Last Week in Congress
NPI's Cascadia Advocate: Last Week in Congress

Good morn­ing! Here’s how Cascadia’s Mem­bers of Con­gress vot­ed on major issues dur­ing the leg­isla­tive week end­ing Fri­day, Feb­ru­ary 7th.

In the United States House of Representatives

Chamber of the United States House of Representatives
The House cham­ber (U.S. Con­gress photo)

OPPOSING BLOCK GRANTS FOR MEDICAID: The House on Feb­ru­ary 6th vot­ed, 223 for and 190 against, to con­demn a Trump admin­is­tra­tion plan to scale back Medicaid’s tra­di­tion­al sta­tus as an enti­tle­ment pro­gram in which all indi­vid­u­als who meet cer­tain income or dis­abil­i­ty cri­te­ria receive guar­an­teed access to defined stan­dards of health care. The mea­sure (House Res­o­lu­tion 826) was non-binding.

Under pro­posed Depart­ment of Health and Human Ser­vices reg­u­la­tions, states could choose to shift some of their Med­ic­aid offer­ings to a block-grant pro­gram with caps put on fund­ing lev­els and access to care deter­mined by dis­cre­tionary state poli­cies rather than fed­er­al­ly set require­ments. The pro­posed con­ver­sion would main­ly affect the Patient Pro­tec­tion Act’s Med­ic­aid expan­sion. Pre-PPA Med­ic­aid pro­grams in all states would con­tin­ue to func­tion on a need basis fea­tur­ing guar­an­teed access to care and unfet­tered state-fed­er­al fund­ing levels.

Michael Doyle, D‑Pennsylvania, said: “Block grants do not strength­en the Med­ic­aid pro­gram and they do not pro­tect Amer­i­cans… Repub­li­cans have been try­ing to cut Med­ic­aid for thir­ty years. This is just the lat­est attempt. They most recent­ly failed to cut Med­ic­aid cov­er­age when they were in the major­i­ty and tried to repeal the Afford­able Care Act… Now the Trump admin­is­tra­tion is try­ing to go it alone.”

Bud­dy Carter, R‑Georgia, said the change “would allow states more flex­i­bil­i­ty to man­age their Med­ic­aid expan­sion pop­u­la­tion by choos­ing to accept their fed­er­al funds in a per-per­son or lump-sum basis. States would be able to [use] that mon­ey to more effi­cient­ly treat these patients…. The Med­ic­aid pro­gram was built to be a safe­ty net for our chil­dren and the poor — not to be our nation’s largest insurer.”

A yes vote was in oppo­si­tion to fund­ing part of Med­ic­aid with block grants.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Aye (3): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, and Peter DeFazio

Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden; Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Kurt Schrader

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Aye (7): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck

Vot­ing Nay (3): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 10 aye votes, 7 nay votes

EXPANDING LABOR LAWS AND WORKER RIGHTS: Vot­ing 224 for and 194 against, the House on Feb­ru­ary 6th passed a Demo­c­ra­t­ic-spon­sored bill (H.R. 2474) that would amend Unit­ed States fed­er­al labor laws and reg­u­la­tions in order to expand union mem­ber­ship and strength­en employ­ee rights to bar­gain for bet­ter pay, ben­e­fits, and work­ing conditions.

In part, the bill would:

  • estab­lish the right to orga­nize as a civ­il right enforce­able in fed­er­al court;
  • make it dif­fi­cult for employ­ers to clas­si­fy “gig econ­o­my” work­ers as inde­pen­dent con­trac­tors to pre­vent them from join­ing unions;
  • estab­lish penal­ties of up to $50,000 per vio­la­tion for employ­ers who break the law to dis­cour­age work­ers from organizing;
  • enable employ­ees to file class-action law­suits over work­ing conditions;
  • estab­lish a medi­a­tion and arbi­tra­tion process to guide ini­tial con­tract nego­ti­a­tions between new­ly formed unions and companies;
  • ease the pro­hi­bi­tion on unions con­duct­ing sec­ondary boycotts;
  • effec­tive­ly void state fire-at-will laws;
  • require employ­ers to pro­vide detailed employ­ee infor­ma­tion to union organizers;
  • and ensure that work­ers with mul­ti­ple employ­ers can nego­ti­ate direct­ly with the one exer­cis­ing the most direct con­trol over their con­di­tions of employment.

Jamie Raskin, D‑Maryland, said “the right to orga­nize is root­ed in the First Amend­ment of the Con­sti­tu­tion, which pro­tects the right of the peo­ple to speak, to assem­ble and to peti­tion for a redress griev­ances. All of these rights have been under severe attack over the last sev­er­al decades of union-bust­ing and inter­fer­ence with the right of the peo­ple to orga­nize into unions.”

Michael Burgess, R‑Texas, said the bill “is noth­ing more than a require­ment that work­ers become mem­bers of labor union. Repub­li­cans sup­port the right of employ­ees to form a labor union, but it should be a choice of every indi­vid­ual worker.”

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Aye (3): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, and Peter DeFazio

Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden; Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Kurt Schrader

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Aye (7): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck

Vot­ing Nay (3): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 10 aye votes, 7 nay votes

PRESERVING STATE UNIONBUSTING LAWS: Vot­ing 187 for and 232 against, the House on Feb­ru­ary 6th defeat­ed a Repub­li­can-spon­sored amend­ment that sought to strip HR 2474 (above) of lan­guage that would effec­tive­ly void the union­bust­ing laws now oper­a­tive in twen­ty-sev­en states. Under those laws, employ­ees are enti­tled to receive all the ben­e­fits of a union con­tract with­out hav­ing to pay fees or dues to the bar­gain­ing unit that nego­ti­at­ed on their behalf.

The bill would com­pel these non-union mem­bers to pay union dues.

Spon­sor Rick Allen, R‑Georgia, said:

“No Amer­i­can should be forced to pay for rep­re­sen­ta­tion and polit­i­cal activ­i­ties that they do not agree with, and that is what will hap­pen if we take away states’ author­i­ty to enact right-to-work laws. My amend­ment will pro­tect states’ right-to-work laws so that union dues are vol­un­tary, giv­ing pow­er to work­ers, not union boss­es, who pock­et these ben­e­fits from manda­to­ry dues.”

Brad Sher­man, D‑California, said: “Right-to-work pro­vi­sions under­mine the right to union­ize because our basic labor law requires a union to rep­re­sent all those in the bar­gain­ing unit, and every­one in the bar­gain­ing unit ben­e­fits from the union con­tract. If you tell peo­ple you don’t have to join, you don’t have to pay the union dues, you don’t have to pay a fee and you still get all the ben­e­fits, then right-to-work is real­ly code for right to free ride.”

A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Aye (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Aye (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden

Vot­ing Nay (4): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, and Kurt Schrader

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Aye (3): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Vot­ing Nay (7): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck

Cas­ca­dia total: 6 aye votes, 11 nay votes

BLOCKING REBUKE OF SPEAKER PELOSI: Vot­ing 224 for and 193 against, the House on Feb­ru­ary 6th blocked an attempt by Repub­li­cans to rebuke Speak­er Nan­cy Pelosi, D‑California, for hav­ing torn apart on nation­al tele­vi­sion a copy of Pres­i­dent Trump’s State of the Union address to Con­gress on Feb­ru­ary 4th. As a priv­i­leged motion, this mea­sure (House Res­o­lu­tion 832) was not debatable.

A yes vote was in oppo­si­tion to rebuk­ing the speaker.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Aye (4): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader

Vot­ing Nay (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Aye (7): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck

Vot­ing Nay (3): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 11 aye votes, 6 nay votes

PROVIDING DISASTER AID TO PUERTO RICO: Vot­ing 237 for and 161 against, the House on Feb­ru­ary 7th passed a bill (H.R. 5687) that would pro­vide Puer­to Rico with about $5 bil­lion in dis­as­ter aid, includ­ing $18 mil­lion for elec­tri­cal-grid repairs, to help it recov­er from earth­quakes this year and hur­ri­canes Irma and Maria in 2017. The bill also deliv­ers $16 bil­lion in tax breaks over ten years cen­tered on child tax cred­its and earned income tax cred­its for indi­vid­u­als and house­holds on the island and excise tax­es on rum sales.

Mark DeSaulnier, D‑California., said: “Puer­to Rico needs our help. With­out it, roads will remain unpass­able, schools will remain closed, and the poor will become poorer.”

Michael Burgess, R‑Texas, said the bill “pro­vides addi­tion­al bil­lions in aid with­out any account­abil­i­ty mea­sures. Exist­ing dis­as­ter aid should be expend­ed before appro­pri­at­ing” any addi­tion­al funds.

A yes vote was to send the bill to the House.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Aye (4): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader

Vot­ing Nay (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Aye (7): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck

Vot­ing Nay (3): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 11 aye votes, 6 nay votes

In the United States Senate

Chamber of the United States Senate
The Sen­ate cham­ber (U.S. Con­gress photo)

ACQUITTING TRUMP ON ARTICLE I — ABUSE OF POWER: Vot­ing 48 for and 52 against, the Sen­ate on Feb­ru­ary 5th failed to con­vict Don­ald Trump on the first of two arti­cles of impeach­ment arti­cles approved by the House. Arti­cle I charged Trump with hav­ing abused the pow­er of the pres­i­den­cy by with­hold­ing mil­i­tary aid and an Oval Office vis­it from Ukraine as pres­sure to obtain per­son­al polit­i­cal favors from Ukrain­ian offi­cials aimed at boost­ing his 2020 re-elec­tion prospects.

Mitt Rom­ney, R‑Utah (and the only Repub­li­can to vote Guilty) said: “The grave ques­tion the Con­sti­tu­tion tasks sen­a­tors to answer is whether the pres­i­dent com­mit­ted an act so extreme and egre­gious that it ris­es to the lev­el of a high crime and mis­de­meanor. Yes, he did. The pres­i­dent asked a for­eign gov­ern­ment to inves­ti­gate his polit­i­cal rival. The pres­i­dent with­held vital mil­i­tary funds from that gov­ern­ment to press it to do so. The pres­i­dent delayed funds for an Amer­i­can ally at war with Russ­ian invaders. The pres­i­den­t’s pur­pose was per­son­al and polit­i­cal. Accord­ing­ly, the pres­i­dent is guilty of an appalling abuse of pub­lic trust.”

Lamar Alexan­der, R‑Tennessee, said: “It was inap­pro­pri­ate for the pres­i­dent to ask a for­eign leader to inves­ti­gate his polit­i­cal oppo­nent and to with­hold U.S. aid to encour­age this inves­ti­ga­tion. When elect­ed offi­cials inap­pro­pri­ate­ly inter­fere with such inves­ti­ga­tions, it under­mines the prin­ci­ple of equal jus­tice under the law. But the Con­sti­tu­tion does not give the Sen­ate the pow­er to remove the pres­i­dent from office and ban him from this year’s bal­lot sim­ply for actions that are inappropriate.”

A “Guilty” vote was in favor of remov­ing the pres­i­dent from office.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Not Guilty (2):
Repub­li­can Sen­a­tors Jim Risch and Mike Crapo

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Guilty (2):
Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­a­tors Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Guilty (2):
Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­a­tors Maria Cantwell and Pat­ty Murray

Cas­ca­dia total: 4 guilty votes, 2 not guilty votes

ACQUITTING TRUMP ON ARTICLE II — OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS: By a vote of 47 for and 53 against, the Sen­ate on Feb­ru­ary 5th failed to con­vict Don­ald Trump on the sec­ond arti­cle of impeach­ment approved by the House. Arti­cle II charged Trump with hav­ing unlaw­ful­ly obstruct­ed Con­gress by direct­ing exec­u­tive branch offi­cials and agen­cies to not com­ply with sub­poe­nas for wit­ness­es and doc­u­ments sub­mit­ted by the House in its impeach­ment inquiry.

Doug Jones, D‑Alabama, said: “The pres­i­den­t’s actions demon­strate a belief that he is above the law, that Con­gress has no pow­er what­so­ev­er in ques­tion­ing or exam­in­ing his actions, and that all who do so, do so at their per­il. That belief, unprece­dent­ed in the his­to­ry of this coun­try, sim­ply must not be per­mit­ted to stand. To do oth­er­wise risks guar­an­tee­ing that no future whistle­blow­er or wit­ness will ever come for­ward, and no future pres­i­dent, Repub­li­can or Demo­c­rat, will be sub­ject to con­gres­sion­al over­sight as man­dat­ed by the Con­sti­tu­tion even when the pres­i­dent has so clear­ly abused his office and vio­lat­ed the pub­lic trust.”

Chief Repub­li­can Mitch McConnell, R‑Kentucky, who vowed at the out­set not to con­duct an impar­tial tri­al, said: “The U.S. Sen­ate was made for moments like this. The framers pre­dict­ed that fac­tion­al fever might dom­i­nate House majori­ties from time to time. They knew the coun­try would need a fire­wall to keep par­ti­san flames from scorch­ing our repub­lic. So they cre­at­ed the Sen­ate — out of ‘neces­si­ty,’ James Madi­son wrote, ‘of some sta­ble insti­tu­tion in the gov­ern­ment.’ Today, we will ful­fill this found­ing pur­pose. We will reject this inco­her­ent case that comes nowhere near — nowhere near — jus­ti­fy­ing the first pres­i­den­tial removal in history.”

A “Guilty” vote was in favor of remov­ing the pres­i­dent from office.

The State of Idaho

Vot­ing Not Guilty (2):
Repub­li­can Sen­a­tors Jim Risch and Mike Crapo

The State of Oregon

Vot­ing Guilty (2):
Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­a­tors Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley

The State of Washington

Vot­ing Guilty (2):
Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­a­tors Maria Cantwell and Pat­ty Murray

Cas­ca­dia total: 4 guilty votes, 2 not guilty votes

Key votes ahead

The House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives will take up bills to pro­tect wilder­ness dur­ing the week of Feb­ru­ary 10th, while the Sen­ate will vote on assert­ing con­gres­sion­al author­i­ty over any Unit­ed States mil­i­tary strikes against Iran.

Edi­tor’s Note: The infor­ma­tion in NPI’s week­ly How Cas­ca­di­a’s U.S. law­mak­ers vot­ed fea­ture is pro­vid­ed by Votera­ma in Con­gress, a ser­vice of Thomas Vot­ing Reports. All rights are reserved. Repro­duc­tion of this post is not per­mit­ted, not even with attri­bu­tion. Use the per­ma­nent link to this post to share it… thanks!

© 2020 Thomas Vot­ing Reports.

Adjacent posts