If it weren’t such a pitiful farce, the vote by Louisiana’s congressional delegation on President Biden’s economic stimulus bill might be funny.
Instead, all it does is expose the hypocrisy in its rawest, most partisan form.
The four House members, Steve Scalise, Clay Higgins, Mike Johnson and Garret Graves, each voted No on House Resolution 1319, the $1.9 trillion relief bill.
Despite their opposition, the resolution squeezed through on a tight 220-211 vote.
In the Senate, the resolution narrowly passed by a 50-49 vote even though both Louisiana senators, Bill Cassidy and John Kennedy, voted No.
They are all Repugnantcans and the bill was being pushed by a president who happened to be a Democrat.
But let us flash back to March 14, 2020. That was the day that the House voted on House Resolution 6201, Donald Trump’s $2 trillion relief package to help struggling Americans who had lost their jobs because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Trump, of course, was a Repugnantcan.
On that vote, Scalise, Higgins, Johnson, Graves and Cedric Richmond voted Yes. Ralph Abraham, then representing Louisiana’s 5th District and with one foot out the door, did not vote.
The resolution swept through the Senate by a vote of 90-8. In the House, the result was an overwhelming vote of 363-40 in favor of the resolution.
In the Senate, both Cassidy and Kennedy voted Yes.
I remind you that of the five House members and the two senators casting their Yea votes, only Richmond was a Democrat.
Do we detect a hint of inconsistency in those votes?
So, the question is: how was it that Trump’s $2 trillion relief package sailed through both chambers but Biden’s $1.9 trillion proposal was barely approved by the narrowest of margins?
The answer is simple, really. The Repugnantcans are hypocrites. There is no other answer that could explain the 180-degree switch from bipartisan approval of a Repugnantcan’s $2 trillion proposal and such a struggle to get a Democrat’s $1.9 trillion approved.
Perhaps Kennedy, Cassidy, Higgins, Graves, Johnson and Scalise should insist that their constituents return their uncashed $1400 stimulus checks to the U.S. Treasury.
Seriously though, if those votes don’t clearly illustrate the mindset of today’s Repugnantcan Party, nothing will. They have clearly shown themselves to be obstructionists who will resort to any ploy to keep control – even supporting a clown’s unsubstantiated claims that the election was stolen from him and attempting every measure available to them to PREVENT BLACKS FROM VOTING.
They can call the voter suppression efforts by any name they want, but the truth is, it’s just the American version of APARTHEID. There’s just no other name for it. Perhaps they should abandon any pretense at advocating equality and just rename themselves as the American Apartheid Party.
Isn’t it sad that we were so critical of that practice in South Africa but half our leaders in Congress and many of our legislatures are perfectly willing, yea eager, to advance it here?
Hell, an attorney representing the Arizona Repugnantcan Party ADMITTED in his argument before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 3 that striking down a voter suppression law in his state would put Repugnantcans “at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats.”
In other words, Repugnantcans can’t expect to win without denying minorities the right to vote.
In another development, the Associated Press reported that in a LEAKED AUDIO, a leading Trump adviser told influential Wisconsin Repugnantcans in December that voter suppression was “traditionally” part of the party’s election strategy in battleground states.
No fewer than two dozen states have moved forward with efforts enact restrictions on voting. To date, only one curious bill has been pre-filed in Louisiana. Rep. Blake Miguez (R-Erath) has authored a bill that would prohibit the use of private funds to pay election-related expenses.
But if Louisiana follows the lead of other states, you can look for similar efforts to suppress black voting from the state’s Repugnant-dominated legislature.
Watch this space for further developments.
Louisiana Voice 
Power politics was always at the top of most elected officials’ priorities, but now it seems to come at the EXCLUSION of anything else that gets in the way, particularly among Republicans. As our beloved T***p, with his erudite vocabulary, would often say, “Sad.”
Tom, what really gets me is the fact that a majority of their Republican constituents support the legislation. We did not send him there to vote his conscience. The following quote is from a Pennsylvania GOP official speaking about Senator Toomey, who voted to impeach trump: “We did not send him there to do the right thing or whatever he said he was doing. We sent him there to represent us,”
Talk about hypocrisy.
There is one thing about these Republican elected folks and their voters….they are persistent and they ALL know what talking points to use over and over and over. I hope that Democrat leadership will figure out that these NO votes can be damning in the upcoming elections if kept before voters and explained as to exactly how these NO votes are and will continue to hurt their own voters. I am certainly not a political strategist but these NO votes seem like a gift….if only Democrats can organize, communicate and keep this failure constantly before their voters. We shall see….!
And then there is Senator Roger Wicker (R) from Mississippi who tweeted yesterday: “Independent restaurant operators have won $28.6 billion worth of targeted relief. This funding will ensure small businesses can survive the pandemic by helping to adapt their operations and keep their employees on the payroll.” But, of course, he voted against the stimulus bill. Hypocrisy?
Less hypocrisy than knowledge his constituents will never see the contradiction because they won’t bother to put 2 and 2 together.
one of the things that most angers me about this and the earlier bill under the Trump administration was the grotesque amount of non covid related pork included in the bills. This is going to contine to continue to happen without a line item veto given to the president. We all KNOW that ain’t gonna happen as BOTH sides have way too much skin in the game to allow passage of such a thing. I gave up on my party a few years back in disgust and now am listed as “no party” I vote for the lesser of the evils, which unfortunately in both prior elections was Trump. Changing parties in the white house or congress is no more meaningful than changing hands. It all comes out in the end
Congress did pass the line item veto during Bill Clinton’s presidency – and at his urging. But the Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional.
You are correct about the pork. That’s in all major bills passed by Congress.
And while I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Trump as the lesser of evils, I do appreciate the calm, rational manner in which you state your position. You are rare indeed – someone I have a beer with, talk politics with and neither of us lose our temper.
He who has the gold, makes the golden rule. I totally agree with your Apartheid appellation. I have the utmost faith and confidence in our Intelligence agencies, and our form of government. So do the Repugnants, and they will not go away, so we must stay alert and keep learning and keep loving. I will drink a beer or O’Doul’s with anyone, discuss politics, sex or religion and not lose my temper, well, maybe. thanks ron thompson