Rep. Allen West Is Getting The Word About Pigford
[Guest post by Lee Stranahan]
Want to hear the sound of people making a difference on the Pigford story?
I mentioned in a previous post that Allen West had voted no on Rep. Steve King’s amendment to stop Pigford funding. This vote struck me as strange because of Rep. West’s reputation as an opponent of wasteful spending.
Talk show host David Webb asked West about his vote today and Rep. West seems to feel that he made an error in his vote. I watched the ‘lightning round’ of fourty (40!) or so amendments live on C-SPAN and I can see where an honest error is certainly possible. I accept his explanation and appreciate his straightforward answer.
But listen to what Rep. West as soon as Webb asks him about Pigford – he says he’s answered the question about his Pigford many times. And THAT is the sound of the tide turning. Pigford is clearly getting onto people’s radar, thanks to you. If you haven’t done so, please sign the Pigford Petition.
And blogger The Right Scoop has another example of West answering a Pigford question. (h/t Joe Brooks)
Here’s Rep. West explanation from his newsletter (h/t to Peresphone from Right Scoop’s comments)
FY 2012 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations – On Thursday, June 16, the House approved H.R. 2112 by a vote of 217-203, I voted YES. The bill would provide a total of $17.25 billion in non-emergency, discretionary budget authority in FY 2012 for government programs funded through the Agriculture and Rural Development Appropriations Act. The bill would represent a decrease of $2.67 billion or 13 percent below the FY 2011 funding level and a reduction of $5.03 billion or 22 percent below the President’s request. H.R. 2112 meets and surpasses House Republican’s pledge by bringing discretionary budget authority for Agriculture and related agencies down to nearly FY 2006 spending levels.
There were some 40 amendments to this piece of legislation and there are those who questioned my NO vote on Rep. Steve King’s amendment on Pigford. I accept full responsibility for not doing a complete due diligence and personal research on this amendment. I am mortal and a fallible human being who seeks to do his best daily, and improve as such."
– Lee Stranahan
How many people just say ‘hey, I made a mistake’?
I like Allen West a whole lot, and hope he picks up the Pigford fraud issue.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/20/2011 @ 3:13 pmAllen West’s true colors are starting to show.
Disgusted American (aea0a1) — 6/20/2011 @ 3:51 pmWhat “true colors” are you referring to, “disgusting”?
JD (306f5d) — 6/20/2011 @ 3:56 pmI think he just made a damn mistake and owned up to it. Sadly, if these guys don’t vote on things they haven’t read, they cede ground to the bad guys.
Congress should slow down these votes. It should be considered an egregious offense to propose legislation that isn’t extremely important, because these guys don’t have enough time to consider all the stuff being proposed as it is.
But what’s West supposed to do when 40 amendments are proposed in a row? How is his body effectively representing this country?
It’s fair to blame senior leadership for this. They need to consider bills at a pace with which anyone could read and consider all of it.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/20/2011 @ 5:28 pmC’mon, “disgusted”. How did Rep West show his true colors, and what colors are they?
JD (318f81) — 6/20/2011 @ 5:30 pmI want to offer this idea for y’all to cogitate upon. It’s not an idea I intend to defend from all attacks, but something I think needs to be said, and to which I’d like to hear your collective response.
(clears throat)
The Pigford frauds are, while big in and of themselves, relatively minor, compared to the $17.25 billion worth of corruption contained in the ARDA Act itself. The House of Representatives merely reduced the amount of corruption by $2.67/5.03 billion dollars (depending on which baseline you start from, last year’s amount or the amount requested by the Administration).
Beyond the FDA and similar agencies which supposedly exist for the safeguarding of public health (and which themselves can be seen as a nexus of politics and corruption) is there anything in HR 2112 which is anything other than handing out money from the public treasury to individuals, businesses, or less precisely defined groups who have the appropriate political connections? And isn’t that corruption so endemic in Washington that it’s seen as normal political lice* nowadays?
*yes, that’s a typo for “life” but somehow it seems appropriate so I’m leaving it uncorrected.
kishnevi (d785be) — 6/20/2011 @ 5:57 pmKiss – no doubt. However, there are tons of things, a few million here, a few million there, a couple billion there, that in and of themselves make little to no difference to the overall budget. If you add all of those up, they can make a difference, and can at the very least be a good start.
JD (318f81) — 6/20/2011 @ 6:07 pmwhat’s that part at the end where he says he doesn’t want to see any deeper cuts to the WIC program? So he wants to tax him a pikachu for to buy foozle for people the pikachu never met in his whole life? What makes hum think the pikachu doesn’t have anybody what he would like to buy foozle for? That’s same as stealing.
here are the roll calls for the 2 votes having to do wif cutting the WIC welfare queen monies:
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 430 An amendment to reduce the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children by $604 million and apply the savings to the spending reduction account.
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 431 An amendment to reduce the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children by $82,500,000 and apply the savings to the spending reduction account.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 6/20/2011 @ 6:32 pmwhat makes *him* think I mean
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 6/20/2011 @ 6:33 pmnonono mister colonel West that’s mah munnies I worked hard for them please don’t steal mah munnies
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 6/20/2011 @ 6:38 pmdagnabbit mister colonel west
no means no!
you want mah munnies you stand in front of ralph’s wif a kettle and a big ass smile on your face and ring a bell and then we’ll see about it maybe
you better ring a ding ding up a storm though I have priorities you know
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 6/20/2011 @ 6:51 pmI’m with feets on this. What does West mean by “I missed one”? He wasn’t absent from the vote, he voted “no”. What did he think the amendment was about, that he was so sure he ought to oppose it? I would have expected such an excuse to come with an explanation, such as “in all the confusion I thought we were still voting on corn subsidies”, or something like that. That would be understandable, a human mistake we all can make, and I certainly have. Or even a simple error, such as “I could have sworn I voted yes on that one, but evidently I messed up somehow”. I’d be fine with that.
In combination with his vote against cutting the health centers, and his voiced intention (in this interview) to protect WIC from further cuts, I’m wondering whether we’ve been sold a bill of goods.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 6/20/2011 @ 10:08 pmHe clearly meant he made a mistake by voting the way he did.
Though I admit this would be much more satisfying if West was clearly talking about Pigford from any POV other than this vague one.
I will give him the benefit of the doubt because I do think the way votes come up is impossible for anyone to really vote with enough time to consider what the hell is being voted on. It’s like that by design and it’s seriously unacceptable, but if West just refuses to vote, that might make it worse rather than better.
I don’t understand what this has to do with Pigford. Sure, cutting food stamps seems great to many, and to some it seems like a bridge too far. It’s not like no conservative could be legit if they support any safety net. I realize WIC is rife with abuse.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/20/2011 @ 10:18 pmBut what sort of mistake? A simple one, where he thought he was voting on something else, or that he was voting yes? Or a mistake in judgment, where he knew what the vote was about but mistakenly thought he ought to oppose it? If the latter, what is it that made him reconsider? Is it only the outrage it provoked, or something deeper?
It’s another example of him seeming to lack respect for happyfeet’s munnies, and mine and yours too.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 6/20/2011 @ 11:13 pmNope. Not understanding what this has to do with Pigford.
Yeah, they are both spending money like virtually all of the House’s actions. Might as well say they were both related to people.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/20/2011 @ 11:52 pmWith all of Obama’s strange talk lately about how his family would love for him not to be President again, could this Libya thing be his way of setting himself up to fail in 2012? Sure, that’s a reach, but if he really doesn’t want to be re-elected, willfully violating the Constitution and teeing this up for the GOP to ruin him in debates about it is a great way to lower your electoral votes….
Elliott (30180a) — 6/21/2011 @ 1:23 amMy previous post belongs in a different thread. Sorry about that.
Elliott (30180a) — 6/21/2011 @ 1:24 amYou’re missing Happyfeet’s point. We now have three examples, three points of data from which we may begin to draw a disturbing conclusion about West’s attitude to the public fisc. His Pigford vote is just one of those three examples, unless it was a genuine mistake. To conclude that it was a genuine mistake we need to know what he was thinking, and “I missed one” is not an answer.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 6/21/2011 @ 4:02 amHis voice sounds a bit condescending and he even refers to himself in the third person. Also, his entire attitude about it seems disingenuous. Unfortunately, I think he voted exactly the way he intended to vote and when called on it he simply says whoops, I made a boo-boo, then starts making lame excuses like it wasn’t my fault, so many things to vote on…..
jmc (f7ac7d) — 6/21/2011 @ 9:44 amI really had high hopes for West, seems he may be a typical politician after all.
Maybe he didn’t want to say he didn’t read the bill.
stone (8306aa) — 6/21/2011 @ 1:46 pmAre you ever not a douchebag, imdw?
Did that other troll ever tell us what true colors were revealed?
JD (85b089) — 6/21/2011 @ 1:52 pmI’m not missing his point. He’s just wrong, is all.
We should oppose the fraud surrounding the Pigford settlement whether we support a safety net or fiscal conservatism. This fraud is a serious problem rather than a litmus test of political orientation, and in fact, had West voted to restrict the settlement 2.0 funds, that would not show him to be fiscally conservative at all.
What’s that got to do with various degrees of moderate Republicans having a different tolerance for food stamps?
Not much. Nothing, really.
By all means, ask for clarification. But 100% of hardcore liberal democrats ought to also restrict this funding. This is about corruption and under the table reparations and political greasing. It’s wrong from all political points of view that have any legitimacy.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/21/2011 @ 1:59 pmI suppose we should, but the fact is that “we” don’t all oppose it. A majority of the House voted to maintain the fraud, including West. The question is why. One possible answer is a genuine mistake; another is something specific to this question; but a third answer might be a general carelessness with regard to the public fisc, a tendency to be generous with other people’s munnies, particularly with mine and yours and happyfeet’s. And if that is the real reason for his vote, then the other two items become relevant, as further circumstantial evidence for this.
I don’t want to believe this of West. I like him; a lot. But I don’t want to be blinded by what I want to see. If Sarah Palin really is a populist taxer and spender and eat-the-richer, as EPWJ keeps insisting, I want to know that. And if Allen West is merely a patriotic version of Jesse Jackson, I want to know that too.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 6/22/2011 @ 12:00 am_______________________________________
With all of Obama’s strange talk lately about how his family would love for him not to be President again
This is somewhat OT, but I was reading today about Michelle Obama visiting South Africa and its prime minister not being able to see her. What got me to sit up and go “damn!” was reading that the guy has 3 wives. So polygamy apparently is a come-see, come-saw sort of thing in South Africa, one of the more Westernized portions of the African continent—because of SA’s long ties to people of Dutch and British ancestry. I believe SA also enacted legislation not too long ago that permits same-sex marriage.
This actually is somewhat related to Pigford because at the core of such matters—be it an abused government program in the US or the reportedly screwball nature of South Africa—is the corrupt, flaky, sloppy nature of leftist sentiment in human nature.
Mark (411533) — 6/22/2011 @ 12:23 amMilhouse
Its being generous with other people’s money
It was any easy vote to say no – West further compounded it by lying about his mistake
Which makes me wonder what else is he lying about
How long until someone makes public the house leadership memo’s on what these bills contained showing that West knew full well what his vote was enabling
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 6/22/2011 @ 12:48 amLove me some Allen West, this guy has true integrity not found anywhere else in our government today. It was actually his staff’s fault for not getting all the facts to him but he would never blame them. His not knowing all the details about this issue, being a black issue, proves to me that he is not racist or biased. I hope he runs for President. We need a strong leader, God willing he will be our next President.
Laura (1c8133) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:21 am