Food supply control bill passes in surprise Sunday night vote

Comments Off on Food supply control bill passes in surprise Sunday night vote

As far as I’m concerned these Democrats and their lame duck session won’t end quick enough. I hope  everyone remembers what they’ve done until the 2012 elections get here. Harry Reid must go into the night in 2012 when hopefully the Republicans take the Senate back. Hopefully the Republicans will reverse some of the damage they’ve done in just 2 years. The bad thing is that the Republicans agreed to the “voice vote”, thereby letting this bill get passed with no record of who voted for what.

Say No to S.510 Food Control in Any Pending Bill! Contact your representatives immediately, the House hears this 12/21/10

Click Here for Action Against the House/Senate Bill Below to you representatives, just add your zip code to send fax

In Sunday-evening surprise, Senate passes food-safety legislation

The Senate unexpectedly approved food-safety legislation by voice vote Sunday evening, rescuing a bill that floated in limbo for weeks because of a clerical error.

The Senate passed the Food Safety and Modernization Act on Nov. 30 by a vote of 73-25. But the bill was later invalidated by a technical objection because it was a revenue-raising measure that did not originate in the House — Senate staff had failed to substitute the food-safety language into a House-originated bill.

A coalition of groups supporting the bill sent a letter Sunday to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Republican leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) calling for action on food safety.

“Our organizations are writing to support attaching S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, to the Senate’s proposed short-term continuing resolution,” the groups wrote. “Strong food-safety legislation will reduce the risk of contamination and provide FDA with the resources and authorities the agency needs to help make prevention the focus of our food safety strategies.”

The American Public Health Association, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union and other groups signed the letter.

Democrats first attempted to attach the food-safety bill to a short-term spending measure, but Republicans balked because they wanted to keep that measure clean, according to Senate aides.

Republicans, however, later agreed to pass it by voice vote.

Reid announced he would send the legislation — this time properly attached to a House-originated measure — back to the lower chamber for final approval.

“Our food safety system has not been updated in almost a century. Families in Nevada and across America should never have to worry about whether the food they put on their table is safe,” Reid said in a statement. “This is a common-sense issue with broad bipartisan support.

“Tonight we unanimously passed a measure to improve on our current food safety system by giving the FDA the resources it needs to keep up with advances in food production and marketing, without unduly burdening farmers and food producers,” he said.

The legislation is a high priority for Reid and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

Reid’s staff earlier in the day had told a coalition of groups supporting the legislation that it had a chance of passing, but the prospects appeared to dim as Sunday wore on. The swift approval by unanimous consent caught some aides and lobbyists working on it by surprise.

Sen. Tom Coburn, the outspoken conservative Republican from Oklahoma, had been blocking the legislation, and lifted his objection at the final moment. ( I wonder who bought him off?)

Correction: The food-safety bill was approved by the Senate in a voice vote. Incorrect information appeared in an earlier version of this story.

The Hill


Time Runs Out on DREAM Act

Comments Off on Time Runs Out on DREAM Act

Here’s another sign that the Democrats time at the wheel is over. But  that doesn’t mean the Republicans get a free pass either when they take over.


Time Runs Out on DREAM Act


Dec. 7, 2010: Immigrants parents, students and others participate  in a candle-light procession and vigil in support of the Federal Dream  Act in downtown Los Angeles.

A bill that would have paved the way for undocumented kids to obtain U.S. citizenship was tabled today by the Senate, which voted 55 to 41 to set it aside.

The DREAM Act, which stands for the Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors, would have provided a road to citizenship for children who entered the U.S. at age under 16, have lived in the country for at least five years, and commit to two years of college or the military.

The bill was seen by advocates as the best hope for legislation that would help legalize some of the nation’s estimated 11 million undocumented residents.

Repeated efforts over the years to pass a comprehensive immigration reform measure have failed.

Political leaders and immigrants rights groups who wanted a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants who met a strict set of criteria then narrowed their focus, putting their energy behind the DREAM Act. They believed the DREAM Act had a better chance of getting the support of the American public because it pivoted on the notion of children penalized because of the actions of their parents.

The bill had passed the House of Representatives. Democrats were eager to pass the legislation through the lame-duck session, just before Republicans take control of the House of Representatives next month.

Republicans and anti-immigrant groups fiercely opposed the measure, dismissing it as a form of amnesty for law-breakers. American residents, they have argued, should not have to foot the bill so that young immigrants without documents could prosper.

The measure, a political football for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, became a bargaining chip this month in discussions that ultimately led to President Obama’s extension of the so-called Bush tax cuts.

“This defeat of the DREAM Act amnesty marks the end of an era in which the American jobs were constantly under attack,” said a statement from NumbersUSA, a group that advocates for strict enforcement of immigration laws, after the vote. “Now, we look forward to moving aggressively to offense. The next Congress has the strongest pro-enforcement membership since 1995 and probably since 1924.”

The president’s official Twitter account, meanwhile, sent out this message: “Despite today’s disappointing Senate vote, my administration will not give up on the DREAM Act, or on fixing our broken immigration system.”

Obama fully supported the DREAM Act. Members of his administration, including his director of White House intergovernmental affairs and a top Pentagon official, touted the benefits of passing the bill, citing, among other benefits, its potential to add to the pool of recruits for the armed forces.

Supporters also argued that children should not be punished for the decision of their parents to live in the United States illegally. They said the immigration-related barriers to higher education and employment for youth who are educated and bred in the United States amounted to wasted potential for the country.

The defeat is a crushing blow for the president, whom pro-immigrant Hispanics have criticized for not following through on his campaign promise to make comprehensive immigration reform a top priority.

latino.Fox News

Go ahead, lame duck Congress: Make our day!

Comments Off on Go ahead, lame duck Congress: Make our day!

Here’s a great article by Herman Cain who just announced there’s a 70% chance he’ll run for president in 2012. I personally think he’d make a good president going on what I know about him at this time.

Go ahead, lame duck Congress: Make our day!

For the first time, the president listened to the majority of the people and was willing to extend the existing tax rates for everyone. Many people do not like the backdoor welfare that he attached to the so-called deal that Congress is now considering, nor did we like extending unemployment benefits for another 13 months without identifying the off-sets in spending.

Liberals in Congress are upset that the president was willing to extend the tax rates. Conservatives are upset with the backdoor welfare programs, as well as the earmarks and pet pork projects Members are trying to attach to the “tax deal”.

According to Congress’s bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, the tax provisions will “cost” $801 billion, and the extended unemployment benefits will cost $57 billion. The $57 billion is a real cost because it promises to pay out money we do not have in the first place.

The so-called $801 billion cost, however, is based on a static calculation of taxes Congress thinks they will collect if they raise taxes, without taking into account lost tax revenue from lower business profits and higher unemployment. In other words, leaving tax rates the same for all income groups is not a cost! Just as leaving rates the same is not a tax cut as liberals want people to believe.

In fact, two private sector economists estimate using dynamic analyses that the GDP could be boosted one-half percentage point in 2011 by extending the tax rates for everyone through 2012, plus the 2 percent payroll tax holiday for workers.

The dynamic analyses estimates would have been even higher if the proposal had been to make the tax rates permanent, because a two-year tax window for businesses is not enough to inspire huge five and 10-year investments. Also, making the payroll tax holiday applicable to both employees and employers would have provided an additional badly needed jolt to our stalled economy.

But who wants to really stimulate the economy? Let’s just continue to spend our nation into oblivion and tinker with tax rates so we can continue to have a tinker-totter economy instead of a robust one.

Who wants to pass a “clean” tax bill for the good of the people and the nation? Let’s just keep adding on unrelated pork projects like ornaments on a Christmas tree to see just how stupid the voters really are.

What part of the election results of November 2, 2010 don’t they understand? What part of the grassroots citizens’ movement building across this country don’t they understand? What part of “can you hear us now” don’t they hear?

It is obvious that they don’t hear us and they don’t understand. This lame duck session of Congress is turning into a brawl amongst Democrats trying to leave town with a wagon load of pork, and a pander box of liberal goodies they can point to in 2012 saying we tried, but those obstinate Republicans got in the way.

The Democrats are digging themselves into a huge political hole with the pork and panders express. And if they fail to act and tax rates go up for everybody even temporarily, the election results of 2010 will seem like a picnic compared to the  shellacking on steroids they will get when the election results of 2012 are counted.

Go ahead, lame duck Congress. Make our day! You will find out just how informed most of the voters have become, since you did not hear us the first time.

Herman Cain .org

House May Block Food Safety Bill Over Senate Error

Comments Off on House May Block Food Safety Bill Over Senate Error

The Constitution may save the day for us against S. 510 because of a “small” error made by Senate Leader Harry Reid. The bill may be forced into the next session of Congress, where our chances of defeating it increase significantly.  So tell your congressmen to oppose unconstitutional legislation like S. 510!

House May Block Food Safety Bill Over Senate Error

A food safety bill that has burned up precious days of the Senate’s lame-duck session appears headed back to the chamber because Democrats violated a constitutional provision requiring that tax provisions originate in the House.

By pre-empting the House’s tax-writing authority, Senate Democrats appear to have touched off a power struggle with members of their own party in the House. The Senate passed the bill Tuesday, sending it to the House, but House Democrats are expected to use a procedure known as “blue slipping” to block the bill, according to House and Senate GOP aides.

Harry Reid

The debacle could prove to be a major embarrassment for Senate Democrats, who sought Tuesday to make the relatively unknown bill a major political issue by sending out numerous news releases trumpeting its passage.

Section 107 of the bill includes a set of fees that are classified as revenue raisers, which are technically taxes under the Constitution.(Which means that S. 510 according to the Constitution must originate in the House) According to a House GOP leadership aide, that section has ruffled the feathers of Ways and Means Committee Democrats, who are expected to use the blue slip process to block completion of the bill.

“We understand there is a blue slip problem, and we expect the House to assert its rights under the Constitution to be the place where revenue bills begin,” the GOP aide said.

The blue slip could lead to one of two likely outcomes. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) could simply drop the issue and let the next session of Congress start from scratch, a strategy that would allow him time in the lame-duck session to tackle other last-minute priorities, such as the expiring 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, a long-term continuing resolution, an immigration bill and a repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay service members.

Or he could try to force the issue in the Senate after the House passes a new version of the bill. But in order to do that and still tackle the other issues, he would need a unanimous consent agreement to limit debate.

According to Senate GOP aides, a unanimous consent agreement is all but certain to be a nonstarter because the bill’s chief opponent, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), will not agree to such a deal.

Coburn “will object and demand changes as [he has] from the get-go,” a GOP aide familiar with the situation said.

This is not the first time that Reid has run afoul of the Constitution’s tax origination provisions. His efforts to pass a tourism promotion bill that was key to his re-election hopes was temporarily stymied earlier this year because the Senate passed a version with revenue raisers similar to those in the food safety bill.

Spokesmen for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Ways and Means Democrats and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), a co-sponsor of the food safety bill who authored its language, did not immediately return requests for comment. Aides for Ways and Means Democrats also did not immediately return requests for comment.

Roll Call

Industry bought Congressional votes to pass S. 510 food safety bill

Comments Off on Industry bought Congressional votes to pass S. 510 food safety bill

Well despite the overwhelming majority against this bill, the Food and Safety Modernization Act of 2010 passed. We’re beginning to see a lot of this, Obamacare 56% opposed this the very weekend it was voted into law, Cap & Trade is dead, so Obama circumvents the Constitution and lets the EPA enforce it by regulations. Then on State levels, Iowans voted against same sex marriage, Oklahomans voted against Sharia Law, Arizonians  voted against letting illegal immigrants stay in their State when discovered by police and guess what? All of these examples in the States where the citizenry voted what they wanted Constitutionally and guess what? One Judge canceled millions of citizen’s votes. I believe we are beginning to see what it would be like to live under tyranny. But we still have the ballot box and for the judges we have “election retention votes” where they can be impeached as Iowa did in November.

The good news is The Constitution May Have Saved the Day on S. 510

Here are just a few points contained in this bill, thankfully provided by Health Freedom USA.  Just think about what is in this bill and then go throw up as I have.

1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense,  in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency.  It resembles the Kissinger Plan.
2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO,  thus threatening national security.
3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.”
4. It imposes Codex Alimentarious on the US. A global system of control over food.  It allows the United Nations,  World Health Organization and Agriculture Organization to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements.
5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security.
6. It includes NAIS, an animal tractability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals.  The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease.
7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production – put it in corporate hands and worsens food safety.
8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy.  It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economics, out of the hands of the citizenry and puts them in total control of multinational corporations.
9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs.
10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control.  The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postponed defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied.  It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country,  making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review.

Industry bought Congressional votes to pass S. 510 food safety bill

Despite an incredible outpouring of public opposition to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “Food Safety Modernization Act”, or S. 510, the Senate voted 73 to 25 to pass the bill anyway. And data presented by, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization, shows that big industry groups and large food producers spent millions of dollars buying off Congressmen to garner support for it. 

According to the site, Senators that ended up supporting the bill received nearly $10 million in political contributions from interest groups that also supported the bill. This amount was more than four times as much as groups opposed to the bill spent on overall contributions.

Some of the supporters of S. 510 that made these significant monetary contributions in order to buy support for the bill include Kraft Foods North America, the American Beverage Association, General Mills, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, and the Snack Food Association.

Interestingly, the top four receivers of contributions from groups that supported the bill actually voted against it, most likely because they are all Republicans and the bill was authored by Democrat Richard Durbin. Even so, these include Sens. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) who received $503,700, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) who received $415,899, Jon Kyl (R-AZ) who received $335,377, and Richard Burr (R-NC) who received $317,086.

The top receivers of contributions from groups that supported the bill, and who ended up voting in favor of it, include Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) who received $301,776, Ben Nelson (D-NE) who received $245,906, Charles Schumer (D-NY) who received $179,435, and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) who received $149,278.

To see a full list of the Senators who supported S. 510, visit:

Sharia Law: An Oklahoma judge rules against the public vote

Comments Off on Sharia Law: An Oklahoma judge rules against the public vote

This is an excellent common sense article below…I hope Oklahoma remembers this judge when the Judicial  Retention Elections come up there and vote this judge out like they did in Iowa earlier this month. The judge that unconstitutionally  put a stay on the “peoples vote” up held her verdict today. No Federal Judge has the Constitutional authority to rule in ANY State cases, only the Supreme Court can Constitutionally do this.

Hamas linked CAIR says they are not trying to impose Sharia Law in America. Then I must ask….why do they want this vote overturned if that is true?

What was it CAIR founder Omar Ahmad stated?

“The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America”

Sharia Law: Coming Soon to a Courtroom Near You

If you thought only U.S. laws ruled the land, you thought wrong — at least according to a crazy decision recently handed down by a federal judge in Oklahoma.

On November 2, Sooner State voters overwhelmingly approved a referendum that directs courts to “rely on federal and state law when deciding cases” and forbids “courts from considering or using international law” or “Sharia law.” Muneer Awad responded by filing suit, and Judge Micki Miles-LaGrange, a Clinton appointee, promptly issued a temporary restraining order, putting the people’s voice on hold.

The plaintiff asserted that his First Amendment rights would be violated if Oklahoma’s constitution was amended to implement this ban against consideration of Sharia law. The amendment, he claimed, would constitute official “disapproval” of his religion. Moreover, it would invalidate his last will and testament, which incorporates various teachings of Mohammed.

Judge Miles-LaGrange bought the argument that banning foreign law would inhibit the practice of religion — in this case, Islam — and lead to excessive government entanglement with religion. She confused the practice of religion — which is not banned under the referendum — with the imposition of a foreign body of law derived from Islam.

In coming to these erroneous conclusions, the judge misunderstands the purpose of the First Amendment, as expressed by the Founders. The Establishment Clause was solely intended to prevent a national church from being funded with tax dollars, and to prevent the government from favoring any particular religious sect.

James Madison, the chief proponent behind the enactment of our Bill of Rights, said the Establishment Clause meant that “Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.” Judge Miles-LaGrange does not explain how Oklahoma’s amendment would “inhibit” a Muslim from worshiping in his own way as dictated by his own conscience. Nor does she explain how it would prohibit a Muslim from abiding by Sharia law if he chose to do so.

To appreciate how strange the judge’s decision is, imagine if Oklahoma had passed a law saying that state courts could not substitute Roman Catholic canon law for state and federal law. No serious person would protest that this somehow inhibited Catholics in the practice of their religion.

This thought experiment also illustrates the broader point that only state laws passed by legislatures or referenda — and U.S. laws passed by Congress — provide the rule of decision for issues that are properly before our courts.

National Review Online


1 Comment

UPDATED: After reading this check out how your Senator just voted on it this morning’s  73-25  vote for the bill. Now it goes to the House for reconciliation…call you Congressman to stop this.

For those of us in Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander voted for S. 510 and Bob Corker voted against it.

I just found this after I posted the other article about the Food Safety and Modernization Act. “The following is a list of U.S Senators and the Bribes (I mean campaign contributions) that these Senators received from Special Interest Groups to either support or oppose S.510 – The FDA Food Safety and Modernization Act.”

As an update to S. 510 ……

As it turns out, it’s not quite a done deal. The National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association has sent an Action Alert announcing there will be another vote first — a

vote for Cloture to MOVE the bill to a final vote.

For that next-to-last step supporters need sixty – that’s 60 — votes. If opponents can muster just 40 VOTES they can stop S. 510. The problem is that a high number of Republicans in both houses like this bill, presumably because it makes them feel like they’re doing something to promote food safety. There were 22 cosponsors, eight of whom were GOP.

Tea Partiers, constitutionalists, small-farming advocates, and liberty activists are urged to contact not only their own senators, but the senators in the list given below (link provided) and implore them NOT TO VOTE FOR CLOTURE.

And of course, request the senators that if the cloture vote succeeds and S. 510 moves to a vote, they should VOTE NO on the bill itself.

One final point: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid runs the show, and is bound and determined to get this bill passed into law. Do not be surprised at any surprises that pop up.

Alert from: National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association

22 November, 2010


Cloture Vote on S 510 Monday, November 29-
Please Call the Senators Below

On Monday, November 29, a cloture vote on Senate Bill 510 will determine if the bill then goes immediately to the Senate floor for a final vote. Cloture requires 60 votes. If there are fewer than 60, the bill will not go forward. Let’s make sure the cloture vote fails.


Senators list at News with


I have listed the names of the Senators, the Party and State, and the amount of Special Interest Bribes (I mean campaign contributions) that they received:

Name of Senator – Party & State – Bribe For S.510 or Bribe Against S.510

Daniel Akaka – D HI – Bribe For: $27,690 – Against: $700

Lamar Alexander – R- TN – Bribe For: $190,421 – Against: $4,850

John Barrasso – R WY – Bribe For: $31,350 – Against: $27,500

Max Baucus – D MT – Bribe for: $123,803 – Against: $55,980

Evan Bayh – D IN – Bribe For: $45,200 – Against: 8,250

Mark Begich – D AK – Bribe For: $23,050 – Against: $2,000

Michael Bennet – D CO – Bribe For: $38,509 – Against: $22,050

Robert Bennett – R UT – Bribe For: $105,530 – Against: $10,000

Jeff Bingaman – D NM – Bribe For: $31,498 – Against: $8,450

Christopher Bond – R MO – Bribe For: $49,550 – Against: $5,200

Barbara Boxer – D CA – Bribe For: $120,000 – Against: $13,650

Sherrod Brown – D OH – Bribe For: $57,800 – Against: $6,600

Samuel Brownback – R KS – Bribe For: $20,950 – Against: $13,500

Jim Bunning – R KY – Brobe For: $20,700 – Against: $2,000

Richard Burr – R NC – Bribe For: $328,086 – Against: $32,292

Roland Burris – D IL – Bribe For: $0 – Against: $0

Maria Cantwell – D WA – Bribe For: $93,541 – Against: $2,750

Benjamin Cardin – D MD – Bribe For: $72,200 – Against: $0

Thomas Carper – D DE – Bribe For: $83,150 – Against: $0

Robert Casey – D PA – Bribe For: $80,576 – Against: $4,600

Saxby Chambliss – R GA – Bribe For: $557,694 – Against: $108,041

Thomas Coburn R OK – Bribe For: $64,400 – Against: $14,200

Thad Cochran – R MS – Bribe For: $50,144 – Against: $22,000

Susan Collins – R ME – Bribe For: $157,438 – Against: $7,800

Kent Conrad – D ND – Bribe For: $41,650 – Against: $29,612

Bob Corker – R- TN – Bribe For: $298,639 – Against: $8,850

John Cornyn – R TX – Bribe For: $286,648 – Against: $254,730

Michael Crapo – R ID – Bribe For: $64,199 – Against: $14,350

Jim DeMint – R SC – Bribe For: $149,935 – Against: $5,000

Christopher Dodd – D CT – Bribe For: $36,400 – Against: $4,500

Byron Dorgan – D ND – Bribe For: $28,200 – Against: $6,000

Richard Durbin – D IL – Bribe For: $151,050 – Against: $19,000

John Ensign – R NV – Bribe For: $76,297 – Against: $10,500

Michael Enzi – R WY – Bribe For: $87,394 – Against: $21,450

Russell Feingold – D WI – Bribe For: $53,854 – Against: $2,200

Dianne Feinstein – D CA – Bribe For: $168,189 – Against: 25,314

Kirsten Gillibrand – D NY – Bribe For: $98,210 – Against: $10,650

Lindsey Graham – R SC – Bribe For: $101,272 – Against: $5,700

Charles Grassley – R IA – Bribe For: $112,150 – Against: $25,500

Judd Gregg – R NH – Bribe For: $26,000 – Against: $0

Kay Hagan – D NC – Bribe For: $36,250 – Against: $3,500

Thomas Harkin – D IA – Bribe For: $138,135 – Against: $40,600

Orrin Hatch – R UT – Bribe For: $102,215 – Against: $11,600

Kay Hutchison – R TX – Bribe For: $127,811 – Against: $103,386

James Inhofe – R OK – Bribe For: $66,744 – Against: $36,430

Daniel Inouye – D HI – Bribe For: $26,350 – Against: $11,200

John Isakson – R GA – Bribe For: $280,995 – Against: $10,100

Mike Johanns – R NE – Bribe For: $159,259 – Against: $59,785

Tim Johnson – D SD – Bribe For: $26,850 – Against: $15,000

Edward Kaufman – D DE – Bribe For: $0 – Against: $0

John Kerry – D MA – Bribe For: $14,406 – Against: $250

Amy Klobuchar – D MN – Bribe For: $149,778 – Against: $16,250

Herbert Kohl – D WI – Bribe For: $300 – Against: $0

Jon Kyl – R AZ – Bribe For: $363,660 – Against: $58,906

Mary Landrieu – D LA – Bribe For: $73,622 – Against: $2,250

Frank Lautenberg – D NJ – Bribe For: $37,883 – Agqinst: $3,550

Patrick Leahy – D VT – Bribe For: $13,800 – Against: $2,750

Carl Levin – D MI – Bribe For: $49,900 – Against: $2,000

Joseph Lieberman – I CT – Bribe For: $121,075 – Against: $0

Blanche Lincoln – D AR – Bribe For: $347,526 – Against: $125,297

Richard Lugar – R IN – Bribe For: $153,579 – Against: $21,000

John McCain – R AZ – Bribe For: $118,070 – Against: $21,525

Claire McCaskill – D MO – Bribe For: $48,950 – Against: $7,650

Mitch McConnell – R KY – Bribe For: $439,593 – Against: $42,244

Robert Menéndez – D NJ – Bribe For: $183,850 – Against: $250

Jeff Merkley – D OR – Bribe For: $27,350 – Against; $3,300

Barbara Mikulski – D MD – Bribe For: $52,165 – Against: $1,000

Lisa Murkowski – R AK – Bribe For: $164,713 – Against: $5,800

Patty Murray – D WA – Bribe For: $136,500 – Against: $3,150

Ben Nelson – D NE – Bribe For: $254,906 – Against: $44,950

Bill Nelson – D FL – Bribe For: $205,471 – Against: $35,748

Mark Pryor – D AR – Bribe For: $115,550 – Against: $16,565

John Reed – D RI – Bribe For: $29,350 – Against: $0

Harry Reid – D NV – Bribe For: $133,985 – Against: $10,000

James Risch – R ID – Bribe For: $56,750 – Against; $36,050

Pat Roberts – R KS – Bribe For: $167,294 – Against: $65,186

John Rockefeller – D WV – Bribe For: $21,250 – Against: $1,000

Bernard Sanders – I VT – Bribe For: $7,800 – Against: $4,200

Charles Schumer – D NY – Bribe For: $175,185 – Against: $14,200

Jefferson Sessions – R AL – Bribe For: $65,303 – Against: $16,800

Jeanne Shaheen – D NH – Bribe For: $17,090 – Against: $7,300

Richard Shelby – R AL – Bribe For: $73,616 – Against: $10,000

Olympia Snowe – R ME – Bribe For: $78,136 – Against: $2,000

Arlen Specter – D PA – Bribe For: $209,124 – Against: $9,400

Debbie Ann Stabenow – D MI – Bribe For: $84,941 – Against: $14,482

Jon Tester – D MT – Bribe For: $21,250 – Against: $61,550

John Thune – R SD – Bribe For: $218,900 – Against: $55,625

Mark Udall – D CO – Bribe For: $34,435 – Against: $45,050

Tom Udall – D NM – Bribe For: $27,102 – Against: $51,900

David Vitter – R LA – Bribe For: $188,225 – Against: $8,500

George Voinovich – R OH – Bribe For: $103,850 – Against: $185

Mark Warner – D VA – Bribe For: $116,450 – Against: $8,600

Jim Webb – D VA – Bribe For: $25,300 – Against: $7,700

Sheldon Whitehouse- D RI – Bribe For: $27,025 – Against: $1,500

Roger Wicker – R MS – Bribe For: $147,650 – Against: $16,250

Ron Wyden – D OR – Bribe For: $58,700 – Against: $4,900

Here’s a list of the Special Interest Groups that support S.510 and how much they bribed (I mean donated) to Senators:

Restaurants & drinking establishments $3,217,767
Food and kindred products manufacturing $1,753,503
Milk & dairy producers $1,717,687
Food stores $1,473,532
Beverages (non-alcoholic) $744,551
Vegetables, fruits and tree nut $709,238
American Veterinarian Medical Association $551,750
Beverage bottling & distribution $289,725
Food wholesalers $284,900
Food & Beverage Products and Services $281,137
Fishing $277,984
Chambers of commerce $219,234
Manufacturing $207,740
Food catering & food services $171,835
Confectionery processors & manufacturers $96,438
Consumer groups $6,100
Farm bureaus $0

Here’s a list of Here’s a list of the Special Interest Groups that opposed S.510 and how much they bribed (I mean donated) to Senators:

Milk & dairy producers $1,717,687
Livestock $1,561,207
Farm organizations & cooperatives $412,976
Consumer groups $6,100
Farmers, crop unspecified $0

I wonder how the Senators will Vote when the bill reaches the floor of the Senate?

Liberty News Online

Older Entries