Recognizing the importance of America's Waterway Watch program, and for other purposes.
FLOOR STATEMENTS
Smith made one floor statement this week:
TRIBUTE TO NEBRASKA NATIONAL GUARD 1074TH DIVISION
(Mr. SMITH of Nebraska asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, on Friday October 12, the Nebraska National Guard's 1074th returned to a hero's homecoming in North Platte, Nebraska. The 1074th, headquartered out of North Platte, with detachments in Broken Bow, Ogallala, and Sidney, Nebraska, returned to Nebraska after a year-long deployment to Iraq. While in Iraq, the 1074th Transportation Company's primary missions were convoy security and local humanitarian support.
The 1074th tragically lost one of their own. Sergeant Randy J. Matheny, a native of McCook, Nebraska, made the ultimate sacrifice to his country on February 4, 2007. I join my fellow Nebraskans in offering my sincere sympathy and continued thoughts and prayers for the Matheny family.
The reception the 1074th received from families, friends and supporters upon their return to Nebraska was truly inspiring, as thousands, literally thousands of well-wishers welcomed these American heroes home in an incredible display of patriotism and pride. I wish to convey appreciation to the 1074th upon their safe return to Nebraska, and certainly commend Nebraskans for their amazing show of support in giving our soldiers the warm, heartfelt reception they deserve.
BILLS SPONSORED/COSPONSORED
Smith did not sponsor any new bills this week, but he did sign on as a cosponsor on 3 bills.
H.R.3779 - To require the Architect of the Capitol to permit the acknowledgment of God on flag certificates
This became yet another Republican “controversy” when the Architect of the Capitol said they weren’t going to automatically put “God” on flag certificates. This didn’t prevent Members of Congress putting it on themselves or making the request for it’s inclusion.
As a result of this “controversy” of such government-stopping importance, this bill was introduced on 10/9/2007. Smith then added his name on 10/16/2007.
H.R.3802 - To prohibit the collection of tolls on highways, bridges, and tunnels constructed using Federal funds.
Now why on earth would this be pushed? Aren’t MOST highways, bridges and tunnels constructed using at least SOME Federal funds? Are they trying to eliminate all toll roads? I wouldn’t mind, but then, it’s beneficial to those areas that have high traffic and more upkeep. Oh, and Nebraska doesn’t have any toll roads.
The bill was introduced on 10/10/2007. Smith added his name on 10/18/2007.
H.R.3888 - To provide for a 5-year SCHIP reauthorization for coverage of low-income children, an expansion of child health care insurance coverage through tax fairness, and a health care Federalism initiative, and for other purposes.
Ah, yet another “Republican” SCHIP Bill that would fail to provide for the children of this country. Another attempt by Smith to say: “See? I support it. I really do! Except, when I don’t get what I want.”
Smith signed on as one of the original cosponsors on 10/18/2007. He did so along with the Republican leadership that he follows so closely: Blunt, Boehner, and Cantor.
As of the end of this week of Congressional Actions:
- Smith has Sponsored 6 bills, and Cosponsored 96, for a total of 102.
- Among the 53 Freshmen members of Congress that started the same time he did, the average number of bills Sponsored is 10.7, the average Cosponsored is 203.9, for a total of 214.6.
- The median total number of bills sponsored and cosponsored is 196.
- Smith ranks number 50 out of 53 among freshman on this issue.
IN THE NEWS
Smith made sure to devote one of his columns to “Thanking American Sportsmen”. Here are some highlights:
Every year, thousands of hunters enjoy their sport safely and lawfully. Unfortunately, there are those few who either willfully or inadvertently fail to observe safety rules designed to protect the hunters and those around them.
This is a good time to be mindful of safety issues. Basic advice such as never drink alcohol while hunting, being mindful of your surroundings, and marking your targets should always be followed.
The Nebraska Game and Parks Commission provides firearm hunter education, taught by volunteer instructors. These lessons should be taken to heart, by both young hunters and experienced veterans….
Sportsmen make considerable contributions to our environment and our economy. To recognize this, late last month I supported, and the House of Representatives passed, the following measures:
H.Res. 634 - Encouraging participation in hunting and fishing, and supporting the goals and ideals of National Hunting and Fishing Day and the efforts of hunters and fishermen toward the scientific management of wildlife and conservation of the natural environment.
H.Res. 79 - Recognizing the establishment of Hunters for the Hungry programs across the United States and the contributions of those programs' efforts to decrease hunger and help feed those in need.
H.Con.Res. 193 - Recognizing all hunters across the United States for their continued commitment to safety.
These three bills acknowledged our hunters and anglers, and recognize their commitment to our society……
As a member of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus and Second Amendment Caucus, and a life-long member of the National Rifle Association, providing an opportunity for future generations to continue this tradition is a priority of mine in Congress, as I imagine it is for any Member of Congress who fondly remembers the excitement of Fall.
First off, the bills he mentions. The first two were passed by voice vote, and Smith did not cosponsor either one. So we have his word he voiced a “Yea” when the question was asked. The last he put his name on as a cosponsor about 3 weeks after it was introduced, and the vote was unanimous. Basically, everyone supported these, so it’s not some big “accomplishment” for Smith.
Second, the Caucuses. What’s the best way to explain these? I know I did once before.
Okay, here’s a comparison. I know several people (myself included) who are on Facebook. You get invites to “join this group” from your friends, or you find them yourselves. Beyond those being listed on your page, you will get the occasional announcement to “support this” or “do that” with those groups. That’s how you participate in them.
Caucuses are the same. Join as many as you want. But it doesn’t mean you’re ACTUALLY doing much of anything. As far as these caucuses, Smith really hasn't shown any bills or legislation that comes directly from them - except for maybe the one he consponsered.
------------------------------------------------------------
Bush made a trade speech during the week, and Smith decided to comment on it:
Congressman Adrian Smith (R-NE) – a member of the House Agriculture Committee and the Republican Whip Trade Team – today commented on remarks given today in Miami, Florida, by President Bush regarding U.S. Trade Policy.
“Nebraska’s agriculture producers, manufacturers, and services providers deserve more access to foreign markets. Opening new export markets has long been a priority of mine. It goes without saying agriculture markets are tremendously important to the Third District and the nation as a whole, and breaking down barriers to trade will allow Nebraska’s products to continue to compete in the global market place,” Smith said.
He follows it up with the usual dry statistics. Result of this? Nothing really. He just had to say something, I guess.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Smith has been following on the heals of some Republicans trying to make an issue out of something that actually isn’t an issue right now. There’s a big Republican move to force a vote on the Broadcast Freedom Bill, which would eliminate the Fairness Doctrine from being implemented ever again:
Congressman Adrian Smith (R-NE) has signed onto a petition initiated by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), compelling House Leadership to bring up the Broadcaster Freedom Act (H.R. 2905) for consideration on the House floor.
In 1949, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began mandating broadcasters to present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, the so-called “Fairness Doctrine.”....
In the mid-1980’s the FCC overturned the Fairness Doctrine and a court challenge upheld the FCC’s decision. Both President Ronald Reagan and President George H.W. Bush actively opposed attempts to reinstate it. As a result, broadcasters today are able to speak freely and talk radio has emerged as a powerful medium of ideas and opinions.
On June 28, the House of Representatives passed a one-year moratorium on the Fairness Doctrine. The Broadcaster Freedom Act would prohibit the FCC from adopting rules or policies reinstating the Fairness Doctrine permanently.
“The exchange of ideas, thoughts, and opinions available on radio and television make our nation strong. I don’t always agree with what I hear, but I love the fact I live in a country where market-based principles have led to hundreds of options – from multiple channels of AM and FM radio, satellite radio services, the Internet, and television – all of which are free to air their views without fear of government reprisal. This bill is important and deserves a vote in Congress,” Smith said.
Now, here’s the problem with this. It’s not an issue. No one is really caring about it. A few Democrats mentioned it a couple times very early this year in passing to media, but NO ONE has suggested it be started up again. It’s a non-issue.
H.R.2905 would prevent the FCC from being able to require broadcasters to present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance. Of course, this kind of policy would have a huge, immediate impact on Fox News (along with all their broadcasts), and Rush Limbaugh. But people like Smith don’t think about the fact that this would also impact things like Air America and all their broadcasts.
The June 28 vote that Smith is talking about was H.R.2829, the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act. An amendment passed that no funds could be used to implement the Fairness Doctrine by a very large majority (304-115). Smith, of course, supported that amendment. HOWEVER, he voted AGAINST the final bill.
Overall, Smith is developing a pattern of shouting out on issues that trigger angry responses from the base. In doing so, they think “this guy is standing up for our moral values”. But shouting does very little. In the mean time, when it comes to substantive issues that affect everyone everyday, Smith is extremely quiet and sitting in the background, waiting for the leadership to point him in the right direction.
0 comments:
Post a Comment