What's up with Republicans taking credit for legislation they voted against?

[jack]

Stefanik is the latest Republican to tout funding she voted against​

Partway through President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address last week, he touted federal investments in initiatives made possible by Democratic legislation, and added a brief dig at some of his Republican detractors. “By the way, I noticed some of you who’ve strongly voted against it are cheering on that money coming in,” the president said, adding, “If any of you don’t want that money in your district, just let me know.”

Biden’s comment was an acknowledgement of a phenomenon that pops up more often than it should: GOP lawmakers have a habit of voting against Democratic legislation, only to turn around and take credit when the Democratic legislation makes investments in their states and districts.

Take this week, for example. House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik issued this press release touting news in her upstate New York district. It was accompanied by a social media message in which the GOP congresswoman said how “proud” she was to announce the federal investment in her community. A day later, there was some discussion about the funding for the local project coming by way of the Inflation Reduction Act, which Stefanik opposed and condemned. But that apparently wasn’t quite right: The funding came from a different Democratic bill — which Stefanik also opposed and condemned.

As we’ve discussed, when it comes to Republicans seeking credit for federal investments they opposed, there are degrees and nuances. For as long as there’s been a Congress, there have been lawmakers seeking federal funds for their states and districts — even when those resources came from bills they voted against. The thinking behind the appeals is obvious: They might’ve opposed the legislation, but if the government is going to make the investments anyway, these members figure they might as well make the case for directing some of those funds to their own constituents.

I’m not unsympathetic to this argument — it’s certainly rooted in the American tradition — but the details matter.

When the legislation in question reached the House floor, Stefanik said the spending would advance the Democrats’ “far-left radical agenda,” adding that House Democrats had “proven” that “their priorities are not for hardworking Americans.” Stefanik went on to argue in December 2022 — the last full month before Republicans would take over the House — that in the new Congress, GOP members would “rein in reckless spending.” It came on the heels of a related statement in which the congresswoman declared, “We need to absolutely stop the spending.” What Stefanik neglected to mention is that she also apparently came to believe that the Democrats’ “far-left radical agenda” would be quite effective, just so long as it was directing funds to her home district.

“We need to absolutely stop the spending,” but apparently not in New York’s 21st.

 

[jack]

'Typical Republican hypocrisy': Lauren Boebert ripped for celrebrating bill she voted against​

In early March, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado) was among the 40 House Republicans who voted against a government funding bill. The far-right MAGA congresswoman even bragged about her opposition, attacking the bill as the "swamp omnibus" and "monstrosity." But later in the month, on Monday, March 18, Boebert did a very different type of bragging when, according to Business Insider, she "celebrated the impending arrival of" funding from a bill she voted against. In a March 18 press release, Boebert said, "Can't wait for the ribbon cuttings and to see these priorities come to fruition." The bill that Boebert opposed, according to Business Insider, contains "more than $20 million for the Colorado district she's now abandoning."

That district is Colorado's 3rd Congressional District, which she still represents. But Boebert is seeking a third term via Colorado's 4th Congressional District, where she is running for the seat that conservative GOP Rep. Ken Buck is leaving.

Business Insider's Bryan Metzger notes that in the 3rd Congressional District, funding from the bill "includes $5 million for a water reservoir near Wolf Creek, millions for highway repairs and renovations in western Colorado, and several other projects." Activist John Shea is among the Democrats who is calling out Boebert's hypocrisy.
In a March 19 post on X, formerly Twitter, Shea noted, "The Republicans voted against every Bill that Biden has put forward!"

Houston-based Tom Barnett tweeted Business Insider's article and said of Boebert, "Hypocrite."

X user Filberto Cavasos wrote, "Lady needs mental help. Taking credit for bills she voted against?"

Activist Sandra Repar tweeted, "@RepBoebert takes credit for something she voted against, in the district she's leaving. Typical #RepublicanHypocrisy."

 

[jack]

Marjorie Taylor Greene voted against over $9.3 million in federal funding for her district. She's bragging about it anyway.​

• Marjorie Taylor Greene voted against a bill that provides over $9.3 million for her district.
• She's touting that funding, which includes local airport improvements, to her constituents anyway.
• It's the latest example of lawmakers having it both ways on government spending.

On March 6, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene lit into her own party in searing terms as she voted against a package of bills to fund broad swaths of the federal government. "Republicans have no excuse for having brought this minibus forward," the Georgia Republican said in a statement that day.

Greene listed a litany of grievances, including the fact the package's six bills weren't receiving their own votes, the level of government spending, and the fact that it funds the Department of Justice.

But that doesn't mean there weren't things for Greene to celebrate in the bill. And within a week, she was doing just that. "Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is proud to announce that she has successfully secured federal funding for seven different projects for Northwest Georgia," her office said in a March 11 release, saying the congresswoman "meticulously sought out" the projects that received the funding. That included more than $3.8 million for an airport expansion in Floyd County, $1.5 million for a water treatment facility in Dade County, and several other projects — totaling over $9.3 million. Greene had secured the projects as so-called "earmarks" in the minibus she'd railed against.

Greene's office touted a local story about the airport funding in an email newsletter to her constituents on Tuesday morning. A spokesman for the congresswoman did not immediately respond to BI's request for comment.

The congresswoman's maneuver is known to Democratic critics as "vote no, take the dough." While Greene herself did secure the funding, one key purpose of earmarks — officially known as congressionally directed spending — is that they give individual lawmakers a stake in government funding legislation and increase the chances that they'll vote for the bill.

In this case, Greene gets to have it both ways, voting against the broader bill while having something to brag about to her constituents back home.

Altogether, 40 House Republicans have done the same thing this month.

That includes Rep. Lauren Boebert, who voted against more than $20 million of her own earmarks as she faces the fight of her political life in Colorado.

 

[jack]

It happened again: These 20 House members, mostly Republican, voted against millions in funding for their own districts​

• 20 House members, mostly Republican, voted against federal funding for their districts.
• It shows the limits of the "earmark" process, which aims to incentivize lawmakers to vote for bills.
• "When I cast a vote on a bill, it has to be reflective of my core principles," said one Republican.

As Rep. Clay Higgins walked toward the House floor to vote on a $1.2 trillion government funding bill on Friday, the Louisiana Republican explained why his "earmarks" couldn't get him to vote yes.

"Ultimately, I don't control what the final language of the total funding bill will be," said Higgins. "When I cast a vote on a bill, it has to be reflective of my core principles."

Higgins voted against the bill, despite securing $2.3 million in federal funding for an emergency operations center at the port in Morgan City, Louisiana. He was one of 20 House members — 15 Republicans and 5 Democrats — who voted against Friday's government funding bill despite securing so-called "earmarks," known officially as congressionally directed spending.

Earmarks, which allow lawmakers to funnel spending toward specific projects in their districts, are controversial. Republicans banned them in 2011 amid accusations of fraud and waste, but Democrats brought them back in 2021. One argument in favor of earmarks is that they make high-stakes legislation easier to pass, providing lawmakers a stake in major bills and giving leadership a way to corral votes. But recent votes show that there are limits to that logic. Friday's bill encompassed roughly 70% of federal government funding, including the Pentagon, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and other agencies. The other 30% was contained in a separate funding bill passed roughly two weeks ago, but that bill contained far more earmarks, especially for House members. Nonetheless, 42 House members who secured earmarks voted against it anyway, 40 of whom were Republicans.

The government funding bill, a compromise hashed out between the Democratic-controlled Senate and the Republican-controlled House, barely passed with the required two-thirds majority on Friday. Both progressives and Republicans found reasons to oppose it. Republicans protested that the bill did not include certain hardline immigration-related policy provisions, that culture war "riders" had been stripped from the compromise legislation, and as always, that the federal government is spending too much money.

22 Democrats, the vast majority of whom are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, voted against the bill in protest of increased military funding, increased funding for border enforcement measures, and a one-year ban on funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), a key provider of aid to Palestinians, particularly in Gaza. That included Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington, the chairwoman of the caucus, who voted against the bill despite securing $1.3 million for seismic structural upgrades at the Seattle Public Library. "We are consistently rewarding waste, fraud, and abuse in the Pentagon by providing them with a larger budget year after year," Jayapal said in a statement.

Republicans in particular have faced accusations in recent years of "voting no and taking the dough" — not just when it comes to earmarks, but for celebrating funding from bills that they wholly opposed. Already, Republicans including Greene and Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado have bragged about earmarks they secured in government funding bills this week, even though they voted against the final product.

Here are the 15 Republicans who voted against the bill, despite securing earmarks:

• Brian Babin of Texas
• Gus Bilirakis of Florida
• John Curtis of Utah
• Mike Ezell of Mississippi
• Garrett Graves of Louisiana
• Michael Guest of Mississippi
• Diana Harshbarger of Tennessee
• Clay Higgins of Louisiana
• Trent Kelly of Mississippi
• Burgess Owens of Utah
• Mike Rogers of Alabama
• Chris Smith of New Jersey
• Greg Steube of Florida
• Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey
• Randy Weber of Texas

Here are the 5 Democrats who did the same:

• Andre Carson of Indiana
• Joaquin Castro of Texas
• Pramila Jayapal of Washington
• Summer Lee of Pennsylvania
• Nydia Velázquez of New York

 

[jack]

'Hypocrite': Jim Jordan accused of taking credit for results of Biden act he voted against​

Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) is being called a hypocrite for taking credit for the results of Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, which Jordan voted against. Jordan, a frequent defender of Donald Trump who was recently accused of causing "real harm to the American people" in a letter by an ethics group, has been a staunch opponent of Biden, and has co-led the push to investigate the president for potential impeachable offenses. But on Friday, Jordan appeared to celebrate Biden's major legislative comment, according to his social media followers.

“'New manufacturing plant to create 160 local jobs.' 'Sheetz to hire over 400 new employees in Ohio' 'Honda and LG Energy begin hiring for new plant.' Ultimately: Move your business to Ohio. Hire workers. See success," the congressman wrote on his social media. The comments are almost universally about a single topic: Joe Biden's legislative accomplishments.

@ArtCandee wrote, "Thank Joe Biden for the money."
@NicholasABrown_ said, "Because of President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act – which Congressman Jim Jordan voted against."
@ATTACKTRADE added, "Jim will take credit for the sun rising tomorrow too."

One commenter simply posted an image with the word "hypocrite." Michael Kelly, actor in Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan, also chimed in. "Just look at what Biden has done even though you voted against all of it," Kelly said.

White House Deputy Communications Director Herbie Ziskend also pointed out the alleged hypocrisy.

"Thank you [Jordan] for spotlighting how the Inflation Reduction Act is driving job creation in Ohio!" he said on Saturday.

Ziskend brought evidence, as well. He included screenshots of various news articles, including, "Toyota, LG Energy sign $3 billion battery supply deal in U.S. EV push," and "Honda and LG Energy Solution Announce Ohio as Home to Joint Venture EV Battery Plant."