by Jack
I’ve really had to wrestle with my conscience on this subject. On one hand we have a Congressman that is well known to me and I consider a friend. We go back many years in GOP circles and we’ve had a number of personal conversations. I know he is honest and means well, but on the other hand he really hasn’t done much while in office.
This was the problem I had with his predecessor, Congressman Herger. I liked Wally Herger and Mr. LaMalfa is every bit as likeable as Wally, but neither man accomplished very much in Congress. They seem to be the “go along, to get along” types that silently voted with the majority in their party or they became a co-sponsor of somebody else’s bill so they could have bragging rights for the folks back home. Co-sponsoring a bill is often just adding a signature, it doesn’t necessarily mean you did any work on the bill. As a voter I expect more than lip service, photo ops and fund raising.
We’re paying $174,000 a year, plus lavish benefits for a Congressman, we need and deserve results. On the other side, I can see why someone would like this job and want to hang on to it, no matter what. They only work 126 days a year. There isn’t a single five day work week on the schedule and they don’t work week-ends. They get a month’s paid vacation in August and two weeks’ vacation around Easter, how does that compare to your job?
The Bible says, “To whom much is given, much is expected.”
All total, we probably spend about a million dollars a year or more for one Congressman to represent us. Don’t we have a right to expect this man will stand up and be heard on major issues like cutting the deficit, weeding out waste, exposing corruption, coming up with immigration reform, working on bills to fight terrorism, or keeping America financially competitive? Don’t we have the right to expect that a congressman, even a new congressman, to take some political risks and get something done? And I’m not talking about helping some stupid Indian casino get federal approval to build a Rancheria. Building casinos is not why we voted for him!
Doug’s campaign just put out a horrible hit piece on his opponent (Joe Montes) and insinuated the man is a crook. He said, “fraud follows him wherever he goes.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Somebody Montes worked with years ago got into legal trouble, a company he once worked for long ago also had legal troubles, so what? If that’s the litmus test I guess we’re all crooks. We’ve all known someone that had legal trouble, didn’t mean we had anything to do with it. Fact is, Montes stayed honest and was never implicated with any wrong doing. To prove it, a thorough background investigation was done before he was appointed to be a federal court judge! What does that say about Doug’s implied accusations? When it comes time for election I want to see a candidate stand on his record, not sling mud.
I never thought Doug would bend the facts in order to attack a good man’s character. If I were him I would step back now and ask myself, have I become what I said I always hated? Is my job in Congress that important to me that I am willing to win at all costs?
These are some of the reasons why I’m supporting Joe Montes. I don’t know Montes personally and nobody pressured me to do this, I just weighed the performance of our Congressman and compared that to Montes outstanding qualifications in education and experience and Montes looks so much better able to represent us. Doug and I aren’t likely to be friends after this election, but that’s a risk I felt I must take to call it like I see it.
Yes. Very disappointing. LaMalfa is not who we are. He has become who we are against.
Exactly
Time spent on the floor is not the only “work” a good representive does. La Malfa may or may not do such work, but such a simple-minded characterization of the job is ignorant and unfair … and typical of you pseudo conservatives.
Libby, there you go again putting words into my mouth that I did not say. You claim that I believe time spent on the floor of Congress is the only work a good representative does. I never said that Libby, not even close.
I know very little of a Congressman’s time is spent on the floor of Congress, and most of America knows that too. A congressman’s work week is spent, to varying degrees, in his office, in committees, in session and with the public glad handing and fund raising. It’s a safe bet that most of his time is geared to raising money for his next election and that’s unfortunate. The money raising could come by way of hosting lobbyists and crafting special interest bills, making special interest speeches or networking (dialing) for dollars among special interest groups. Whatever time is left over after fund raising is spent on that other miscellaneous stuff that we call “critically important issues.” Very little time is spent there.
Question: Libby, why do I always wind up explaining such simple things to you and correcting what you think I said or didn’t say? Can’t you just read the patently obvious and get it?
“They only work 126 days a year.”
A lot of us are experiencing the same dilemma.
La Malfa’s conservative voting record counts for something: Conservative Review gives him a low 63%, a “D.” Govtrack places him fairly conservative but with low leadership qualities. So he doesn’t look good on paper.
I tracked another Congressman that I admire, Louis Gohmert, to see how well did by comparison. His record was better at Govtrack and Conservative Review gives him 96%.
Joe Montes has a good resume. His webpage includes a link titled, “Why I am a True Reagan Conservative”. He’s the real thing if he’s being honest and I have no reason to think he isn’t. One thing I like is he has legal, business, and military experience.
It’s a hard choice.
Bottom Line you are correct whether I agree with your politicians or not.
But it comes down to this. When you get to DC you are told you can be an insider or you can be an outsider. It becomes apparent big money will take you out if you do not tow the party line.
How each politician handles this whether a Dem or Rep is key. I can see being quiet for the first year to gather your info on what is going on. But then you have choices to make.
Truth be told most lower level congressman are assigned to spend more time in the Donor dialing center than the established. Yes both the DNC and GOP have dialing centers right there where up to 75% of their time is spent dialing for dollars.
Of course all this money has no influence right? They just give money away because they are in business to loose. Right?
La Malfa is weak. He gave in to the system. But he did manage to get on the Farm committee ….hum all his subsidies are in tact.
He took care of himself so why are you complaining?
He was told how to vote. They kept him busy and he read briefs prepared by the party head. Most the time these guys have not even read the actual bills! They dial for dollars!
DC is a horse trading farm where the donors are heard and the people are of no consequence.
It takes a real leader to go against the establishment and their corrupt media machine.
There are but a handful brave souls in DC …..
The rest?…………….They want to keep their jobs and take orders for the most part.
Amazing Dewster, you nailed it. Thank you and congratulations.
The first post from Dewey that is actually comprehensible. Must be a stand in.
Which makes me wonder why you wrote the post at all. You know how the game is played. If you won’t leave a Rep in office long enough to “play the game”, network … attain POWER! … then the Rep won’t.
Mind you, Wally was in for just ages and ages … and … .
Hurray for Dewey, he did nail it.
Once they arrive they must go along with the establishment to get along and to get some of that money they’re dialing for dollars for. Otherwise, you’re called a “Wacko Bird” and even worse.
When Matt Bevin ran against Mitch McConnell for the Senate the GOP donated to the Democrat who was also running to take out Bevin. They succeeded, but Bevin later ran for governor and won.
It’s all about control and staying in power. That’s why I advocate for voter enforced term limits. Vote out every candidate who has been in Congress for over 12 years. Force them back into the private sector to live under the laws they created.
BTW vet Joe Montes, follow his campaign money and if satisfied vote for him.
To hear La Malfa is using the establishment tactics is a sign he has the support of the very people in DC that rail against all of us.
I came to the same conclusion for the same reasons listed by Jack and Tina.
Over the years I’d tracked Doug’s conservative score on different sites and was disappointed to see it in the D range. The deciding factor was when he supported Boehner and McCarthy for Speaker. Seeing him on stage behind them said he’d sold out to the establishment to get along. Boehner had been rejected by the voters and members in the House. Doug should have realized he would be judged by the friends he kept.
With regrets I didn’t vote for Doug. I voted for Joe in the hopes he won’t loose his soul in DC and in a couple of years we won’t be looking for someone to replace him with a man/woman of honor who will keep their word.
Side note: Washington state voted to NOT support Trump.
WHOA: Washington State GOP Awards Delegate Spots to Cruz, NOT Presumptive Nominee Donald Trump:
“This weekend, the Washington State GOP held their convention and elected delegates to the national convention. In a stunning upset, they gave 40 of the 41 spots not to Donald Trump’s people, but to those loyal to Sen. Ted Cruz, who has already suspended his campaign.”
http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/05/22/whoa-washington-state-gop-awards-delegate-spots-cruz-presumptive-nominee-donald-trump/?utm_content=buffer32f34&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Cruz folded. He is as disgusted with the GOP as I am?
And me!
The official delegate count that takes place during the first ballot on the floor of the convention should be very interesting. No one knows who the unbound delegates will vote for.
Seattle may be a big liberal bastion but the western part of the state is very conservative. Glad to see Cruz supporters/delegates are remaining visible! The party elites need to get that the conservative movement is serious and growing.
Cruz will run for his Senate seat. His team filed a “slate of potential presidential delegates for California’s June 7 primary, and continues to monitor delegate selection in states that already voted in the GOP nominating process. The end result is that Cruz will have more than 550 loyalists attending the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July — a ground force that helps him establish himself as the national leader of the conservative movement, protect the party’s conservative platform from what the senator has called Trump’s “New York values,” and lay the foundation for a potential 2020 presidential bid. (continues)”
The will of the people. I think that’s what made Cruz graciously suspend his election bid. His inside polling, his losses to Trump, provided the writing on the wall. Before we conservatives can see ourselves as the leadership of our party we have to gain in numbers both in and out of Congress. Trump has won a lot of moderates, Democrats and Independents; we can thank Obama for that.
Agree Tina. He may not win the delegates, but he’s making sure he has a seat at the table to have a say about what goes into the platform and the process/rules for the next election.
It will be interesting to see who the unbound delegates support and the new rules they come up with. Will the progressive right or the Constitutional conservatives be the majority at that table?
Doug is a failed congressman He has a D rating from the Conservative Review . votes to give large government subdues to his rich fat cat cronies .and does whatever the establishment republican tales him to . We need a change and Joe Montes is the person
You know, what you guys need is a new party. Seriously.
Libby, do you mean you think this stuff doesn’t go on in your party, or, it does but you’re okay with that?
Tina, human beings are what they are, some virtuous, most not. It’s you who live in Partisan Land, where everything would run beautifully if only your human beings were in charge. Dream on.
That being said, if you want to give the party of rich cronies a swift kick in the keister, you will form a third party … and run that religious monomaniac, Cruz.
Hee-Hee.
Oh give me a break Libby. You’re the one who famously crowed we would “take it and like it” on some such lefty proposal. You’re the one who delights in the idea of single party rule (YOURS) and government control of everything. it doesn;t get much more partisan than that.
On the other hand you might have noticed that this Cruz supporter has no trouble defending and backing Trump if he’s the party’s choice.
“…if you want to give the party of rich cronies a swift kick in the keister…”
Oh no worries, Luv, Republican candidate Trump is doing just that. Hillary is the standard bearer for the party of the rich…big banks on Wall Street, big tech in Silicon Valley, Big Hollywood, a few wine makers and boutique coffee and ice cream moguls…and then there’s BIG media. You guys are no longer the party of the working man…not that you ever really were. You’re a bunch of pandering opportunists.
“you will form a third party”
You wish! Nope, I think the Bern will do more to upset your party…he was already third party anyway.
” You’re the one who delights in the idea of single party rule (YOURS) and government control of everything.”
But I never said this utopia would be administered free of the waste, bungling and corruption endemic to the species. Why can’t you stick to the point?
The fact that the bureaucrat in charge of the subsidized-to-all school lunch program has to be sent to jail for graft, DOES NOT negate the social value of well nourished school children.
“…DOES NOT negate the social value of well nourished school children.”
But it does take the responsibility for providing said meals from the parents where it belongs.
You helped to create the “need” by creating the Great Society of perpetual welfare and dependency…neat trick! Now of course lunch and dinner has been added. If Hillary is elected she’s going to have babies in the hands of the government from day one through college and the circle will be complete.
The “social value” decreases wit every new nuance and program added. soon a nation of helpless fools will be malleable but useless for anything but slave labor.
The problem is you just don’t think these things through!
The “need” existed long before the Great Society, Tina, and the poverty rates demonstrate that. They also demonstrate that the Great Society has been at least somewhat effective at meeting that need, since poverty rates have never once gone up to pre-Great Society levels.
But you can keep pretending otherwise.
Yeah, and Trump is a self-made, up from the ranks, man of the people. Please, not even you can be that blindly partisan? He’s spent his career buying off our government on the one hand, and mobsters on the other, with Daddy’s money.
The unhappy fact is, very plainly, that there is very little to choose from, policy-wise in this election. The very little?
Our candidate has all her marbles.
Your candidate is a pathological liar and criminal who has lived off the taxpayer all of her adult life and made her fortune in underhanded nefarious ways.
Her “marbles” are about as useful as marbles.
The anti-intellectual rears its head again. Ignorance and stupidity, not to mention the megalomania, these are not what you want in a President.
Marbles are essential.
You can nail Hillary with the arrogance, the entitlement, the bad judgment re the email server, but you could probably get her to concede all of these.
The Donald? Never. It isn’t in him.
Mr. Montes has a very respectable resume. I have not met the man, but he also has a respectable record of action locally. However, I am troubled by one incident in the last Chico City Council election. Mr. Montes was among those who filed appropriate paperwork to run for a council slot. But reportedly, he (being a later filer in the field) was asked to withdraw in order to avoid splitting the conservative vote among too many candidates. I read in another local blog that he admitted that this was the case and he complied. Basically, that’s following the direction from the Party. And that’s just in a small local contest. What could we expect from him at the national level, under regular pressures from Party leaders?
I am no fan of Mr. Lamalfa, never have been. But I wonder if any elected congress-person determined to be self-directed could actually be so. And if so, would he or she be able to accomplish anything at all? Ultimately, political power corrupts. Doubtless there must be some historical exceptions, but I, regrettably, am not aware of any.