Former Health Care Industry Lobbyist and Congressman Jason Altmire continues to bite the hand that feeds him.
UPDATE: From the Comments section (Hope it was worth it, Jason because I'm guessing there's a lot of folks like GeneW):
At 10:43 AM, GeneW said...
I worked hard for almost six months making phone calls and knocking on doors for him three years ago in part because he told me and my wife to our faces that he was going to fight to reform healthcare. We no longer live in his district but if I did, I'd certainly vote against him and if he has a primary challenger, I'll definitely send him/her support.
.
9 comments:
I did about 15 minutes worth of research last night to test that very theory, Maria, and it was enough to turn my stomach:
Coming out vocally against cap-and-trade legislation and in defense of polluters? BAM!!
Giving the Bush/Cheney administration a blank check to bomb/invade Iran without Congressional authorization? POW!!
Refusing to allow Guantanamo detainees a trial in the U.S. after in some cases EIGHT YEARS of secret detention without any charges? KABLAMMO!!
I was prepared to think this was just a matter of Altmire's health insurance quirk crossing perfectly with Altmire's anti-choice quirk. But it's not. He appears to be a comprehensive disappointment.
He's a creep who embodies my belief that you can never really trust anti choice politicians in general (he's the un-named pol I was talking about in this post).
he's gotten his last vote or endorsement to friends from me!
I worked hard for almost six months making phone calls and knocking on doors for him three years ago in part because he told me and my wife to our faces that he was going to fight to reform healthcare. We no longer live in his district but if I did, I'd certainly vote against him and if he has a primary challenger, I'll definitely send him/her support.
Like it or not Jason Altmire represents the interests of the people of his district. A progressive candidate would get crushed up here, so consider that before trying to get a progressive to run against him. You could knock him off just to replace him with the second coming of Melissa Hart.
I think he really is trying to get a good bill. The final bill merged with the Senate version will likely be more conservative and something he can support.
In any case, he has some damage control to do.
It's a beautiful thing.. liberals eating their own. Go ahead, run a liberal in Altmire's district.. by all means give that liberal boatloads of $$$. Go ahead. Knock your self out.
I'd campaign for and contribute $$ to a Conservative in this district.. not sure I trust Altmire..
You liberals realize the Stupak amendment was "100% cover" to buy votes don't you? A Dem could vote for the Stupak amendment and then vote for the bill... many probably knowing that the amendment will be aborted (killed) in a final Bill. Others were dupes.. a vote was bought.. plain and simple.
Against Cap 'n Tax - Good.
For attacking Islamofacists in the ME - Good.
Against Muzzies on US soil - Good.
The key would be knowing what Altmire would do in a key moment where he doesn't have the luxury of a throwaway vote. Yes, certain votes are "throwaway" when the outcome is predetermined.. saves a representative's a**.
Wonder what the vote for the healthcare bill would have been had the vote been SECRET ballot? Hmmm? Me thinks something on the order of 280-155 AGAINST.
Jason (who I helped elect as well...) is making a classic political strategic decision. He KNOWS that Dems won't vote for Mary Beth if she runs, so he figures he is inoculated....
I mean, as a progressive, who would you vote for next time around?
I was always a bit nervous about his health industry ties and now I am even more so. My guess is that, if he ever loses his seat, a cushy industry job will be waiting for him.
Sigh....
To some extent, C. Mountaineer is correct, if we start enforcing purity tests on democratic congressional candidates, we run the risk of losing general elections because we throw out our sure bet in favor of a more liberal candidate. Just look at NY-23 for an example of how badly that kind of strategy can work out for the incumbent party. On the other hand, why bother having a political party at all if there aren't any boundries on what the party's representatives in office stand for? If I vote for a democrat, I have certain expectations of how she/he is going to represent me and if he/she doesn't vote along with the values that are implicit in the the party identification, then she/he hasn't really earned my support.
As I mentioned above, NY-23 is an example of how you can score an own goal when you place ideology over electability. The difference between NY-23 and Altmire's district is that the Democrats now have an 81 vote lead in the House. That's a big buffer and I'd think that we can afford to risk losing a few seats to threaten some of the more center-right blue dogs with primary challenges. If a few of them get forced out, the others might rethink whether they are Democrats first or friends of lobbyists first.
Post a Comment