Norm Coleman has run a nasty campaign, full of personal attacks, half-truths, and ridiculous claims about Al Franken. Why would he do that? you may ask. The answer is simple: he knows that if this campaign comes down to issues, he'll lose. He was never elected for sharing Minnesotans' views on the issues, and his record in Congress has not been one most Minnesotans would approve of.
Over the past few months, I've compiled Coleman's floor votes on a number of different subjects. Now I bring you a summary of his worst votes. He wants to run from his record, but here it is, in black and white, for your review.
This is the eighth in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. For a list of previous articles, go here.
Last week, I started looking through some of the voting history compiled by the good folks at Peace Action West, which illustrates some of Norm "W" Coleman's dangerous votes on foreign policy. Peace Action West is an organization which advocates for "broad-based civic activism to create a strong voice for peaceful and pragmatic solutions to global problems." They developed a Congressional scorecard to highlight Congressmen's votes on foreign policy and peace. Norm "W" Coleman's record is so bad, I had to split it into two weeks. Last week, I covered his support of new nuclear weapons. Here are some more of his bad votes
Folks, if ever you needed an explanation for why we're still in Iraq, this is it. Coleman voted against an amendment that would prohibit the use of Iraq reconstruction funds for any contract or financial agreement with an entity that pays deferred compensation to the president, vice president, or a Cabinet level official, or any entity in which the president, vice president or Cabinet-level official holds options to purchase more than 1,000 shares of stock (vote #386). That means Coleman voted to make it legal for our own president and vice president to be war profiteers.
Here's another shocking vote from Coleman. This is proof that when Coleman tells you he's "strong on defense," you should take a closer look. Barbara Boxer introduced what I would consider a very reasonable amendment, providing that Bush's missile defense system could not be deployed for defensive operations until the Department of Defense certified that the capabilities of the
system to perform its defense mission had been confirmed by operationally realistic testing of the system (vote #124). Now just stop and think about that. Norm says he cares about defense, but he's totally fine having a defense system in operation before we have proof that it works properly.
In a heartwarming vote, Coleman voted AGAINST protecting civilians from cluster bombs. A cluster bomb is an air-dropped bomb that ejects multiple small bomblets. They are very inaccurate and unreliable, and wreak havoc when used in civilian areas. The amendment Coleman voted against would have required the administration to certify the weapons would not be used in civilian areas before the US could sell, transfer or acquire cluster bombs (vote #232).
2003 - present
I don't have the space to list the number of bad votes Coleman has made on Iraq. The war is just another of Bush's failed policies that Coleman lined up behind. You can check out any of the Peace Action scorecards for some of Coleman's worst votes on Iraq.
The bottom line: Norm "W" Coleman isn't making us or anyone else safer. He's voting to reward war profiteers and allow innocent civilians to be killed. Perhaps even more disturbing is the thought that he doesn't want to bother testing out our country's missile defense system before putting it into action. We can't trust Norm Coleman on defense; it's time to send a new Senator to Washington.
CALL FOR TIPS: are there some areas of Coleman's record you'd like to see highlighted? Email me at rosenberg.jeff(at)gmail.com(dot)com
This is the seventh in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. For a list of previous articles, go here.
As the material on CQ Weekly for this series started to run thin, I received an email from Reva Patwardhan
of Peace Action West about some of Norm "W" Coleman's dangerous votes on foreign policy. Peace Action West is an organization which advocates for "broad-based civic activism to create a strong voice for peaceful and pragmatic solutions to global problems." They developed a Congressional scorecard to highlight Congressmen's votes on foreign policy and peace. I'm sure nobody thinks Norm "W" Coleman is in favor of a peaceful foreign policy, but you'll be surprised just how bad he is.
In fact, there are so many bad votes in these scorecards that I'm going to spend at least two weeks going through them. This, week, I explore Coleman's misguided support for nuclear weapons. After the Cold War was over, most people thought the threat of continuing nuclear proliferation was over. So why are Coleman and other conservatives still voting to expand our nuclear arsenal?
Conservatives in Congress have been pushing the concepts of low-yield nuclear weapons and nuclear earth-penetrator weapons. Despite being smaller than conventional nuclear weapons, they are still nuclear weapons, and will result in substantial civilian casualties. The Federation of American Scientists warns:
By seeking to produce usable low-yield nuclear weapons, we risk blurring the now sharp line separating nuclear and conventional warfare, and provide legitimacy for other nations to similarly consider using nuclear weapons in regional wars.
Yet for some reason, Norm supports them. Here is some documentation of his votes:
Coleman voted three times to expand the United States' nuclear weapons arsenal. He voted twice to approve research on low-yield nuclear weapons (Votes #186, 187). He also voted for nuclear earth penetrator weapons (Vote #189). These votes aren't "strong on defense," they're simply irresponsible.
Edward Kennedy (D-MA) tried to include a provision in the Defense Authorization Bill that would prohibit the use of $36.6 million for a study of Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator "bunker buster" weapons and a Stockpile Services Advanced Concepts Initiative, which includes research into a "low yield" nuclear weapons. Of course, Coleman voted AGAINST it (Vote #113).
Coleman didn't just vote for more nuclear weapons for us; he seems fine allowing nuclear proliferation around the world. During the debate over nuclear cooperation with India, Russ Feingold (D-WI) proposed an amendment would have required that the India deal could only move forward if the president certified that civilian nuclear cooperation with India did nothing to assist, encourage or induce India to manufacture or acquire additional nuclear weapons. I supported the deal with India, but the deal needed to be about civilian nuclear energy only; we don't want to fund other countries' nuclear proliferation. I'd love to hear Coleman's justification for this one.
The bottom line: There's no good reason to be in support of nuclear proliferation. A nuclear war would be devastating to the whole world, and I have to believe nobody wants that. We have the most advanced army in the world, and the most advanced weapons in the world. New nuclear weapons don't serve any functional purpose, yet Norm "W" Coleman has consistently voted for them. That's warmongering foreign policy at its worst.
This is the sixth in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. Previous articles are collected here. All data in this series comes from CQ Weekly.
First, I need to start with an admission: I said we were going to be looking at Norm's record on agriculture. But when I looked into it, there were not many interesting floor votes available on agricultural topics. And what's more, I have to admit, his record was really not terrible. In fact, I was almost feeling downright positive about Norm until I stumbled upon the 2005 Bankruptcy Overhaul bill.
The bill, with Coleman's support, create a means test tied to the median incomes of individual states to determine whether personal bankruptcy filers were able to repay some or all of their debts. That doesn't sound too bad. What's mind-boggling, as always, is some of the stuff Norm voted against.
Coleman started his record on veterans by voting AGAINST an amendment that would increase spending on veterans' programs by approximately $1 billion and put the same amount toward deficit reduction. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 74)
He then voted against a proposal that would have made it easier for veterans to return to their jobs. He voted AGAINST an amendment would allow a 50 percent tax credit on the salaries employers pay workers who are in the National Guard or Reserves and have been put on active duty. I would have thought he would at least support veterans if it involved giving a tax cut.
2004
Proving that the richest Americans are more important to him than the troops, Coleman voted AGAINST an amendment that would create a reserve fund that would allow up to $2.7 billion in additional spending for veterans' medical programs. It also would increase the amount dedicated for deficit reduction by $2.7 billion. The spending would be offset by reducing tax breaks for taxpayers with incomes of more than $1 million per year (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 34). I've written previously about the long-term damage Bush and Coleman are doing by putting this war on a credit card instead of asking Americans, even the very wealthiest, to make sacrifices for their country.
Coleman also voted AGAINST a similar amendment to create a reserve fund that would allow up to $1.8 billion in additional spending for veterans' medical programs. The spending would be offset by revenue increases. (SENATE ROLL CALL 40)
Finally in 2004, Coleman voted AGAINST an amendment to authorize an increase in health benefits for veterans by keeping discretionary spending at fiscal 2004 levels. Yes, you read that right: he voted against increasing health benefits for troops who were being wounded every single day. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 145)
Did you think that transportation security was an obvious opportunity for bipartisan agreement? Did you think that only a maniac could vote against securing our planes, trains, and cargo ships? Well, then you haven't been following the career of Norm "W" Coleman. The following is a list of some of Coleman's most egregious votes against securing our transportation networks:
2003
Coleman voted to privatize core air traffic control functions, system specialists and maintenance of systems and flight service stations. You've seen what the privatized TSA program is like; do you really want to outsource our transportation security?
2004
Coleman voted AGAINST an amendment to increase funding for rail and transit security by $350 million (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 181). This is such a small number, when you consider the amount of damage that could be done in an attack. Coleman's vote against this is nothing short of disgusting.
2005
This was a banner year for Coleman in terms of voting against our security.
First, he voted AGAINST an amendment which would appropriate approximately $302 million for aviation security programs (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 180). Well, it's not like anyone has ever attacked our aviation system, right?
Immediately after that, he voted AGAINST appropriating $70 million to the Transportation Security Administration to identify and track shipments of hazardous materials by truck using global positioning system (GPS) technology (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 181).
Next, he voted AGAINST an amendment that would provide an additional $100 million for transportation and infrastructure grants, increase port security grant funding by $50 million to $200 million and increase intercity bus security grants to $15 million (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 185).
He did vote for one amendment supporting transit security grants. This bill would have provided $1.2 billion for transit security (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 186); I have no idea why he would support this bill and vote against the others. Well, at least one out of four ain't bad... no, wait--it stinks. Unfortunately, the only amendment Coleman voted for was voted down by the rest of the Republicans.
2006
Coleman wrote an amendment that would require the screening of all high-risk maritime cargo inbound to the United States (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 245). Sounds good, right? Well, not so fast.
He wrote this amendment because he voted AGAINST an amendment that would require the Homeland Security secretary to develop a plan for scanning all of the cargo containers destined for and departing from the United States (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 246). So I suppose he's in favor of inbound cargo being safe, just not that safe. And outbound cargo? Who cares?
2007
Once again, he voted AGAINST scan all cargo entering the United States (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 56). I want to explain here: the 9-11 Commission said that the technology to do this effectively was a few years in the future. This bill would have given the Department of Homeland Security five years to put the technology in place to screen cargo efficiently and economically. So how could Coleman oppose screening cargo?
The bottom line: Norm "W" Coleman has consistently voted against funding for transportation security. And even when he voted for something, he was usually voting for the weaker of several options. That's just unacceptable. I can't think of many votes that were more important to this country, and Coleman shirked his responsibility to keep us safe.
This is the fourth in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. Articles in the series will be collected here. All data in this series comes from CQ Weekly.
Does Norm "W" Coleman hate transportation? I know, it seems unlikely. But how else do you account for some of these votes? He doesn't seem to be objecting to the size of the transportation bill, so what's the problem? Maybe he just doesn't want to spend money on transportation at all. Check out his voting record below:
2003
In Norm's first year in the Senate, he voted to privatize core air traffic control functions, system specialists and maintenance of systems and flight service stations. We saw how well privatization worked for TSA; do you want your safety outsourced to corporations?
2004
Norm voted AGAINST the Surface Transportation bill that would authorize $318 billion in federal aid for highways, highway safety programs and transit programs over six years. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 14)
So was the problem the cost of the bill? Not likely. He also voted AGAINST an amendment to reduce the total cost of the surface transportation measure from $318 billion to $256 billion, to match the president's fiscal 2005 budget request. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 13) What exactly does Norm want? the only conclusion I can make is that he doesn't want to spend any money on transportation.
2005
Norm voted an amendment that would increase revenue by $13.8 billion and use it to increase spending for surface transportation projects. It also would add a section designating $34.7 billion for highways in fiscal 2006 and $7.1 billion for public transit. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 71)
But once again, spending doesn't seem to be the issue. He also voted AGAINST an amendment would reduce funding for certain programs by $10.7 billion. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 124) So, what WILL he vote for?
Of course, as long as we have transportation, Norm doesn't want it to be environmentally friendly. He voted AGAINST an amendment that would mandate phased increases in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The standard would gradually increase to 40 miles per gallon by model year 2016. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 157)
2007
To be fair, I report both sides of the story. Norm voted FOR an amendment to increase the obligation limitation for the Highway Trust Fund by $1 billion to repair aging bridges. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 329) Of course, right after the I-35W bridge collapse, you'd hope he would finally start taking our safety more seriously than he did in 2003.
The bottom line: Norm "W" Coleman has consistently voted against funding for transportation infrastructure. That's not even considering transportation security. Next week, I'll expose just how often Norm voted against improving security aboard planes, transit, and cargo ships.
This is the third in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. Articles in the series will be collected here. All data in this series comes from CQ Weekly.
I have to be completely honest: Norm "W" Coleman has been better on environmental issues than on certain others. That's not to say that he's been good, of course--just less bad. In particular, it boggles my mind how someone can be against cleaning up toxic pollutants--especially when we ask the polluters to pay instead of the federal government.
Here are some examples of some of Coleman's ridiculous anti-environment votes.
2003
Coleman came to Congress raring to fight against the environment. Soon after arriving in the Senate, Coleman voted twice against environmental cleanup. First, he voted AGAINST an amendment that would increase spending on environmental and conservation programs by $12.4 billion over 10 years. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 96) Then, on the very next roll-call vote, he voted to kill an amendment that would provide $100 million from the Superfund trust fund for cleanup of brownfield sites. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 97)
That same year, he voted for the first time--but not the last--AGAINST an increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 309)
Finally, he voted AGAINST a substitute amendment that would require greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010. It would also provide a program of scientific research on climate change, establish a national greenhouse gas database, and create a market-driven system of greenhouse gas tradeable allowances. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 310)
2004
Coleman voted AGAINST increasing spending for the superfund program--again! This version would have increased funding for fiscal 2005 through 2009 by $8.3 billion; it also would have provided for reinstating polluter fees to fund the cleanup of superfund sites. (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 45)
2005
Coleman voted AGAINST capping greenhouse gas emissions at 2000 levels by 2010--again! (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 148)
2007
As he has done on every issue we've looked at, Coleman changed his tune once the election neared. After two votes against fuel efficiency, he offered an amendment to provide energy tax incentives for energy efficient buildings through Dec. 31, 2012.(SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 98)
Then, he voted FOR a bill that would overhaul national energy policies and increase the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2020. So why did he vote against this before?. In fact, he voted for it 3 times in quick succession in 2007! (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 226) (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 416) (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 425)
The bottom line: Norm has developed a pattern: he knows his values are out of touch, and so he changes them when the election comes close. He's done this on almost every single issue, and the environment is no exception. Here's a news flash, Norm: it's too late! You're out of touch, and it's time you were held accountable.
(A good deal more important than conservative mouthpieces acting like children toward me....I'm promoting this back up to the top. - promoted by Joe Bodell)
This is the second in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. Articles in the series will be collected here. All data in this series comes from CQ Weekly.
Norm "W" Coleman has such a long history of voting against education, I've had to narrow this post down to the most egregious. As usual, though, as the election began approaching, he started trying to appear more moderate. That's why we can't just look at his record in the last year: we have to look at his whole last term to see the real Coleman.
2003
Norm Coleman wasn't in the Senate to vote on No Child Left Behind, but he got off to a rousing start by voting AGAINST an amendment to properly fund the initiative (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 5).
He then voted AGAINST an amendment that would increase spending on Head Start programs by $24 billion and increase spending on after-school programs by $18 billion, both over 10 years (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 86).
But he didn't just vote against little kids. He voted against young adults too, voting AGAINST an amendment that would increase spending on vocational education by $3.6 billion over 10 years (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 98), and another that would slow the acceleration in the reduction of the top tax rate and use the revenue for higher education financial aid programs (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 164).
And finally, in a busy year voting against education, Norm voted AGAINST an amendment to increase funding for Hispanic education programs by $210 million money for dropout prevention and language instruction (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 322).
2005
Norm voted against vocational education again by voting AGAINST increasing funding under the Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 61).
He also once again voted AGAINST a motion to add $153 million for Head Start programs (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 272).
2006
As 2008 approached and Norm's popularity declined, he decided to change his tune. This time he voted FOR restoring education program cuts and an increase in the maximum Pell Grant award to $4,500 (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 39).
2007
Norm voted FOR a bill that would authorize $21 billion for education in science and math through fiscal 2010 (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 146).
After voting against student grants in the past, he now votes for them. He voted FOR increasing the amount authorized for the college access partnership grant program from $25 million to $113 million (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 254), and increasing the amount authorized for the new Promise grant program (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 255). He is one of only 4 Republicans to vote for this amendment. Would he have voted for it in 2003, without an election on the line?
Of course, he did show his true roots last year by voting AGAINST a funding increase for programs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (SENATE ROLL CALL VOTE 94).
The bottom line: I'm not trying to accuse Norm "W" Coleman of "flip-flopping" on education. I'm accusing him of something worse: trying to mislead us on his record. When he thinks we're not looking, he votes against properly funding education. Then, when the election comes closer, he changes his tune. Here's a news flash, Norm: it's too late! You're out of touch, and it's time you were held accountable.
NOTE: This is the first in a series of weekly articles exposing Norm Coleman's record on the issues. Articles in the series will be collected here. All data in this series comes from CQ Weekly.
As I shared yesterday, Norm Coleman has been running toward the center, trying to fool Minnesotans into thinking he is more moderate than he really is. He knows his positions on the issues are out of touch, and so he's hoping the voters have short memories. So here's a reminder of some of his most egregious votes against American workers.
2003
Coleman gets off to a rousing start by voting against investment in our workers. He voted AGAINST increasing spending in the Workforce Investment Act by $678 million.
Not content to vote just against workers, Coleman votes against both workers and businesses by voting AGAINST a motion to increase the amount businesses can deduct for equipment costs, extend federal unemployment benefits and expand eligibility for the benefits to low-wage and part-time workers.
Finally, he votes for what is effectively a pay decrease for our workers by voting AGAINST an amendment to prevent workers from losing their eligibility for overtime pay.
2004
Coleman votes a second time AGAINST an amendment that would prevent workers from losing their eligibility for overtime pay.
2005
After voting for a pay decrease, Coleman votes AGAINST a motion to increase the minimum wage to $6.25 over one year. Republicans claim this hurts small businesses, but Coleman clearly doesn't care about them. He already voted against increasing the amount businesses can deduct in 2003. This is clearly just a mean-spirited vote against American workers.
2007
Coleman starts running toward the center and votes FOR raising the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour over two years. But, if he really believes in this, why vote against a smaller increase two years ago?
The bottom line: Norm "W" Coleman consistently voted against American workers, then tried to cover it up in 2007. Here's a news flash, Norm: it's too late! You're out of touch, and it's time you were held accountable.
During the glory days of one-party power, the GOP stuck together. Party discipline was high, and they fervently pushed President Bush's misguided agenda through Congress. Our own Senator Norm "W" Coleman was in the forefront of Bush's supporters, voting with his GOP colleagues nearly 95 percent of the time--even more than the GOP average.
Now, however, it's a different story. GOP Senators--including Coleman--are pathetically trying to mislead voters into thinking they are "moderate." Party unity has disintegrated as they each try to prove that they are in the mainstream.
Norm Coleman is no exception. In fact, he's run away even faster than his Republican colleagues. He now votes with his own party even less often than average. But we know today's Coleman isn't the real Coleman. So why has he run away from his party? Because he knows Minnesotans disagree with him on the issues, and he's desperate to be re-elected. Coleman was never elected because of his stance on the issues; he was elected because of the tragedy of Paul Wellstone's plane crash and the public's backlash to the now infamous memorial service.
DON'T BE FOOLED! Coleman is a far-right Republican in the mold of George W. Bush. Over the coming months, I will be exploring Coleman's record, with one issue in the spotlight each week. I will show that, while he is sprinting toward the center now, his heart lies far to the right. He is out of touch with Minnesotans, and he needs to be held accountable for that.
During the glory days of one-party power, the GOP stuck together. Party discipline was high, and they fervently pushed President Bush's misguided agenda through Congress. Our own Senator Norm "W" Coleman was in the forefront of Bush's supporters, voting with his GOP colleagues nearly 95 percent of the time--even more than the GOP average.
