Ferrari Mailing List: Re: NFC - Constitutional Issues

[Brian E. Buxton (BrianBuxton]

Larry,
I agree with you 100%.  BUT, sometimes even printing the voting records 
won't tell the entire story.  Recently defeated 8th Congressional 
District of Indiana Rep John Hostettler had a few of his votes 
"reported" in the newspaper, but for the purpose of defeating him and 
NOT reporting the truth.  As an example, he was chastised for voting 
against financial aid to Katrina victims, which he was NOT against.  He 
was voting against some of the wording of that particular bill, not 
against the purpose of the bill...

From Wikipedia ...

"In September 2005, Hostettler was one of 11 Representatives who voted 
against the $51.8 billion aid package for relief and recovery from 
Hurricane Katrina <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina>.[12] 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_N._Hostettler#_note-11> Spokesman 
Matt Faraci said Hostettler voted against the hurricane measure because 
it included a provision making it easy for supposed do-gooders to pilfer 
federal funds. Faraci said that Hostettler would like to see federal 
funds spent helping victims of natural disasters so long as those 
dollars are not squandered. "He was very supportive of giving assistance 
to people affected by Rita and Katrina," Faraci said. "He was concerned 
that there were provisions in the bill that were open to abuse."[13] 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_N._Hostettler#_note-12>"

There are other instances where ho voted against bills that 
theoretically would have been favorable, if they had all of the pork 
taken out of them.  One was that he voted against a pay increase to 
military personnel.  BUT the bill included so much other pork that was 
so wasteful it would have done more harm to the nation than it would 
have done good for the military personnel.  So reporting the facts 
doesn't always convey the actual truth.  And most people won't take the 
time to find out what the truth is ...

Brian



LarryT wrote:

> Hi Brian,
> You're right - voting records are available - but when specific groups 
> have an interest in a particular policitian I believe a group - AARP, 
> Ferrari Club, etc should be able to tell their members about a 
> particular politicians voting record - and I suspect most people will 
> not look at the voting data and distill some meaning from it.  Also, 
> the titles of the bills can be misleading - McCain-Feingolds Campaign 
> Finance reform sounds noble- and someone who voted against it may be 
> seen as being pro-"the way things are" rather than someone who wants 
> to keep big money out of politicians pockets - but there are many 
> issues in that bill (and all others) very much different from what the 
> title implies.
>  
> Better to see - Billy Bob voted against 7 bills in the last year that 
> would have restricted Ferrari ownership - as a note from FCA, rather 
> than hoping F owners will look in the appropriate website and see what 
> happened.
>  
> But your point is valid - the info (truth) is out there - but if you 
> apply the law to newspapers virtually no one will know who voted for 
> what.  Why make it legal for media to publicize votes but not for 
> citizens groups?
>  
> Happy Sunday -
>  
> Larry T (67 MGB, 74 911, 78 240D, 91 300D)
>
> <http://www.youroil.net>