Why Some Dems Bucked Their Own Party to Oppose a $3 Trillion Relief Package

Newsweak via MSN ^ | 5/16/20 | Ramsey Touchberry

[Libloather]

The latest economic stimulus package narrowly passed by the House on Friday was a tiptoeing act for Democratic leadership, not because they tried to craft a $3 trillion piece of bipartisan legislation - neither Republicans nor the White House were consulted - but because they struggled to get members of their own party on board.

As a result of the inability to appease the entire caucus, some moderate and liberal Democrats crossed the aisle to join Republicans to vote against the proposal that includes another round of stimulus checks, state and local aid, an expansion of unemployed benefits and rent and mortgage relief.

Fourteen Democrats ultimately voted no: Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Kendra Horn (Okla.), Abigail Spanberger (Va.), Conor Lamb (Penn.), Elaine Luria (Va.), Cindy Axne (Iowa), Abby Finkenauer (Iowa), Ben McAdams (Utah), Joe Cunningham (S.C.), Jared Golden (Maine), Susan Wild (Penn.), Kim Schrier (Wash.), Sharice Davids (Kan.) and Xochitl Torres Small (N.M.). The final vote was 208-199.

For moderates, which includes them all minus Jayapal, the vote was a particularly difficult one. They characterized the $3 trillion bill as "bloated" with "extraneous," non-related pandemic items tucked into its 1,800 pages. These members' concerns reverberated the loudest, given they are part of a larger group of mostly first-term lawmakers who flipped districts won by President Donald Trump and are considered the most vulnerable this November.

[Libloather]

"Unfortunately, many Members of CONGRESS - including some in my own PARTY - have decided to use this package as an opportunity to make political statements and propose a bill that goes far beyond pandemic relief and has no chance at becoming law, further delaying the help so many need," Spanberger said in a statement.

How about that. The RAT stench is that strong.

[SmokingJoe]

Unfortunately, many Members of CONGRESS - including some in my own PARTY - have decided to use this package as an opportunity to make political statements and propose a bill that goes far beyond pandemic relief and has no chance at becoming law, further delaying the help so many need,” Spanberger said in a statement.

That pretty much covers it.
Even Republicans couldn't have put it better.
There may be a tiny bit of hope for the Democratic Party yet.

[House Atreides]

“...For moderates, which includes them all minus Jayapal, the vote was a particularly difficult one. They characterized the $3 trillion bill as “bloated” with “extraneous,” non-related pandemic items tucked into its 1,800 pages. These members’ concerns reverberated the loudest, given they are part of a larger group of mostly first-term lawmakers who flipped districts won by President Donald Trump and are considered the most vulnerable this November....”
*******************************************************
These “moderates” are posturing for purposes of their 2020 reelection campaigns.

The ONLY thing their district voters should vote on is the question “Did you vote for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House in 2018 and will you vote for a DemocRAT Speaker again after the 2020 election?”. Of course their ONLY honest answer will be “Yes”. Everything Pelosi does, THEY own.

[rockinqsranch]

From the article: “These members’ concerns reverberated the loudest, given they are part of a larger group of mostly first-term lawmakers who flipped districts won by President Donald Trump and are considered the most vulnerable this November.”

They are considered vulnerable next election cycle, therefore they are concerned. Their concern for their chances at reelection supersedes their concern for their constituencies well being, but note how they pay lip service to the latter.

[CMailBag]

They voted against the bill because Captain-May-I Pelosi gave them permission to vote against the bill.

[libertylover]

Fourteen Democrats ultimately voted no

Ha! I saw a previous article from "journalists" that said one Republican joined the Democrats and voted "yes", but there was no mention at all about any Democrats voting "no" so I had assumed they ALL voted "yes".

[House Atreides]

“There may be a tiny bit of hope for the Democratic Party yet.”
*******************************************
Their 2020 re-election year posturing has got you fooled. Hopefully their district voters won’t be similarly fooled this November.

[SmokingJoe]

You are right.

[PeterPrinciple]

They voted against the bill because Captain-May-I Pelosi gave them permission to vote against the bill.

---

Most Logical Observation Award.

[livius]

Yes, but the Dem Spanberger said the right thing. Give credit where credit is due.

[aimhigh]

The article gives praise to a few Democrats voting against the bill. Where is the praise for Republicans who voted against the bill?

[Lizavetta]

and are considered the most vulnerable this November.

More theater for the masses.

THIS is why they voted against it.

[Bonemaker]

"There may be a tiny bit of hope for the Democratic Party yet."

[LoveMyFreedom]

You got that right 100%

[Rumplemeyer]

BINGO. They screamed that they are in tight races and the rabble is very unhappy, might vote them out and return them to the dreaded private sector!!!!

[Luke21]

They voted for impeachment. Screw them.

[outofsalt]

Elaine Luria of VA will have a fight on her hands this fall. I’m fully behind Ben Loyola to win back a seat lost by RINO Scott Taylor, if he can best him in the primary this June.

[House Atreides]

They voted for impeachment. Screw them.
*************************************
They also VOTED TO PUT NANCY PELOSI IN CHARGE. They OWN everything that Nancy does.

[Luke21]

Absolutely agree.

[SmokingJoe]

Not even a teeny tiny bit?
Have some kindness in your heart towards our fellow compatriots here.
Chuckle.
Reminds me of that skit by Reagan and Nancy at the White House Correspondence Dinner.