Stubborn facts: bipartisanship

By Joe Spear
Free Press Editor

More and more, I'm seeing the major broadcast media playing up controversies at the risk of the facts. I guess good TV is just good theater sometimes. TV isn't the only culprit either. Talk radio. Wild-haired bloggers. Take your pick.

But the newspaper and its bloggers are supposed to be "of record" and more concerned with facts.

So, I wondered, are Democrats and Republicans really as far apart as the big media say? Looking at the handy Free Press roll call vote Web site, we can discern the following facts.

Sometimes Democrats vote "no" with Republicans as in the following case.

The House on Feb. 4 voted, 217 for and 212 against, (37 Dems voted no) to raise the national debt limit by $1.9 trillion to $14.29 trillion and thus extend Treasury borrowing authority until early 2011. So close, there were member of both parties, including lots of Republicans, voting for this one.

Sometimes everyone's one big happy family to spend more money:

Voting 422 for (197 Republicans voted with Democrats) and five against, the House on Feb. 4 sent the Senate a bill (HR 4061) to fund National Science Foundation programs for upgrading cybersecurity instruction and research on U.S. campuses. The bill authorizes $396 million over five years in NSF grants for research to help governments and the private-sector better secure their computer systems. The bill also authorizes $94 million over five years in scholarships for students who study cybersecurity and commit to public-service employment in the field after graduation.

Sometimes Democrats vote "no" with Republicans on issues they fear would raise taxes.

Voting 233 for and 187 against (5 were Democrats), the House on Feb. 4 added pay-as-you-go budget discipline to HJ Res 45 (above). Under "pay-go," proposed tax cuts or entitlement-spending increases must be offset by tax increases or entitlement cuts elsewhere in the budget. If not offset, they need 60 votes in the Senate and a majority vote in the House for approval. Pay-go was a staple of congressional budgeting throughout the 1990s but dropped in 2002 mainly to clear the way for President Bush's tax cuts. Republicans usually oppose pay-go as a deterrent to tax cuts.

It's not just Democrats who support Trial lawyers, nor is just it just Republicans against them

Voting 187 (13 Republicans) for and 247 (3 Republicans) against, the House on Nov. 7, 2009, defeated a Republican motion to add limits on medical-malpractice suits to HR 3962 (above). The underlying bill would fund state efforts to reduce the cost of the "defensive medicine" practiced by doctors to fend off lawsuits. Republicans sought to cap non-economic damage awards at $250,000; limit plaintiffs' lawyers' contingency fees and narrow the window for filing malpractice suits, among other provisions. The GOP motion sought to generate $54 billion to be spent for the benefit of Medicare participants in rural areas.

And here's one that was really bipartisan in the Senate.

Voting 51 (27 Dems, 23 Repubs) for and 48 (30 Dems, 17 Repubs, and one nonvote) against, the Senate on Dec. 15, 2009, failed to reach 60 votes needed to pass an amendment under which individuals and businesses could import U.S.-made, federally approved pharmaceuticals from Canada and other countries at retail costs much lower than in U.S. stores. This amendment was offered to a pending health-care bill (HR 3590).

Facts are stubborn things.