Loading ...Katrina Funding. During consideration of the 2006 supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 4939), Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas) introduced this amendment to eliminate the $19.2 billion appropriated in the bill for Hurricane Katrina relief. Neugebauer argued that the supplemental Katrina aid, and the supplemental funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are separate issues and should be voted on separately. The House rejected the Neugebauer amendment on March 16, 2006 by a vote of 89-332 (Roll Call 57). It would have significantly cut unconstitutional federally funded disaster relief.John Tanner voted AGAINST this bill.109-3 (Source: The New American, July 10, 2006)
Supplemental Appropriations. This legislation (H.R. 4939) would appropriate a whopping $91.9 billion for emergency supplemental funding in fiscal 2006, including $67.6 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, $4.3 billion for foreign aid, and $19.2 billion for Hurricane Katrina relief. Congressional Quarterly noted that the funding in the bill “for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would push to more than $390 billion the war-related supplemental funds appropriated since Sept. 11. It would be the sixth major emergency spending measure for the Bush administration.” The House passed H.R. 4939 on March 16, 2006 by a vote of 348-71 (Roll Call 65). The funding should be voted on as part of the regular appropriations process and not introduced after the fact as “emergency” spending, ignoring fiscal responsibility. The Senate passed a similar supplemental appropriations bill several weeks later.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.109-3 (Source: The New American, July 10, 2006)
Defunding the NAIS. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) introduced this amendment to the fiscal 2007 agriculture appropriations (H.R. 5384). Paul’s amendment would bar the use of funds in the bill to implement the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), a government program that would electronically track farm cattle and poultry in hopes of preventing the spread of disease. Writing about the program, Paul stated, “NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights.” The House rejected Paul’s amendment on May 23, 2006, by a vote of 34-389 (Roll Call 184). The program would unconstitutionally allocate federal spending, place useless regulations on farmers, and threaten the privacy rights of American citizens.John Tanner voted AGAINST this bill.109-3 (Source: The New American, July 10, 2006)
Agriculture Appropriations. This bill (H.R. 5384) would provide $93.6 billion in fiscal 2007 for the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies. The funding includes $37.9 billion for the food-stamp program, $13.3 billion for the child-nutrition program, and $19.7 billion for the Commodity Credit Corporation, a federally funded program that aids farmers. The House passed H.R. 5384 on May 23, 2006 by a vote of 378-46 (Roll Call 193). Federal aid to farmers and federal food aid to individuals are not authorized by the Constitution. John Tanner voted FOR this bill.109-3 (Source: The New American, July 10, 2006)
Iran Military Operations. Representative Maurice Hinchey (DN. Y.) offered this amendment to the 2007 Defense appropriations bill (H.R. 5631). The amendment would bar any funds to initiate military operations in Iran unless it is in accordance with Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which delegates to Congress alone the power to declare war. The House rejected Hinchey’s amendment by a vote of 158-262 on June 20, 2006 (Roll Call 300). The power to declare war belongs to Congress, not to the president, and that much power should not be in the hands of one man.John Tanner voted AGAINST this bill.109-4 (Source: The New American, October 30, 2006)
Line-item Rescission. The legislative line-item rescission bill (H.R. 4890) would allow the president to propose cuts in spending bills already enacted by Congress. The cuts would then receive an up-or-down vote with no opportunity to filibuster or add amendments. The House passed H.R. 4890 by a vote of 247-172 on June 22, 2006 (Roll Call 317). The rescission bill, though not a full-fledged line-item veto, would still shift some legislative power from Congress to the president, disrupting the U.S. system of checks and balances.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.109-4 (Source: The New American, October 30, 2006)
Oman Trade Agreement. The Oman Free Trade Agreement (H.R. 5684) would reduce most tariffs and duties between Oman and the United States. H.R. 5684 was considered under fast track authority, which requires Congress to expedite consideration of presidentially negotiated trade pacts without offering amendments. The Oman agreement is just one steppingstone in the White House’s effort to form a Middle Eastern Free Trade Area (MEFTA) by 2013. These so-called free trade agreements have historically failed because they encourage the relocation of U.S. jobs to foreign countries so that the companies can get cheap labor. Meanwhile, they don’t provide the United States with trade benefits — largely because the people in those countries cannot afford to buy our products — thereby harming the U.S. economy. The agreements also put our economic destiny in the hands of unelected foreign bureaucrats, such as those at the World Trade Organization. The House passed H.R. 5684 by a vote of 221-205 on July 20, 2006 (Roll Call 392). Such trade agreements damage the U.S. economy and threaten U.S. sovereignty by the imposition of international regulations. The Senate voted on similar legislation in September.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.109-4 (Source: The New American, October 30, 2006)
Military Tribunals. This bill (H.R. 6166) would authorize a new system of military tribunals to try persons designated “unlawful enemy combatants” by the president. The bill defines an unlawful enemy combatant to include a person who “has purposely and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents.” Once designated an unlawful enemy combatant, a defendant’s rights would be curtailed: he would be denied the right of habeas corpus; he could be detained indefinitely; and evidence obtained through coercion could be used against him — so long as the coercion falls outside the administration’s definition of torture. Critics of the tribunals bill are planning to file suit in order to test the constitutionality of the legislation. This legislation was in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 29 ruling on the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which declared that the administration’s current system for trying military detainees was unconstitutional. The House passed the military tribunals bill on September 27, 2006 by a vote of 253-168 (Roll Call 491). The bill would curtail defendant rights. The Senate passed this legislation the following day.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.109-4 (Source: The New American, October 30, 2006)
Minimum Wage. The minimum-wage increase bill (H.R. 2) would increase the federal minimum wage by $2.10 over two years to $7.25 an hour. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) had repeatedly attempted to pass a minimum-wage increase in recent years, but the Republican-led Congress had always rejected his minimum-wage amendments. The minimum-wage increase represents one of the first major pushes of the newly elected Democratic Congress and was high up on the 100-hour legislative agenda pushed by House leaders at the beginning of the congressional year. In 1996, the federal minimum wage was increased by 90 cents to the current $5.15 an hour. Though many people believe that raising the federal minimum wage is a solution to national poverty, allowing the market to dictate wages allows entry-level workers to get the experience and job training they need to get higher paying jobs. The House passed H.R. 2 on January 10, 2007, by a vote of 315-116 (Roll Call 18). It is unconstitutional for the government to prohibit citizens from working for less than a government-set wage. The Senate voted on similar legislation three weeks later.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
Embryonic Stem-cell Research.The stem-cell research bill (H.R. 3) would allow federal funds to be used for research on embryos donated by in vitro fertility clinics. Embryonic stem-cell research is both immoral and unethical because it cannibalizes and destroys human embryos in the name of science. Supporters of embryonic stem-cell research argue that the cell lines could cure diseases such as cancer and diabetes. But rather than destroying human life, science should focus on cures from stem-cell lines derived from other sources, such as amniotic fluids. Under threat of a presidential veto, the House passed this stem-cell research bill on January 11, 2007, by a vote of 253-174 (Roll Call 20). It violates the right to life for millions of unborn babies and unconstitutionally mandates federal funds for scientific research. The Senate passed similar legislation on April 11, 2007.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
Budget Resolution. The 2008 budget resolution (House Concurrent Resolution 99) would increase the fiscal 2008 budget to approximately $2.9 trillion, an almost $150 billion increase from fiscal 2007. The bill’s spending would include an astronomical $955.8 billion in discretionary spending, including $145.2 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The House passed H. Con. Res. 99 by a vote of 216-210 (Roll Call 212) on March 29, 2007. Congress must not continue to support massive amounts of irresponsible and unconstitutional spending. The Senate passed a similar measure the previous week.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
Supplemental Spending — Conference Report. The final version (conference report) of this supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 1591) would provide an additional $124.2 billion for the previous fiscal year (fiscal 2007), over and above previous appropriations. Although the bill would set a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops in Iraq, it would also authorize an additional $95.5 billion to carry out military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Additionally, this seemingly catchall bill also would raise the federal minimum wage to $7.25 an hour and provide nearly $5 billion in small-business incentives. Even if the spending in this supplemental bill were constitutional, it should have been added to the federal budget in the annual appropriations process. The House passed H.R. 1591 on April 25, 2007, by a vote of 218-208 (Roll Call 265). It contained an enormous amount of unconstitutional spending, raised the federal minimum wage, and authorized money for the Iraq War, which itself was never authorized by Congress under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution. The Senate passed the same legislation the next day, and President Bush, who wanted the war funding, vetoed it because of the troop-withdrawal provision.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
Head Start Funding.The Head Start reauthorization bill (H.R. 1429) would authorize $7.4 billion for the Head Start program in fiscal 2008. The bill would also disburse “such sums as may be necessary” for fiscal years 2009-2012. The bill would also place more strict requirements on Head Start teachers, such as requiring them to have completed a bachelor’s degree by 2013. The funding for the Head Start program is up from the $6.9 billion that it received in fiscal 2007. The House passed this bill on May 2, 2007, by a vote of 365-48 (Roll Call 285). The bill perpetuates a federally funded educational program, and federal aid to education is unconstitutional.John Tanner voted FOR this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
Iraq Troop Withdrawal. This bill to withdraw U.S. troops and Defense Department contractors from Iraq (H.R. 2237) was purely a symbolic bill with little chance of passage by the House. The bill would require the withdrawal of troops and contractors to begin within 90 days of the bill’s enactment, and to be completed within 180 days from the beginning date of the withdrawal. The House rejected this bill on May 10, 2007, by a vote of 171-255 (Roll Call 330). According to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, only Congress can declare war, and consequently our soldiers are not fighting under a constitutional mandate.John Tanner voted AGAINST this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
COPS Funding. This bill (H.R. 1700) would provide the annual funds for the Community-Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program for fiscal 2008 through 2013. The bill would authorize $1.15 billion per fiscal year to aid in the hiring of law enforcement officers. The funding would include up to $600 million each year for “officers hired to perform intelligence, anti-terror or homeland security duties.” The House passed H.R. 1700 on May 15, 2007, by a vote of 381-34 (Roll Call 348). Providing federal aid to local law enforcement programs is not only unconstitutional, but it also further federalizes the police system. The Senate passed a similar provision in March. John Tanner voted FOR this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
Iran Military Operations.During consideration for the fiscal 2008 defense authorization bill (H.R. 1585), Representative Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) offered this amendment that would require President Bush to get specific congressional authorization before engaging in military operations in Iran. The House rejected the DeFazio amendment in a Committee of the Whole on May 16, 2007, by a vote of 136-288. The power to declare war belongs solely to Congress, not the president. Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress alone has the power to declare war.John Tanner voted AGAINST this bill.110-1 (Source: The New American, July 23, 2007)
