Senator Bob Bennett misses many votes to campaign in Utah


Return To Article
  • goatesnotes
    May 7, 2010 10:54 a.m.

    Please, pretty please, continue the status quo. . . answer: not this time. . .

  • OtownGOPdude
    May 7, 2010 8:37 a.m.

    TARP was a bad idea, necessary, but bad. I work in the financial services area and they had to have help to keep the entire industry afloat. And unlike the borrowed money for stimulus and Obamacare, half of the money spent has been returned already. People forget some things and do not know others.

    First since Bush got TARP passed, 345 billion has been spent on banks. According to the US Treasury website, as of Wed, 146 billion had been repaid with 14 billion more in interest earned.....Hello people, we have not lost a cent.

    Lastly, remember this is the last go around for Bennett. He is essentially a one term Senator and no one else running has even been elected to a city council seat before. Let's send someone with NO elected official record to battle Pelosi right now....HA

  • John C. C.
    May 6, 2010 9:42 p.m.

    So many oppose Bennett for his bail out vote. Yet, I haven't heard any realistic alternative. What would have happened if these large institutions had been allowed to fail? Who out there has the experience and knowledge discuss these details with the seasoned senator? He knew he had to do even as he held his nose. The bailout stunk to him just like it did to us. But what else could have worked?

  • Kaye Possa
    May 6, 2010 1:01 p.m.

    Though I like and respect the Senator, this time he will not be re-elected.

    The best thing he can do is lead the way for the old guard to stop hanging on to "seniority" like a crutch, and encourage all the "professional Senators" to do the same.

    Please, Senator, announce your withdrawal from this race. You can do more good from outside.

  • Cats
    May 6, 2010 12:46 p.m.

    SoUtahbites: I'm just wondering. How much experience do you have in Washington? How much? I have spent many years of my life on Capitol Hill and have a pretty good idea about the way things work. Anyone can make sweeping statements with no supporting evidence.

    I believe most of these posts are written by members of other campaigns that are trying to fuel the hysteria and denigrate the importance of seniority because their candidates HAVE NONE. I've been on campaigns, I know just what you're trying to do and I'm not fooled.

    I am NOT opposed to Mike Lee or Tim Bridgewater. I'm only pointing out how important seniority is.

    Please, delegates, let the voters decide. Let Senator Bennett get to a primary and then the voters can decide.

  • aceroinox
    May 6, 2010 12:25 p.m.

    Wow, facts_r_stubborn...you seem to have a lot of time on your hands to defend Senator Bennett. Any chance you're a full-time employee of the Senator or his campaign? What other usernames are you employing on these boards?

    And since you have so much time on your hands, how about rebutting my previous question about the Senator's involvement in the Transatlantic Policy Network? Or was your claim that you had refuted every argument against the Senator just an idle boast?

  • SoUtahbites
    May 6, 2010 11:56 a.m.

    "Cats" Bennett's seniority does not help on the specifics you listed.

  • 2nd lantern
    May 6, 2010 11:52 a.m.

    Concerning inability of a Junior Senator from Utah not having the ability to accomplish much in Congress until better seasoned. Since when do we expect Seniority to be the superman cape for Utah or America?

    Thomas Jefferson was 32 when elected to the Continental Congress; the next year, 1776, he was chosen by his illustrious, seasoned colleagues to serve on a committee to prepare a Declaration of Independance. Though the youngest and most inexperienced member of that committee, he was chosen by that body to serve as Chairman; he was then given the task of drafting the document, to which few changes were made by the greater Congress:
    to which 56 seasoned representatives pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor. Where are the statesmen of 2010? Mr. Bennett had waffled too many times on his oath to the Constitution in my book.

  • Veracity
    May 6, 2010 11:41 a.m.

    Bennet only comes out of the closet every six years...you never hear about him and what he is doing for the state the rest of the time...but now that it appears he is on the threshold of going down in flames...suddenly, he's there, he's here and wow want a job he has done for Utah...too little, too late...so sad...Goodbye

  • 2nd lantern
    May 6, 2010 11:27 a.m.

    Interesting image of a future teeter-totter:
    Mr. Bennett sitting as the Chairman of any committee in Congress, claiming accountability to "we the people", and on the opposite end, Mr. Bennett as the (current) Chair of the Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN) which is accountable to none of us.

  • Emjay
    May 6, 2010 11:20 a.m.

    There are people posting here who are trying to pretend that seniority doesn't matter. BUT IT DOES. IT MAKES A GREAT DEAL OF DIFFERENCE!

    Give Senator Bennett a chance to get to the primary. Then let the voters decide who they want to have the nomination. Don't let a few angry delegates make this decision for everyone. Let the voters decide.

  • Cats
    May 6, 2010 10:33 a.m.

    ScatteredRain: You clearly don't have ANY idea about how important seniority is. Chairmen of Committees have the ability to push all kinds of legislation that benefits their states and all kind of ability to stop legislation that hurts their states.

    Having a powerful chairman can have A LOT to do with opening up energy production in Utah, with stopping unreasonable wilderness expansion, with helping maintain the charitable contribution deduction that MANY people in Utah need in order to continue to pay their tithing, etc, etc, etc.

    There are MANY, MANY reasons to want a Senator with a lot of seniority. ANYONE who has spent ANY time on Capitol Hill knows this. It's only people who have no experience there, but think they know everything, that believe it doesn't matter. IT DOES.

    Don't get me wrong. I'm a big supporter of the Tea Partiers. I think they're great and I agree with them on just about everything. I'm only trying to point out that this hysteria against Senator Bennett is just that--HYSTERIA. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.

  • SoUtahbites
    May 6, 2010 10:20 a.m.

    facts_r_stubborn you did not read JMT post very well he/she said "debt and obligation." Anyway, I have tried to find these types of numbers and I have compiled my own and these are pretty close to what I have come up with. I would love if an official source released these kind of numbers, but it would be extremely depressing to really know what is handing over the next generation.

  • ScatteredRain
    May 6, 2010 10:12 a.m.


    Just because you write every detail of your opinion doesn't mean we're reading it. I have skipped over your comments...too long...boring! Make your point quick! Here's mine:

    I don't want Bennett in there anymore. Term Limits! This keeps the process honest.

    @Cats Get off your "Seniority" kick. That is all the "Big Boys Club" can use in favor of Bennett. You talk about how it's important, but don't add any detail. Utah-It's time to show Washington that We the People run this place...watch what we do this Saturday, and in November!!!

  • randy13
    May 6, 2010 9:53 a.m.

    ok facts look at it this way

    bennett's influence didnt help when obama took over the student loan issue and utah was left out

    bennett's influence with oil hasnt done anything, production up , nowhere to put it and still oil goes up .. what influence

    bennett watches his senator peers double their personal wealth and does nothing

    bennett started the whole economic mess, lost jobs, lost homes with his YES votes on banking deregulation

    bennett's influence has done nothing for corn subsidies which causes the rest of world economic meltdown in trying to grow corn and cause ecoli here in america with american beef (not grass fed anymore)

    bennett's influence with monsanto and supreme court judge clarence thomas (former monsanto lawyer) decisions (all in favor) of monsanto suing soybean growers out of business

    bennett's non-influence on committee meetings where john Q public cant attend from waiting in many hour long lines cause lobbyist dont have to wait in line and crowd the room full

    and the list goes on

    and just how exactly when bennett ousted his incumbent 18 yrs ago how wasnt that a horrible awful thing??

    utah has had enough bennett 'influence'

  • D1
    May 6, 2010 9:45 a.m.

    I wrote Senator Bennette and told him if he votes for the TARP bill I will not supprot him for re-election. Now he is acting all surprised.

  • randy13
    May 6, 2010 9:37 a.m.

    facts_r_stubborn .. must be a staffer.. cant have it both ways sir ... if bennett has all this influence in DC as he suggests .. how can he miss so many votes on the important committees he sits on??

    you see sir he has 18 yrs of taking lobby money, voting lobby ways , shoot he voted for the deregulation bill for banking which in turn lead to the world wide meltdown .. lost jobs, lost pensions, lost homes ,, then of course he had to vote for the TARP and bailout his lobby buddies demanded it .. otherwise the money would have dried up that he is currently spending now .. and just how many days has he missed being in DC and just how much money (not his) has he spent all the while complaining about others spending money 'against' him ..

    if anybody with logical reason listening to bennetts word is saying excuse me .. you claim influence but you can miss 6 weeks plus from being on the job ?? you started the world wide meltdown with your voting, and continued the mess with helping the lobbyists rather then the americans keeping their jobs and homes

    incumbent out and challengers in

    hatch is next

  • Not_Scared
    May 6, 2010 9:29 a.m.

    "I won't break Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment like so many conservatives on these threads have. I'm sure a few of the challengers are very capable and qualified individuals in whatever professions or business they have been involved with."

    You put a president that had the most federal convictions within his administration on level ground with Moses? Interesting.

  • davidjay
    May 6, 2010 8:41 a.m.

    I am just amazed by the tone of desperation in these posts. Here we are just a few days from the convention and suddenly Mr. Bennett's campaign decides he is in trouble. Somebody on the campaign should be fired for not reading the signs months ago. That is when this reelect Bob campaign should have started. This appears to be a case of too little too late.

    The Republican Party created Tea Party is going to backfire on the old guard Republicans and they just now are beginning to realize it. Their creation has gained a life of its own and the end result could be more losses for the GOP brought about by vote splitting.

  • utwingnut
    May 6, 2010 8:00 a.m.

    I'm so tired of my father's generation screwing up our country. It's time to vote this generation out of office. Let's start with Bob Bennett!

  • Cats
    May 6, 2010 7:39 a.m.

    Forrest: You don't have ANY idea what that seniority might have gotten for Utah. You just threw that out for something to say. You have nothing to back that up. The fact is, you don't know anything about it.

    Having said that, I have no doubt that much the nastiness against Senator Bennett on these posts has come from members of the other campaigns. It's a cheap way to make points--especially when you can't raise any money.

    When the Republicans take back the Senate, Bennett will become a Committee Chairman. That's a lot of power for Utah.

    If you are a delegate, please think very hard about that. I've spent a lot of my life in Washington and I know how much that seniority counts. Please let Senator Bennett get out of the Convention and then let the Republican voters make the decision in the primary.

  • Patrick Henry
    May 6, 2010 7:16 a.m.


    we will loss the seniority in 6 years when Bennett retires. So the real question is do we want to loss the seniority now and get someone in who will defend and uphold the constitution or do we want 6 more years of Bailout Bob and his seniority?

  • financenco
    May 6, 2010 6:55 a.m.

    It is tiem for him to go. You show you can't fulfill your responsibility. You don't need another shot. We need someone with real conservative roots, who won't bend, and then not stay there forever.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 6, 2010 6:12 a.m.

    Senator Bennett made the right call on the Bush Financial TARP. He made the right call in not supporting the wasteful spending of TARP funds under Obama, Obama care or Obama budget. He made the right call and showed great political courage in offering to begin a dialogue for alternatives to Obama care. Something that with skyrocketing health care costs and the burden of medicare and medicaid is sorely needed to save the nation from bankruptcy and mediocrity.

    Senator Bennett is an expert on many important issues affecting Utah, including Utah/federal land use issues where he has done tremendous good for the state. Far from pork barrel spending he has supported jobs in Utah, and Utah getting its share of federal funds for important military, infrastructure and other needed projects.

    Senator Bennett has the skill, experience, seniority and clout in Washington to move the nation back to right of center when the Republicans retake Congress. He is the best qualified candidate for Utah's Senate seat this year.

    Vote to move Senator Bennett forward to the primary and to re-election.

  • T. Party
    May 6, 2010 12:46 a.m.


    The Shelby bill from 2004, which attempted to reform Fannie and Freddie, died because Bailout Bob had added an amendment to it which weakened it to the point that its own sponsors could no longer support it.

  • Viva la Migra
    May 5, 2010 11:41 p.m.

    Bailout Bob should be as voting as often as possible right now. There probably aren't that many votes left this year, so he should participate while he still has time.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 11:38 p.m.


    Yes, and the civil war occured during Lincoln's watch too. When challenging events in our nation's history occur, it is what you do about them that counts.

    Senator Bennett's votes and record are not the slightest bit responsible for the financial crisis, nor could he could have prevented it, but then I've already explained that in detail.

    In summary, there were two primary regulatory failures, both occuring under the Democrats' watch. One, the 1999 Clinton administration rule allowing "naked credit default swaps" for the first time since the great depression. Two, relaxed underwriting standards pushed on a willing Fannie and Freddie by Democrats intent on pushing home ownership, leading to destructive competition and a flight to the bottom by private lenders in the mortgage market, then securitizations where the mortgage originators were left with no skin in the game, the housing bubble, yada yada.

    Republicans and the Bush administration did push for reforms at Fannie and Freddie but were blocked at every turn by Democrats. Of-course very few saw the full extent of the looming risk.

    Hind sight is 20/20, and financial computer models showing safety in diversification and securitization were wrong.

  • Commoner
    May 5, 2010 10:08 p.m.

    So Bailout Bob missed almost a third of the votes to be here in Utah telling us how critical it is that he be in Washington. If it were that critical, shouldn't he have been in Washington instead of Utah?

    The real problem is not only that he missed almost a thrid of the votes, but that when he missed those votes he also wasn't actually working. Regardless of whether the particular votes were important or not, he could have been working on saving this Country from the mess its in -- the mess that was created on his watch.

  • tq2
    May 5, 2010 9:09 p.m.

    Well, Bennett certainly didn't spend of that time in southern Utah. He lost my vote right there alone.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 9:03 p.m.

    T. Party,

    Delagates and voters need to make distinctions between the short term intervention in financial markets done by Bush and supported by almost every Senator, and the partisan new wasteful spending of TARP funds and new social programs initiated by the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats.

    During Bushes term only about $245 billion was committed to stabilization of financial markets. A resolution trust corporation or asset guarantees would have been preferable both structurally and politically, but because the markets for these assets was totally inactive, direct capital infusions became the only viable option. It was necessity and not bailing out budies on Wall Street that caused this to happen.

    Bennett had nothing to do with all the wasteful ways Obama spent the remainder of TARP or his new stimilus, and bail outs of GM and Chrysler.

    The Bush TARP funds are already 75% paid back with the sale of the taxpayers 27% stake in Citigroup. We need to get out as soon as possible when smaller regional banks pay back the remaining 25%. This was not a government takeover, this was short term intervention. Ugly, but it worked and will be payed back, unlike Obama's initiatives.

  • goatesnotes
    May 5, 2010 9:00 p.m.

    Sure glad we've got Senator Bennett -- he saved the world. Let's re-elect him!

  • owlmaster2
    May 5, 2010 8:55 p.m.

    If I missed going to my office 28% of the time I'd be fired.
    No employer would put up with that nonsense.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 8:44 p.m.

    T. Party,

    Think of it this way. Who would have thought that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico would have hurt duck hunters in North Dakota?

    These are not scare tactics these are the facts. Don't believe me, talk to the experts. Here is one to check out: Spain will be attempting to float $30 billion of debt this Friday. Whether or not they succeed could have big implications for how far and fast the contagion spreads.

    Take the financial crisis of 2008. The problems started at Fannie and Freddie emboldened by Congressional Democrats to relax underwriting standards to push home ownership leading to a housing bubble. Financial markets were within days of a total collapse.

    It started in the sub-prime market and lower traunches of mortgage backed securities spreading to senior traunches, and eventually to almost all sectors of financial markets and even to short term supposedly "safe" commercial paper.

    Ask almost any business man, or retirement fund manager what a total collapse of financial markets, (i.e. no access to capital),would have meant for the main street economy.

    Sorry to bust anyone's bubble, but this wasn't a bailout.

  • Forrest
    May 5, 2010 8:32 p.m.

    Let's take a look at what the "seniority" of Utah's senators has gotten us: NOTHING.

  • Cats
    May 5, 2010 8:25 p.m.

    I didn't like the TARP vote either. BUT...as someone who has spent a lot of my life on Capitol Hill in Washington, I can tell you that SENIORITY REALLY COUNTS!!! IT REALLY DOES!

    Everyone who wants to dump Bob Bennet better think about this really hard. SENIORITY REALLY DOES COUNT FOR A LOT. We would be losing a lot of clout in Washington.

    PLEASE, really think about it!

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 8:17 p.m.

    goatesnotes, one more rhetorical point:

    Ears work better when they are not deaf.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 8:15 p.m.


    With all due respect, you speak for all delegates now? I just call it the way I see it. I firmly and sincerely believe, that now is not the time to punt Utah's influence and power to other states. You believe otherwise and that is fine. Am I not entitled to my opinion? At least I attempt to ground my opinions with verified facts, unlike most of the wild rhetoric on these threads.

    I wouldn't be surprised if he is re-elected this year, that Senator Bennett retires in six years. We'll just have to wait and see if he is re-elected this time.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 8:07 p.m.


    I don't know where you are pulling your figures from but you better double check your sources. What debt are you refering to at $110 trillion?

    Total gross domestic product for 2009 was only $14.2 trillion. Total domestic public debt at the end of 2009 was $12 trillion. This is extremely troubling never the less.

    You lose credibility with your conclusion when your numbers are bogus. Don't paint with such a broad brush. Talk to people who know the facts, or learn them yourself. Details do matter in the conclusions we reach.

    Senator Bennett voted against Obama care, against Obama stimilus, against Obama budget, against Obama taxes and against Obama spending. He most certainly has not voted for $70 trillion of IOUs.

  • T. Party
    May 5, 2010 7:56 p.m.

    Let's conserve the Constitution, and stop conserving Bailout Bob's campaign contributors.

    @facts_r_stubborn: the scare rhetoric you employ is the same kind of rhetoric that was used to justify bailouts of the same institutions over and over again since Clinton. "If you don't bail us out, the sky will fall." Goldman Sachs was bailed out five different times before anyone even heard of TARP.

    Put all banks on an honest footing, and then watch how fast the recovery takes place.

    Bailout Bob's way is to try so hard to avoid the pain, it ends up being protracted for years.

  • goatesnotes
    May 5, 2010 7:53 p.m.

    I have one question for you, "facts" -- will you still be using the same tired argument for Senator Bennett six years from now when he's 83 years old? Your plea to delegates is falling on deaf ears.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 7:47 p.m.

    Healthcare is another issue where well meaning and principled but misinformed conservatives have attacked Senator Bennett for the Bennett/Wyden bill.

    Let's look at the reality, healthcare costs themselves. Republicans should not live up to Democrat's characterization of them as the party of "no." We actually have a better, market based and state regulated way to address the cost of healthcare.

    Health care costs have risen from 11% of gross domestic product during the Reagan administration to 18% today ane 20% within five years. One out of five dollars in the U.S. is spent on health care. Tax is not the only tax. Health care costs are killing the American Dream and eliminating the middle class in this nation. Medicare and medicaid will bankrupt this nation within 20 years if nothing is done to change our current trajectory.

    The Bennett/Wyden bill was not a finished product but a template for debate and market based solutions which won bipartisan support. It was lauded by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation as a big step forward, a starting place for a market state based plan.

    Mark my words, these are the facts.

  • JMT
    May 5, 2010 7:40 p.m.

    John Jacobs, we have tried the "mainstream and compromise" you suggest. $110 Trillion of debt and obligation later, here we are. It doesn't work.

    One party is absolutely dedicated to expanding government power and expense at every turn. Compromise with this means that we only grow government at half the rate. So it takes us twice as long to get there but in the end we are there. And the there is European style socialism.

    If you want that then climb out front and campaign for it. If you don't then at some point it is a matter of digging in your heels and saying no more.

    When Bob Bennett got into office the total debt and obligation was around $40 trillion. He has voted for almost every part of the next $70 Trillion worth of I.O.U.'s. How much more do you want to "compromise"?

    I'm all out of "compromise" on this one. Vote the guy out of office!

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 7:35 p.m.


    I won't break Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment like so many conservatives on these threads have. I'm sure a few of the challengers are very capable and qualified individuals in whatever professions or business they have been involved with.

    Having said that, no matter how smart and capable someone is, there is usually some learning curve on a new job. That seems to just be common sense, but I suppose there is little common sense in politics.

    Perhaps one of these challengers will be the next Senator from Utah, and certainly the time for change will come, sooner or later.

    Having said that with the Republicans poised to take control of the Senate this year, Utah needs to be a player in reversing the excesses of the Obama administration and a Democrat Congress that is spending our children's future financial security at an alarming rate.

    A freshman Senator, no matter how much potential he/she has can't deliver on that promise now. Only a conservative Senator with signficiant clout as Chairman of Banking and senior on Approprations can bring the kind of change we need.

    Now when it really counts, delegates support Senator Bennett.

  • facts_r_stubborn
    May 5, 2010 7:20 p.m.

    People don't realize just how critical this moment in history is. No matter how good a new Senator may be one day be, Utah will lose influence now if we dump a senior Senator.

    It's not over. Greece is in sovereign bankruptcy. The contagion is spreading to Portugal, next Spain, then Italy and possibly even the U.K. This could well cause a severe double dip recession in the U.S. as well.

    8 million jobs have been lost in the U.S. and the federal deficit looms. However, failure to stabilize financial institutions would have been exponentially worse. I have seen the economic projections had we failed.

    Political delays to intervention in Greece have doubled the taxpayer tab there since January. In Greece, $100 billion is a lot of salad.

    Forgetting Obama's excess, Bennett's vote for the original TARP prevented a global depression. I'm all for creative destruction and free markets, but that kind of pain would jeopardize our freedom and our ability to defend our nation. It would have taken well more than two decades to recover, cost the taxpayer trillions more, and the job loss and economic decline unfathomable.

  • goatesnotes
    May 5, 2010 7:18 p.m.

    Knock, knock, anybody there? The Club for Growth is having very little if any impact on the delegates, and Senator Bennett's efforts are having even less. Most delegates with whom I have spoken are supporting either Mike Lee or Tim Bridgewater. And, believe it or not, those delegates who aren't supporting Senator Bennett are reasoned and thoughtful for the most part, not the radical extremists most in the media want you to believe. I've never heard so much hyperbole in the run up to a convention as I have this year. There's a really simple reason Bennett will be defeated -- the delegates believe his opponents are better qualified this year than he is, and all the pressure in the world won't sway many from their positions, certainly not me.

  • myturn
    May 5, 2010 7:02 p.m.

    Senator Bennett should fight for everything he is worth for re-election. Missing a few routine votes now could pay big dividends for Utahns for the next six years. If he is able to make his case, many reasonable delegates who carefully consider Senator Bennett's conservative record and experience may wonder if now is really the time for inexperience.

    The Club for Growth has been almost single handedly more effective in defeating Republican Senators and replacing them with Democrats than all the liberal interest groups put together.

    They are a destructive special interest group of the worst kind who take statements and events out of context and distort the truth. No matter how conservative you are, a simple review of their website shows that this group is willing to do and say anything, without any concern for the truth to further their end game and questionable agenda.

  • johnjacobs99
    May 5, 2010 5:54 p.m.

    Wow. Why all the negativity against Bennett? It seems like the extremists are running both parties. Lately it has been all or nothing. What happenned to mainstream and compromise?