Four of Utah's congressional delegates chose not to vote

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Oct. 25, 2013 10:04 a.m.


    Have Republicans reduced the national debt?

  • RedShirtMIT Cambridge, MA
    Oct. 22, 2013 4:07 p.m.

    To "one old man" while you make your totally biased complaint, you should realize that th Democrats in Congress have added to the debt at twice the rate that Republicans have added to the debt. Since 1980 the Democrats have averaged $732 billion/yr in deficit spending when they controlled congress, while Republicans have averaged only $300 billion/yr. (Taken from GAO Historical Tables for FY2012)

    Right now I would vote for a Republican that could promise to reduce our yearly deficit to $300 billion.

    Why do you blame the party that has't controlled congress in the past 7 years? The largest deficits in US history have occured while Democrats controlled Congress and the Presidency. Doesn't that bother you?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Oct. 22, 2013 1:49 p.m.

    What really upsets the Republicans is that anyone would dare to question the Republicans irresponsible spending without increasing revenues party. Does anyone remember two wars coupled with record tax cuts? How dare anyone hold them accountable! Have we all forgotten President Cheney and his little buddy?

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 22, 2013 2:16 a.m.

    Sitting in their hands was why they were elected. Were they out giving Hannity interviews?

  • ECR Burke, VA
    Oct. 21, 2013 6:20 p.m.

    ...Bush Jr. gets credit for FY2009 because that budget was established by his administration. Therefore Obama started with FY2010, which starts in October of 2009.

    If you are going to argue that Obama started his administration on equal ground with all the other presidents mentioned then you have zero credibility. The economic conditions he inherited from the previous administration had not been seen since the 30's. Since he took office the deficit, while still too large, has been cut in half. And Obama's rate of increase in spending is lower than any president since Eisenhower.

    Having said all that, let me repeat - We have got to stop deficit spending with responsible cost cutting and responsible revenue increases. A healthy economy will increase revenues but that won't happen while Congress plays games with all of our well being.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    Oct. 21, 2013 6:14 p.m.

    Lost in DC and Mountanman - before you both blow a gasket, let me admit that my comments were ludicrous, but no more so than yours. Don't we all have to admit that regardless of who is in office spending has increased? And so it is certainly necessary to stop deficit spending. And in my opinion it has to come by way of increased revenue (yes, I'm talking about tax rates) and lower spending. During the Clinton years we actually achieved a surplus budget and starting paying down the debt (yes, Lost in DC, I've heard your argument refuting that fact but every reputable source I know of says we had a surplus. That was achieved by a Democratic President and Republican Congress, but most of all it was achieved by a very robust economy which resulted in increased tax revenue.

    A couple of other issues -
    -From a source more reliable than me, the official numbers show that increases for each president are as follows: Reagan 187%; Bush Sr. 57%; Clinton 36%; Bush Jr. 89% and Obama so far 54% after only five years.

    Mountanman your number starts at the beginning of Bush's last year. See my next comment...

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 5:01 p.m.


    You speak as though the president had the power to spend without restraint. Last I checked, appropriations is a function of Congress, not the executive. Why do you not blame Congress for the deficit? And if you blame Obama, do you also blame all of his predecessors for the increases in the deficit during each of their terms?

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 4:39 p.m.

    Were they hiding somewhere?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 21, 2013 4:06 p.m.

    @ ECR. Baloney! When George W. Bush left office on January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08. Today, less than 5 years later, Obama has increased the debt to just over $17 trillion and Congress just gave him authority to borrow another $850 billion this year. My calculator says going from $10 trillion to $17 trillion is a whopping 58.8% increase in less than 5 years with the debt forecast to be over $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office. That is a 100% increase and it isn't a question of if that will happen, the question is if $20 trillion is even a close estimate of what the actual debt will be at that time. Please stop lying!

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 4:00 p.m.

    You have twisted my comment – typical liberal response. Please tell me where I said a deficit was good. I did not. I stated facts, did not express opinion.

    Resorting to falsehoods reveals a weakness in your argument. I pointed out facts – bush had lower deficits when he had a repub house than when he had a dem house. BO has had lower deficits with a repub house than with a dem house; again stating facts – not expressing opinion.

    And as for the rest of the mess; the house passed legislation to fund all of the government expect obamacare – BO and the dems think so highly of this self-described train wreck that BO and harry threatened default on other obligations to protect it. They felt obamacare was more important than all the rest of the government combined.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    Oct. 21, 2013 1:35 p.m.

    Lost in DC - So with your logic, any deficits under a Democratic President are the fault of the president and any deficits under a Democratic Congress are the fault of the Congress.


  • RedShirtMIT Cambridge, MA
    Oct. 21, 2013 1:17 p.m.

    The liberal hate machiene is really running hard today.

    We hear them bemoaning our Congressmen voting against dumping more debt on our children and grandchildren.

    To "Roland Kayser" you are sort of right, but are mostly wrong. The federal government has no obligation to maintain any specific funding levels for any program. If they decide to cut funding for roads in half, they can do so. The only obligations that must be paid to avoid default are debt payments or other contractual obligations. Everything else is based on desires. For example, if congress wanted to cut welfare to $1 million/yr they could. Congress could even cut welfare off.

    To "ECR" your numbers are off. Obama has increased the debt by over 66%, and is on track to raise it more than Bush. You also forget that Bush's 81% was only 5Trillion, where Obama's 66% is pushing $7 Trillion.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 12:43 p.m.

    Please re-read the letter and re-read my comment. The article specifically mentioned default on the debt, to which I responded. There would have been no default on the debt.

    If every bill passed by the government is sacrosanct, why are you giving BO a pass for not enforcing the employer mandate in Obamacare, or our immigration laws, or federal drug laws? Neither you, nor BO, should be able to pick and choose which laws are enforced, whether or not such failure constitutes a “default” of any term or condition.

    There was NEVER a threat of default on the debt.

    Wally West,
    That’s how BO prefers to govern – by crisis. How much is obamacare keeping the economy down?

    Mike in Cedar,
    Had you used that term and been named Buttars, the left would have screamed for your head as a racist.

    1979 – dem contol

    More debt was added during BO’s first 38 months than during any other 96 month term. Bush’s deficits were higher with a dem house than with a GOP house, and you want to draw comparisons? Welcome to the right side!

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 12:19 p.m.

    @ECR exactly why the tea party started under bush's administration.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    Oct. 21, 2013 11:30 a.m.

    Mountanman said, "What really upsets the Democrats is that anyone would dare to question the Democrat's irresponsible borrowing and spending party."

    So let's take a look at the last 33 years - since 1980 when deficit spending began to skyrocket.

    During the Reagan years the debt increased by 163%
    During the Bush Sr. years the debt increassed by 44%
    During the Clinton years the debt increased 26%
    During the Bush Jr. years the debt increased 81%
    And so far, during the Obama years, the debt increased 33%

    Average those numbers and you find that during Republican administrations over that period the debt increased 96% while it increased a little less than 30% under Democratic administrations.

    And which one did you call the "irresponsible borrowing and spending party"?

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    At least Lee was front and center because he was raising funds for his little campaign fund. The remainders did their subterfuge in the shadows, pandering to those tpees that think not paying bills is acceptable. This pandering to a minority of citizens lacks understanding that Utah's largest employer is the public sector and that wasting money down the rabbit holes like government shutdowns and unfunded wars just isn't helping anyone but their donors. This must stop. Pragmatism must prevail.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:49 a.m.

    "If it requires a genius to simultaneously hold two contradictory convictions" Read what Obama said about raising the debt ceiling while a senator. Oh that's right he is a genius.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    I wish I had Mike R's ability to turn every political/financial question into a moral one. I suppose it was OK when Reagan demanded GOP support for raising the debt limit during his two terms - eighteen times! Now the good guys are all supposed to favor stiffing our creditors, shutting down government services (at least the ones that go to other people) and deregulating everything in sight. What could possibly go wrong?

    If it requires a genius to simultaneously hold two contradictory convictions, then Mike R. is up there with Einstein.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    "The black 4 are guilty of both. Lets remove them all at the next opportunity."

    Isn't it the liberal left who claim that opposition to Obama is because of racism. Yet here a liberal uses a racist label to denigrate the opposition and color as reason to remove them from office.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:36 a.m.

    Per the Huffington post, U.S. defaulted on its debts in 1814 and 1979. 1979 Bond holders sued to recover interest and the courts identified it as a default. In 1971, the U.S. defaulted on their debts when demand for Gold to replace dollars was not honored and we stiffed the French for millions. The U.S. terminated the gold standard. That's three defaults on U.S. debt. We may not be bankrupt yet, but we as a nation are insolvent. It is strictly propaganda for the Congress and President to claim we have not defaulted ever. Go get'em Lee. Orin is the one who needs to be recalled.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    We actually did partially default once in 1979 with one of these stunts (didn't even cross the debt ceiling line but got close enough it messed things up for a couple weeks). Interest rates rose half a percent as a result which doesn't sound like much but cost the nation billions. So much for deficit reduction... this stunt would've just increased the money spent on absolutely nothing (interest) if the Utah delegation had their way.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Oct. 21, 2013 10:06 a.m.

    There are sins of commission and sins of omission. The black 4 are guilty of both. Lets remove them all at the next opportunity.

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 9:48 a.m.

    I read somewhere that governing by crisis (which has been done since 2010) has consistently kept the GDP down by a full 1%. Imagine what a higher GDP could accomplish/lead to?

    Is it really surprising Lee would play this card? Am I the only one who recalls his playing fast & loose w/ his own mortgage? The Junior Senator from Zion has no credibility IMO.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    Surprise! The liberals here are not going to vote for any of the republican incumbents. Who would have thought! I am sure they would have, had it not been for the last 3 weeks. (Sarcasm off)

    The debt ceiling is a grade 2 rapid compared to Niagara Falls called bankruptcy, which is surely coming to the US if we don't get our spending under control. Thank goodness some legislators are willing to try to steer the federal government away from the deadly threat!

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 9:03 a.m.

    If I were a bank, I would be reluctant to loan money to those who think Lee, Chaffetz, Bishop, and Stewart did the right thing by effectively voting for the U.S. to default on its debt.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:56 a.m.

    What really upsets the Democrats is that anyone would dare to question the Democrat's irresponsible borrowing and spending party. How dare anyone hold them accountable!

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:47 a.m.

    To lost in D.C.: Every single bill submitted to the Treasury represents funds that were legally and lawfully appropriated by Congress. Failure to pay any of them constitutes a default. What you suggest would be like saying that as long as you make your house payment, you can stop paying your car payment, utilities, credit cards, etc. It's nonsense.

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    Great letter. These guys can go through an entire term without a single accomplishment, and yet still get re-elected by constituents who only care to hear about their "principles". We Utahns will vote against our own self interests time and again!

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:28 a.m.

    Brad, Roland
    The idea that the US would default on its debt was a scare tactic created by the DNC, peddled by a lapdog media, and swallowed by a gullible public.

    I assume that if you are employed and get paid more than once a month that you received at least one paycheck during the dem-forced shutdown. Did you not have taxes withheld? There is more than enough revenue coming in to meet all the debt service requirements. The only way there would have been a default was if Lew ignored the constitution and spent the money on other things before servicing the debt.

    The answer is at hand if the American people will rise up and vote against their dem masters.

    And all you lib apologists seem to ignore the fact that the house voted to keep the government open – BO and the dems voted to shut it down. The shut-down was purely a dem creation.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    Embarrassments, all of them, No alternative, No ideas, No votes, No character, next election No jobs.

    "the true enemy is democrats" funny, sad, but funny. The republicans really needed the red menace to focus their collective hate upon or they start calling everyone one else "the enemy."

    "Four members of Congress wanted to solve the problem NOW." with continued chaos, ignorance, and grandstanding, not likely?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:17 a.m.

    Four members of Congress from Utah had the courage to NOT kick the can down the road. Four members of Congress had the courage to NOT let Obama and Reid dictate terms to the House. Four members of Congress kept their oath to protect the Constitution.

    Those who are beating their chests over the fact that we did not default seem to think that doing nothing means something. Exactly what was done? Obama's credit card was renewed. That's all. There is no budget. There was no compromise. The whole mess has to be repeated in a few months.

    Apparently, that's what the liberals want - continued chaos. Four members of Congress wanted to solve the problem NOW.

  • psalms91 olivehurst, CA
    Oct. 21, 2013 8:05 a.m.

    i think they did just fine you all need to quit attacking the republicans and stand for what is right and true the true enemy is democrats who want to keep us in debt you ppl need to wake up we will default sooner or later you cant spend like they been spending

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 7:48 a.m.

    A solution is at hand if the people of Utah will rise up and vote against their republican masters long enough to make voting count in Utah. Although there is no guarantee that democrats would give people the right to elect the government, the chances are slightly better than with the republicans.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    They all jumped onto the Tea Party sinking boat.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 6:57 a.m.

    If you don't intentionally do something, you unintentionally cause bad things to happen.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 6:36 a.m.

    Whatever happened to government for the people by the people?

    I read poll after poll from BYU and KSL how unpopular the shutdown was. All the polls I read showed that a majority here in Utah did not support or agree with what our state delegation was doing. So only a very small minority supported them. Yet...

    Why then was our state delegation catering to the minority and ignoring the majority?

    Could it be because the minority are the delegates for the caucus system? Could it be that our state delegation was catering to those who control our caucus system rather than adhering to those who they're supposed to represent?

    Just another prime example of why we need to "Count me Vote" and rid ourselves of the corrupt caucus system. It merely breeds radicalism and extremism.

    Time to give the majority a voice! Let freedom ring!

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Oct. 21, 2013 5:21 a.m.

    I find this extremely funny since we all had to endure the endless rantings about how when Obama was in the Illinois chamber he voted present (no vote) several times. Oh how the far righties had a heyday with that. It was proof he shouldn't be a leader.

    It will be interesting to see the justification behind these lack of votes. Particularly from Lee... with all his principles and all. If should have stared true to course, voted No against the CR and the cap increase. He was all bluster when no shots were being fired, but when the actual fight came to him, he was no where to be found. He had left his Republican colleagues to make the hard choice.... his choice... to not make a choice.

    Shameful seeing how he is one of the principles who started the fight. You don't throw the first punch, then walk away, leaving someone else to clean up your mess. Place the dang vote.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 21, 2013 12:36 a.m.

    Basically these four legislators said that they would be happy to let America fail as long as President Obama gets the blame. Patriot is not a term that one could apply to any of them.