To the nation, and to the other members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation who did their duty by opposing the oil refinery subsidy/environmental destruction bill in the House, which infamously passed by a 2-vote margin after DeLay and co. were able to twist some arms: We’re sorry about our absent three congressmen.
On the final major vote before Congress took its 10-day Columbusholiday recess, House Republican leaders pushed through a bill thatwould promote construction of oil refineries by easing theenvironmental review process.
…Six Republicans and six Democrats missed the vote. Three of thoseDemocrats were from Massachusetts. And the three who were absent –Representatives William D. Delahunt of Quincy, Richard Neal ofSpringfield, and John Olver of Amherst — have the lowest votingpercentages of the state’s 10-member House delegation.
Read the article. They don’t have good excuses. Delahunt has one of the lowest voting attendance records in the House, and was in Mexico. Olver was already on vacation. Neal "attended a funeral that morning, as well as the investiture of a college president in Chicopee later."
Congressmen: If you’re not going to do your jobs by casting critical votes on important matters, you need to step aside. Period.
Agreed. This is utterly pathetic. If Congressmen can’t be bothered to stick around and vote on important legislation before the recess actually begins, what the fuck are they doing there? In any real job, they would have been fired for this kind of abdication of responsibility. If the Dems don’t show up for work, it makes it that much easier for DeLay and the gang to roll over them.
“Another bloc of missed votes came just after Labor Day, when Olver was treated for a brain infection, which he disclosed in a statement at the time.”That seems like a reasonable excuse to me. Now, it’s just pathetic. Is anyone willing to challenge these Congressmen in a primary?
Slow down folks…I agree, they should be making their votes. Missing “bookend” votes is just plain slack-ass.That being said, did you notice that there were an equal number of GOP voters missing? When about to miss a vote, it’s quite common for a member of one side of the aisle to ask a member of the other side of the aisle to skip the vote too. After all, if they were going to vote in different directions, then there’s no impact on the passage of the bill if they both fail to vote.So, I’m not saying that this is what happened, and since the vote had some GOP defectors, it’s possible that one of the GOP voters who skipped might have been a defector.But, it is well within the realm of possibility — even reason — that the 6 Dems and the 6 GOPs had agreed to not vote together, so that they wouldn’t impact the overall outcome of a vote. It’s a bit of a professional couresty.So, I’m not saying that our guys should be off the hook for only voting 93% or so of the time — that’s inexcusable. I am saying, however, that our 3 guys missing this vote may not have anything to do with it’s passage, since either the Dems made sure an equal number of GOPs no-showed, or a GOP would have simply gotten a different Dem Congressman to no-show had our MA Dems said that they were going to vote.
stomv – Thanks for that info about the voting. I didn’t know that it was common for members to ask others to skip a vote. This comment isn’t directed at you, but that kind of behavior is flat out bullshit. I don’t care which party instigates it. I realize the outcome could have been the same, but unless these people who we elect to do a job, actually do that job, it’s hard to tell for sure. Olver is my congresscritter. I know he sells himself as an environmental guy, so to verify I went over to his website and found this tidbit: “He was also named in 2005 to the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee. This panel has jurisdiction over the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, and all land conservation, habitat restoration and water management activities conducted by the Department of Interior.” (emphasis mine) The idea that Olver is on this particular subcommittee, and then decides to go on vacation when a crucial vote is going down is incompentent and irresponsible. Lots of folks have to put off vacations because stuff comes up at work – welcome to the real world. You know what they say: Call your congressman and let them know what you think of their job performance.
that kind of behavior is flat out bullshitI agree, to a point. Nobody is going to get to 100% of the votes. In fact, this is a prime case for a missed vote, since (if I understand correctly) it was held on a Mon or Fri when no votes were scheduled to occur.Congressman, particularly members of the House, have much to do. They have constituent services back home, voting in Washington, and with a two year re-election cycle, constant fundraising and photo-op situations.So, the game of “paired no-shows” is a really smart way to get around this problem, but it should be used sparingly, and as a last resort.So, like I said, I don’t think 93% or so is satisfactory, barring unusual circumstances such as major medical problems, running for an even higher office, etc. While I think that the constituents should complain to their Congressmen about a trend of no-shows, complaining about a specific vote, particularly when an equal number of Congressmen from each side of the aisle skipped, seems a bit much for my taste.
Another mitigating factor was that even if those three Democrats had been there and the three Republicans hadn’t, the bill still would have passed, 213-212. Tom Delay would have held the voting open just long enough for him to twist the arm of yet another Republican to change his vote, and the bill would have included another chunk of pork for that guy’s district.
stomv – I agree with you too, up to a point. đŸ™‚ I get it that votes get missed. Shit happens, but on this particular vote, on this particular issue, when Olver is a member of that particular subcommittee, I think he better get his ass to the chamber and vote. Your congressional voting record satisfaction may vary. I did call Olver’s Fitchburg office. I’m in the midst of procrastinating a project for an online class I’m taking, so I have that kind of time. I wasn’t shirty with the staffer, but I let her know that on this particular issue, yadda yadda, I was disappointed that Olver missed the vote. Here’s the kicker – she actually agreed with me. Go figure. I was sorta stunned by that.
MariposaI think your calling Olver was excellent. If constituents get huffy when their rep misses votes, their rep will miss fewer votes. If the consituent points to a particular vote, it reminds the rep that the issue in question is particularly important.So, good stuff.My rep is Frank. I rarely have anything to complain about.
I can vouch that Olver’s Fitchburg staff are thoughtful and professional – I spent a summer as an intern there a few years ago. I lack a broader understanding of how many votes the average Congressman/woman misses each year. I’d bet my turkey sandwich that the MA delegation is better the national average. Not that that’s okay, but there have GOT to be ways to hold our electeds accountable beyond threatening to unseat them. This seems to be a slight trend all over MA. Party-line Democrats being abandoned by the progressive movement for challengers, just for the sake of supporting challengers. I would guess that threatening to, or actually supporting a challenger, would NOT be always the best way to influence the decisionmaking process of an elected official. Unless you are successful at booting out the Democratic incumbent, it seems like a pretty good way to get yourself ignored since you are displaying that you do NOT have the back of said candidate/official. What worries me particularly about Olver and Neal is the potential of a Republican or more conservative Democrat taking their seats when they retire/move on. It would be fun to have a real congressional or senatorial campaign… somewhere… in MA. But I can safely say I’d rather wait til someone retires than create a left-wing primary challenger-then- right-wing-general challenger situation in ANY of our districts.
I’ll bet that Olver will be paired with Neal after the next round of redistricting. Massachusetts is going to lose a seat, and the western part of the state has the slowest growth and the least clout on Beacon Hill.
….and Fitchburg won’t be in that district, but will be paired with either Worcester or Lowell.
I’m not going to touch the missed vote debate, if for no reason other than I interned in the office of one of the members and worked for the other two in the past 3 years.However, on redestricting, I think Britain33 is off by a bit. If Massachusetts loses a seat, which looks like a very strong possibility, the last Congresssional Research Service estimates would have a seat being lost from the Southeastern section of the state. That being said, CRS reports on redistricting are best guesses made on census tracks and passed legislative line-drawings, so who knows. Either way, I don’t think Neal and Olver will ever face off. There is a chance that Neal would be the incumbent in a new 1st district whose boundaries were the state line in west and Springfield in the East, but I’m not sure its a lock by any means.
Ben, thanks for the comment. I’d be curious to see the report; however, I wouldn’t put too much stock in it, because politicians draw the lines, and if they can divide up the state into nine districts by getting rid of one in western Massachusetts, they’ll do it. And it can be done. No part of the state is growing much faster or slower than any other part, but western Mass. is definitely in the slow lane. Southeastern Massachusetts doesn’t have its own seat, not as I understand the term. Bristol County is split between Frank (Newton) and Lynch (South Boston), with the Cape growing faster than anywhere else in Massachusetts. http://www.sec.state.ma.us/cis/cismap/mapidx.htmThink of it another way: eliminating a district creates a vacuum, and other districts get pulled toward it. Imagine both the 1st and 2nd districts having to find 100,000 more people each to their east in order to survive post-2012. How much further east can they go? Does it make sense to put Chelmsford in the 1st district just so the Pioneer Valley and Springfield don’t get grouped together? Why would the legislature put Attleboro and Franklin in with the representative from Springfield?Now, some might say that putting the Lowell suburbs in the 1st district isn’t any more nonsensical than putting Fall River in the same district as Brookline, and they’d be right, but that doesn’t mean that it’s likely to happen. It’s far more likely–and least disruptive to the rest of the state–to have one district based on Springfield and the Berkshires, another based on Worcester, and give Fitchburg to Marty Meehan. Southeastern Massachusetts would have to be redrawn, too, but it’s an incoherent mess right now anyway.Sorry if I ramble on, but this is something I enjoy talking about. You know more about the dynamics of the candidates than I do, and 2012 is a long way off to talk about the current incumbents running against each other.
I described the Bristol County split incorrectly. Not that it’s important, but it’s McGovern, not Lynch, who represents it along with Frank.
Britain33, all very good points. To tell you the truth, if they gave me a marker and a map of Massachusetts, I’m not sure where I’d draw the lines. It’s pretty clear that the MA members are for the most part safe (talking of whether they should/shouldn’t be is a whole other bag of tricks, so I’ll stay away from that). So any redistricting will take into account their hometowns/power bases (anyone who argues it won’t is fooling themselves). My guess is by the time the redistricting is done there will be a new Congressman in the 1st district and one new Senator, if not two (remember, odds are its 2012 and I am working off the assumption that Kerry is running in 2008, meaning his Senate seat will be open, and therefore, possibly a few congressionals). So alot (or probably all) of this is speculation. The real battle, in all of it, would be to see how Rep. Neal would handle a new district. Having been the Mayor of Springfield he has a lot of good will there, and he’s represented Northampton (yes, Northampton is the 2nd, not the 1st, very odd, I know) for a little while with mixed reaction (they still all think John Olver is there Congressman, or at least they wish it). That being said, a more liberal Dem could give Neal a real run if the “new 1st” were drawn with Northampton, Amherst and all the colleges included.Then again, we could see a population influx rendering this entire conversation mute!
Delahunt is the one to dump. Use his Quincy district to prop up other better Congressmen when redistricting happens. Make Plymouth/Barnstable an open seat, and run Therese Murray – how long has it been since we’ve had a woman represent us?He’s rude, he doesn’t shop up and has the WORST voting record, and the south shore doesn’t have decent representation. He almost lost us the Base – Murray all the way!
stomv: interesting theory as to why our boys skipped the vote, but I wonder whether it applies in this case. In some recent Senate votes, a Republican or Democrat would vote “present” to make up for a Senator from the other party who couldn’t attend. But as far as I know, there’s no protocol whereby Reps call each other up and say “oh, you’re going to be in Mexico? Great – I’ll be sure to be in Aruba that day.” None of our guys voted “present” – they weren’t there at all. These guys don’t deserve any slack unless they checked with their Republican colleagues, found out that THEY couldn’t be there, and arranged to be absent as a result. Based on their spokesfolks’ comments, I don’t think that’s what happened.
I should have mentioned earlier that I don’t just contact my elected officials when I have complaints, I also let ’em know when I think they’re doing a good job too. I think overall that Olver does a great job and I’ve supported him since I moved to MA in 1997. I’m glad to see this discussion about redistricting. I hear things sometimes at meetings I go to, but I’ve never been able to wrap my head around the reasons why redistricting is being considered. If anyone has any links to more information about this subject I’d appreciate it if they would post them. I have one question about the hypothetical redistricting of Fitchburg. Wouldn’t it make more sense to group it with Worcester, since Fitchburg is in Worcester County rather than Lowell which is in Middlesex? Or is this even an issue?
Mariposa, the reason I don’t see Fitchburg grouped with Worcester is because the population of everything from Worcester County west is more than what you’d need to make up 2 Congressional districts. But only a little more. Some towns would need to be tied into districts based to their east.There’s already a tradition of linking southern Worcester County with Springfield or Worcester, so in the interests of least change, I presumed that northern Worcester County would be orphaned if the 1st district was effectively dismantled. Based on the existing lines, legislators don’t seem to take county boundaries into consideration when drawing districts. That makes sense to me, because counties are so weak. Certainly southeastern Middlesex County has many more shared interests with Boston than it does with Lowell.
As a Leominster resident I can tell you that clumping Leominster and Fitchburg together with the entirety of the farming community of Massachusetts does very little for Leominster and Fitchburg, but probably does a lot to keep the seat guaranteed Dem. Although districting it with Worcester probably would just stick us backseat to Worcester. We’ve got bigger problems in Leo and Fitch with a DINO state rep who truly does almost no good for Fitchburg (emile gougen) & and in Leominster – a republican vs. republican mayoral race right now. Allow me to use this space to IMPLORE the state party to pay more attention to the middle of the state!
Brittain33- Thanks for that info. The way you explain it does make sense, well as much as something I have no freakin’ clue of can make sense. đŸ™‚ Having moved to MA from CA in ’97, I’m still (8 years later!) trying to understand the political lay of the land. Just from a local, trying-to-get-things-organized perspective, the Rep. and Senate districting here in MA can be annoying to deal with at times. Townsend shares a school district with Pepperell so our towns are involved with each other for sports and stuff, but we’re in different senate districts so we don’t really organize political meetings or events that often, which is a shame because Pepperell has a very active DTC and Townsend is just getting started. That’s just one example, but you get the idea.Beth – you have my condolences. Emile Goguen is a tool and based on his voting record, has no business calling himself a democrat and since he is a “democrat”, I doubt the state party cares. We have a long way to go in terms of putting together a progressive democratic farm team out here in central Mass. That’s my goal, but I don’t think that’s the goal of the MDP. The fact that I can’t get much interest (um, like none) in a DFA chapter out here is not much of a confidence builder.