Jim Talent (R-MO) is up for re-election in 2006. Like most of his party in the Senate, he didn’t want to stand up for good government and Social Security.
S.Amdt. 145 to to S.Con.Res. 18
As a constituent I wrote Talent to chastise him for his vote.
You didn’t vote yes on this?
In regard to your recent vote:
S.Amdt. 145 to to S.Con.Res. 18 (Appropriations resolution FY2006, Budget)
“To express the sense of the Senate that Congress should reject any Social Security plan that requires deep benefit cuts or a massive increase in debt.”
Talent (R-MO), Nay
I take it that you support cutting Social Security benefits and increasing the debt.
He’s going to have a lot of explaining to do in Missouri.
but I have a slightly different question.
Why does the senate allow these ‘sense of the Senate’ votes in the first place?
They just seem like a way for people to grandstand and try to embarrass each other.
I’m hoping that a strong candidate will emerge to take him down in 2006. I wish it were Nancy Farmer, but I fear that she doesn’t have the support at this point. But with a few more votes like this on Talent’s part, I live in hope.
Money. It all comes down to money.
Nancy Farmer is one of those all too rare people in public service. She’s intelligent, knowledgable, experienced, compassionate, and “down to earth”. Her problem running against Kit “I never met a pork photo-op I didn’t like” Bond in the last general election was money. In a situation with a Democratic favorite son presidential campaign and a Democratic primary challenge to a sitting governor all sucking the fundraising oxygen out of the state, she did fairly well. But she still couldn’t compete against the obscene amount of money the rnc, dubya’s campaign, and Kit Bond had to throw around in 2004.
I haven’t heard of anyone yet setting up to challenge Talent. It needs to happen – soon.