Club for Growth

The 2005 Congressional Scorecard - House

---

House Vote 38: S 5 -- Class Action Reform.
Vote on passage of a bill to reform interstate class action lawsuits. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because abusive class action lawsuits harm entrepreneurship. Passed, 279-149, February 17, 2005.

House Vote 83: H Con Res 95 -- Republican Study Committee Budget.
Vote on the Hensarling (R-TX) amendment to propose $58 billion in spending cuts, in order to reduce the growth of spending by $125 billion over the next five years. It also would reform budget procedures to reduce waivers of the Budget Act. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget proposal are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 102-320, March 17, 2005.

House Vote 102: HR 8 -- Death Tax Permanent Repeal.
Vote on passage of the bill to permanently repeal the death tax in 2010. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because the death tax greatly distorts investment decisions and causes economically inefficient tax planning for family-owned businesses. Passed, 272-162, April 13, 2005.

House Vote 122: HR 6 -- ANWR.
Vote on the Markey (D-MA) amendment strike provisions in the bill to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska. The pro-growth vote was "nay" because economic growth depends in part on a safe energy sources and royalties from new natural resource development may cause less economic distortions than income taxes. Defeated, 200-231, April 20, 2005.

House Vote 197: HR 2361 -- Hefley Interior 1% Cut.
Vote on the Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 90-326, May 19, 2005.

House Vote 219: HR 1815 -- Base Closures.
Vote on the Bradley (R-NH) amendment to postpone the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) recommendations. The pro-growth vote was "nay" because it is important to reduce wasteful spending by closing obsolete or low priority bases. Defeated, 112-316, May 25, 2005.

House Vote 234: HR 2744 -- Sugar Program Reform.
Vote on the Blumenauer (D-OR) amendment to reduce sugar subsidies. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because the Sugar Loan Program has evolved into one of the worst examples of corporate welfare for giant agri-business. It artificially inflates sugar prices across the U.S. to levels of more than twice what they would be, killing jobs in the food production industry. Defeated, 146-280, June 08, 2005.

House Vote 236: HR 2744 -- Hefley Agriculture 1% Cut.
Vote on the Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Agriculture Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 80-335, June 08, 2005.

House Vote 260: HR 2862 -- Hefley Commerce-Justice-Science 1% Cut.
Vote on the Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 91-336, June 16, 2005.

House Vote 301: HR 2985 -- Hefley Legislative Branch 1% Cut.
Vote on the Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 114-294, June 22, 2005.

House Vote 313: HR 3010 -- Hefley Labor-HHS 1% Cut.
Vote on the Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 84-323, June 24, 2005.

House Vote 334: HR 3057 -- Hefley Foreign Operations 1% Cut.
Vote on the Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 117-309, June 28, 2005.

House Vote 347: HR 3058 -- Anti-privatization.
Vote on the Sanders (I-VT) amendment to stop the competitive sourcing of air traffic control flight service stations. The pro-growth vote was "nay" because this would set back efforts to privatize functions that can be more efficiently handled by the private sector. Passed, 238-177, June 30, 2005.

House Vote 350: HR 3058 -- Property Rights.
Vote on the Garrett (R-NJ) amendment to bar the use of federal funds for development of private property obtained through use of the eminent domain power. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because it would limit the impact of the highly-criticized Supreme Court decision that authorized government to take private property from one owner to give it to another. Property rights are crucial for a free-market economy since property owners over the long run will make better investment decisions than government bureaucrats. Passed, 231-189, June 30, 2005.

House Vote 352: HR 3058 -- Hefley Transportation 1% Cut.
Hefley (R-CO) amendment to cut discretionary spending by 1 percent in the 2006 Transportation-Treasury-Housing Appropriations bill. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget cut amendment are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Defeated, 88-338, June 30, 2005.

House Vote 430: HR 22 -- Postal Service.
Vote to pass the bill that purported to reform the Postal Service. In reality it bailed out the USPS and contained no new measures to allow competition in mail delivery. According to the Congressional Budget Office, this bill will cost at least $5.9 billion over the next ten years. The pro-growth vote was "nay" as this bill added to an already bloated budget and did nothing to reduce government regulation of mail services. Passed, 410-20, July 26, 2005.

House Vote 443: HR 3045 -- Central American Free Trade Agreement.
Vote on passage of the bill to approve the Central American Free Trade Agreement. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because free trade is crucial to economic prosperity. CAFTA will sharply reduce taxes and other barriers on American exports, thus opening up foreign markets to our products. Passed, 217-215, July 28, 2005.

House Vote 453: HR 3 -- Transportation Bill.
Vote on final passage of the transportation bill, one of the worst examples of pork-barrel spending. With a final price tag of $286 billion, it was $30 billion higher than President Bush's initial proposal of $256 billion, itself a substantial 20% increase over the previous transportation bill. The pro-growth vote was "nay" because the bill contain billions of dollars in wasteful spending. Passed, 412-8, July 29, 2005.

House Vote 544: HR 1461 -- Limit Government-Sponsored Enterprises.
Vote on the Paul (R-TX) amendment to cut off Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's approximately $2 billion line of credit from the United States Treasury. The pro-growth vote is "yea" as taxpayers should not provide a special privilege to two private, for-profit corporations. Such a government subsidy distorts capital markets and increases financial risk to the Federal government. Defeated, 47-371, October 26, 2005.

House Vote 601: HR 4241 -- Budget Reconciliation.
Vote on passage of the "budget reconciliation" bill that would adjust federal spending programs so they would grow at a slightly slower rate. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because Federal spending has been growing at an unsustainable pace, and measures such as this budget reconciliation bill are needed to slow the growth to a level the economy can sustain in the long run. Passed, 217-215, November 18, 2005.

House Vote 612: S 467 -- Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension.
Vote on passage of legislation to extend the Federal government's insurance program for terrorism risks. The pro-growth vote was "nay" because the bill failed to reflect the sensible recommendations for limits on the program made by both the Treasury Department and the Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center. Continuation of the program in its current form is likely to hinder the further development of the insurance market by crowding out innovation and capacity building. Passed, 371-49, December 7, 2005.

House Vote 621: HR 4297 -- Tax Cuts.
Vote on passage of the bill to extend for two years (to 2010) the tax rate reductions on dividends and capital gains. The pro-growth vote was "yea" because there was growing uncertainty about whether these two pro-growth tax cuts would be allowed to expire. Passed, 234-197, December 8, 2005.

House Vote 652: S 1932 -- Byrd Amendment Repeal.
Vote on the Spratt (D-SC) motion to instruct the House-Senate conference committee to increase spending and keep the Byrd amendment that funnels import taxes to companies that make competing products. The pro-growth vote was "nay" because the instructions urged higher spending and would have undermined efforts for freer trade policies. Passed, 246-175, December 16, 2005.

Available Printouts (Vote Weightings Included - PDF files)
By Rank

By State

By Last Name

House Vote Descriptions

Posted by Andrew Roth on July 10, 2006 10:55 PM | Trackback (1) | Print | #