Why is Staten Island Republican County Leader Scamardella talking up Congressman Grimm's "admirable political courage"? --- What really happened before and during these votes, and what will be the repercussions inside the House GOP Caucus, if any?
After the House passed all the parts of the aid bill last night, Congressman Grimm is reported to have said, in part:
"I have poured my heart and soul into this effort - working tirelessly to secure the support to pass this bill and bring relief to the people of Staten Island.... There's no question that this vote should have happened much sooner; however, I am proud to return to my district knowing that we won the battle in the House. Once this bill becomes law, we will have the rest of the funding to continue helping our homeowners and small business owners get back on their feet, begin repairing NYC's devastated infrastructure, and give the Army Corps of Engineers the resources it needs to begin fortifying our shoreline.... This funding will never make up for the loss and devastation that was felt by so many throughout Staten Island and the region, but it can help restore some semblance of normality to lives that have been turned upside down.... I am grateful to represent such an extraordinary and resilient constituency, and feel truly privileged to play a role in delivering the aid needed to help our communities rebuild." (Quoted material from "House approves $50.5B Sandy aid bill" by Dean Balsamini, Staten Island Advance, 1/15/13; http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/01/house_approves_507b_sandy_aid.html )
UNFORTUNATELY, CONGRESSMAN GRIMM HAS LEFT A LOT UNSAID ABOUT HIS PART IN THE LEGISLATIVE FIASCO THAT HAS HELD UP DISASTER RELIEF MONEY FROM THE FEDS FOR WHAT SOON WILL BE MORE THAN THREE MONTHS
This passage sticks out like a sore thumb in Dean Balsimini's SI Advance article about Grimm and the passage of the "Hurricane Sandy" Relief Bills by the House: "Robert Scamardella, chairman of Staten Island's Republican Party said: 'I know that the congressman worked extraordinarily hard on this and exhibited admirable political courage. This is a good day for all of Staten Island, particularly the victims of Hurricane Sandy'." Since, Republican Party Chairman Scamardella wants to make this about Grimm and partisan GOP politics, let's look at things a little closer and in a more inside the GOP sort of way, shall we. Just what kind of "...admirable political courage..." are we talking about when it comes to my Conservative-Republican Congressman Michael Grimm?
In a little over two weeks, conservative Republican members of Michael Grimm's majority caucus in congress have twice told Grimm and the constituents of Grimm's Brooklyn and Staten Island Congressional District to "Drop Dead" --- DOES CONGRESSMAN GRIMM (R-C, NY) HAVE ANY EXPLANATION FOR THAT ?
Yesterday, when the votes finally came to the floor, the House of Representatives approved an additional $50.7 billion in federal aid for states affected by Hurricane Sandy by a vote of 241 to 180. Only 49 Republicans voted for that bill, while 179 GOP representatives voted against it. (The bill in question was for $17 billion in aid; another $33.7 billion in aid was accomplished via amendment and was approved by a 228-192 vote, consisting of 190 Democrats, with even fewer Republican crossovers - 38.) The aid approved today is in addition to the nearly $10 billion allocated earlier in the month, meaning that the total House package of $60 billion roughly matches the amount previously approved by the U.S. Senate, however because of technical differences and the Senate's passage having been done in the prior session, the relief bill must be taken up again in the Senate. So, as it stands, things still aren't done yet.
Apparently, all the Republican opposition in the House, all the fiscal extremist groups demanding Congress not allocate that level of disaster relief, all the other groups demanding it not be done unless cuts of an equal amount were first made elsewhere in the budget , and all the threats made at John Boehner by Republicans such as New York Representatives like Peter King and Michael Grimm ended with those votes. Really, just like that; the tempest in a teapot is over and done with, once and for all -- no price to be paid at a later date ! Pardon my surprise and my incredulity.
Doesn't my Conservative Republican Representative, Michael Grimm, still need to explain why all of this wasn't accomplished in 2012 during the last session, shortly after the Senate had passed its piece of the legislation? Doesn't my Conservative Republican Representative, Michael Grimm, still need to explain why House Republicans had to delay making their 178 or 191 "No" votes until January 15th. Doesn't my Conservative Republican Representative, Michael Grimm, still need to explain why he could only convince 37 to 48 other Republicans to vote along with him ? (Btw, that number includes several other Republicans who voted like Grimm because their districts were also storm ravaged.). Doesn't my Conservative Republican Representative, Michael Grimm, still need to tell us exactly how much traction he has in this conservative Republican Caucus ?
On a real inside the House GOP Caucus point: Does the fact that yesterday's vote was brought to the floor without the support of a majority of Republicans violate the so-called "Hastert Rule" and show that Congressman Grimm and other "stormy" GOP members had too threaten the GOP House leadership and a majority of their GOP colleagues; and won't there be repercussions from something like that?
It's nice to hear talk about "...admirable political courage...", but unless we know exactly what's involved, how can we know if it's really courageous, or just expedient or exigent ?
No comments:
Post a Comment