We Thought You Could Read, Mike Simpson
Have something to say? ADD A NEW POST!
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the newsletter or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Another example of problems with blind party loyalty: Representative Simpson claiming he did not know a major bill he voted for implemented a $25 fee to moms trying to get a few child support bucks.
Granted I have done no research if this bill had wide bipartisan support, but I see it was passed in 2005 which was nearing the height of Republican political arrogance. I hypothesize that Simpson got this big bill, was told he needed to vote for it because his Republican bosses told him to, and Simpson did his duty without reading the bill. Blind party loyalty reigned, and today we have Simpson claiming it was too big to read it all.
Hey Mike Simpson, apparently you did not read your job description, either. This is why we elected and pay you as our representative, to read and understand these bills. You just exhibited dereliction of your duty by admitting you did not understand what you were voting for.
The PR quoted Simpson’s excuse, “When they get that big, they have some strange things in them sometimes.”
I would have expected this kind of statement from Absolute Idiot Bill Sali, but not Simpson. If you don’t understand what you are voting for, don’t vote for it!
Mike Simpson, if these bills are too big for you to read and understand what you are voting on, I think you might be too stupid to be our representative. I don’t say that lightly, but what else have you voted on and not understood? Get your head out of the loyalty trough and into the game here, it is why we pay you.
The other interesting part of this fiasco is that “Idaho” selected the option to charge this fee to moms, instead of to the deadbeat dads. Who is this person, “Idaho” that made this decision? The PR apparently did not think to ask this obvious question, who actually made the decision in Idaho?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Vote:
0 
0 The thing that I found the most amusing about the legislation isn’t neccessarily that Simpson (and Craig, AFAIK) both voted for it, but the fact that the legislation had this stated purpose for the fee:
“paying down the federal deficit”
Now, call me crazy, but isn’t collecting $25 from people who receive child support to ‘pay down’ the deficit the financial equivilant of urinating in the ocean to raise water levels?
Vote:
0 0 Whats particularly amusing is what if the $25 takes up most of the child support payment. I know of a case where someone pays $75.00 a month due to joint custody and fairly equal incomes.
Vote:
0 0 Thats a $25.00 YEARLY fee not monthly
Vote:
0 0 If people are all up in arms about $25.00, try Hillary’s $5000.00 giveaway to new born babies. Will people be as outraged about this as well? And how much will this raise the federal deficit? Or how will we pay for it?
Vote:
0 0 I don’t see how Mike Simpson admitting he didn’t understand a bill he voted for has to do with some Hillary campaign pledge (hadn’t heard that one). I guess you’re looking at the method to balance the budget? There are so many avenues there! I don’t think giving oil companies and rich people huge tax cuts was the correct first step (which helped create our huge deficit). They gave tax cuts to the rich and the richest companies, now are balancing the budget on the backs of poor moms. Is that what compassionate conservatism means? Sounds more sexist to me.
A buddy yesterday told me when he first read this article, he thought I was being a bit harsh saying Simpson might be too stupid to be our representative, but he said he thought about it all day and kept thinking how incredibly stupid it was to vote for a massive bill that Simpson didn’t understand, and then how stupid it was to admit he had not understood it when voting for it.
These bills can contain about anything in them, including things that could take money away from Idaho or otherwise hurt our state. We need a representative that will not vote for a bill unless they understand what is in the bill.
Maybe Mike Simpson should pay that fee for all Idaho moms since he didn’t read the fine print. How’s that for conservative accountability and responsibility? Is Mike Simpson that big of a gentleman?
Vote:
0 0 I’m with Joe on this one. The guy’s an idiot! I was flabbergasted when I found out about this! How many OTHER bills has he signed without reading? We need to get this man out of office and quick! We need someone who will represent Idaho and it’s best interests, instead just blindly voting on bills like he clearly did in this case. Obviously he’s not cut out for this line of work if he’s not able to read and understand a bill such as this.
Vote:
0 0 The problem isn’t that Simpson is an idiot. He isn’t. The problem is systemic with Congress. They allow bills to become so huge and filled with rider amendments that the bill is too huge for ANYONE to thoughtfully consider and understand. It’s not just Simpson.
What this situation points out is that the way bills are brought to the floor and ADDED onto needs reform. For instance, states like Oregon don’t allow rider amendments that are not related into a bill up for consideration. So, if you have a bill dealing with transportation issues coming to committee or making it to the floor for a vote, you can’t add issues involving welfare, or say abortion to the original bill. This keeps the bills focused on the issue at hand….and keeps them smaller and more readable.
Say what you want about Simpson, but the real problem is with the process not one man. Joe, this is a personal attack on Simpson and serves nothing other than to be a Democratic talking point. Your article could have (and should have) taken a look at the larger issues involved.
You can bash Simpson or any Republican but I suspect Richard Stallings dealt with the same type of issues when he was our Congressmen as well. I could bash Mike Crapo for not knowing about the “Dream Act” 2 weeks ago. There is alot of information being put out there. I think it is unreasonable to assume that every Congressmen knows 100% of every bill they vote on. That stings–but it is the truth. If you were in his shoes it would be the same. No one could say that they would have read an 800 page bill and understood everything in it (especially with lawyers writing the legislation). The point is that the process needs to be changed so that our representatives do have a better idea what they are supporting or opposing. That would be the constructive approach in this instance. What do you think?
Vote:
0 0 I think that the earlier guest hit the nail on the head when they said that if Mike Simpson doesn’t have time to read a bill before he votes on it, he should assign a staffer or somebody to do it. And really Mike, do you have to bring Hillary into every discussion? The issue here is taking $25 a year from those who might actually feel the loss from it. It’s a question of right or wrong, and I think it’s wrong. If Mike Simpson supported it then he can take the heat.
Vote:
0 0 Wow….Mike is definately a clear cut, love every single Republican no matter what he does wrong, type of guy. Incredible! It’s THIS type of mentality that has ruined this country’s credibility with the rest of the world over the past couple of decades. I’m a Republican and no matter how bad I screw up, there’s a reason behind it and I’m never wrong. Unbelievable!
The fact of the matter is, we pay him to represent us, the people of Idaho. If he can’t even take the time to read a bill, I don’t care if it’s 20,000 pages long, then he doesn’t need to be in office. It’s just amazing the way you stand up for these Republicans in office like Bush, and consistantly back them and provide excuses for their inappropriate behaviors and actions. Typical Republican.
Vote:
0 0 Mike makes some good points that Mike Simpson is probably not the only one to ever do this, and the problem is really deeper and systemic across Congress than just our east Idaho representative. I’m becoming apathetic to any reform possibilities. It seems like any congressional reforms always have little hidden gotchas that guarantees they only make it worse.
I would think if they don’t know what is in the bill, they should abstain. I guess it is really my problem for expecting more from Mike Simpson.
Vote:
0 0 I am not a Republican apologist. If you read the threads on Craig I support his ouster from the Senate by whatever means possible. My point was about the systemic abuses in Congress. Sure, we can hang the problems on Simpson to what end? Doesn’t solve the problem. And yes, Simpson should get on board with reforms. I agree with Joe that reform proposals usually go nowhere….but if we don’t even make the attempt to address problems and suggest reforms there won’t even be the possibility of reform. While I appreciate the stab at my mentality this is exactly what I am trying to address: The mentality (which I am even guilty of at times) to bash the person versus the policies and procedures that perpetuate waste, fraud, and abuse. Politics needs to move away from left vs. right and make a return to right v. wrong. That will save this country in the long run.
Vote:
0 0 Is banning political parties the only way we can move away from left vs right? Political parties seem to poison our politicians, they continually play each other off of the electorate, and didn’t George Washington warn us against political parties?
Vote:
0 0 Maybe term limits would be a good idea after all. It would require a constitutional amendment; however, it would curb some of the zeal exhibited by pols to stay at all costs and demonize opponents.
Vote:
0 0 yes, term limits is a good idea to start with
Vote:
0 0 Maybe we all should stop crying on a blog and goto boise and voice our opinion and take 20,000 people with us and really get the message across. Maybe next summer we should all carpool over there with some sleeping bags and sleep there for a weekend and protest the heck out of it. They are even passing laws to prohibit us to speak in most places so u might want to bring atleast 3,000 people with guns to guard us against tyrany from illegal arrest on protesters. What do you think joe? PROTEST!!!!!
Vote:
0 0 Localman….Don’t bother talking about protest’s on this site. I tried for months awhile back to get people together to protest the war in Iraq and people these days just don’t care like they did back in the 60’s -70’s. Unless something is directly affecting a person in this day and age, they don’t care how many of our freedoms we loose. There’s just no pride in the American people anymore. Oh they say there is, but when it really comes down to it, nobody wants to actually get off their butt and do anything about it! People are too scared (or too lazy) to stand up to their govt these days. All the while our freeedoms continue to be stripped from us one by one.
Vote:
0 0 Apathy is one side of that coin, lack of results is the other. How many times have we heard of protests in Boise and Washington for various causes, and the politicians still did what they planned to do?
The real problem is that politicians no longer fear the people as the founding fathers intended. Putting your life on hold to sleep on the capitol steps will not strike fear into politicians.
How can we strike fear into politicians nowadays? I think citizen initiatives are the last outlet we have. Make initiatives easier to get on the ballot, then pass term limits (again), campaign reform laws, etc.
Vote:
0 0 yeah, but how long have people been talking about “reform”? Not just on this site but everywhere. For years and years and still nothing has come of it. Protests get people out there and seen and whether you believe it or not, it doesn’t go unnoticed by the politicians. At least these people got together in Boise and did something instead of just “talking” about it on a blog. What do YOU think our govt notices more…. thousands of protestors on capital steps speaking out about what they believe in, or a handful of people complaining about it on a blog?
Vote:
0 0 I think they notice them about equally, but do they care enough to change from either protest form?
If I suggest revolution, I probably get a visit from authorities and my life turned upside down. But what else are the people to do when our government no longer represents us and no longer fears us?
Vote:
0 0 You can’t seriously believe that they notice protests and blogs “equally”. Obviously you’re biased as this is your site, but lets be realistic Joe.
You may get your life turned upside down trying to start a revolution, but thats the great thing about protests and our freedom to have them at anytime, anywhere.
Vote:
0 0 I probably am biased, however please keep in mind I have also been part of marching protests in the past. I’ve been part of both, and I feel they get ignored equally!
I guess what I am saying by “noticed equally” is not that their effectiveness is equal, but a protest happens over one hour and the politicians pay attention to it for a few minutes. A blog publishes several articles and some of those catch the attention of politicians for a few minutes each. They read through some of the comments, so their attention is focused on the blog form of protest for about an equal amount of time. The blog and comments articulate reasoning from several people, rather than one boisterous protest chant. You might disagree with my reasoning, but that’s how I thought of it.
I encourage anyone to organize a street protest. Post the subject here with the when and where and I’ll probably be there if I agree with it.
Part of the problem with protest ideas is that some think they are only effective if we go to Boise and march. Most people cannot take the day and expense of driving to Boise for what is probably a futile effort.
Why not protest right here in Idaho Falls? Don’t our senators and congressman have official offices here in Idaho Falls? Don’t we know the workplaces and home addresses of our state legislators?
Why not organize a protest to go right to the local source? That would attract your local mainstream news coverage, and you would probably roust more locals out here than by saying “meet me in Boise”.
I wish you all luck with your protests, let me know if one happens locally.
Vote:
0 0 I too would support a protest here in Idaho Falls if it was one that I agreed with. If someone gets one organized, just post it here or in the paper or both and I would be there if at all possible and would probably bring friends with me. However, I do think that for one to be effective in IF, it would need to be concerned with IF problems or Idaho. While I do not and never have supported Jr’s war, a protest here would probably not have much impact on the big picture. But, if there ever was a protest here on the war, I would most definitely be there. Let’s start with something where we might be able to see some results quickly and work our way up.
I’m sure I have worded this all wrong, but hopefully got my point across.
Leave Your Comment
Our Community's Comment Guidelines:- Please stay polite and on topic.
- Your email will never be published.
- No profanity or euphemisms for profanity.
- No personal attacks, name-calls, put-downs, or baiting other guests, races, genders, or religions.
- Express opinions, facts, logic, and reasoning; just don’t argue for argument’s sake.
- No commercial links (unless absolutely relevant to the discussion) and no religious proselytizing.
- No religious discussions (for or against). Go to http://religion.idahofallstoday.com for religious discussions.
- Use the "I" word as much as possible to demonstrate responsibility.
- Limit yourself to using one name per thread to demonstrate responsibility.
- If you think a comment is inappropriate, ask Joe to review it.
whew, slow day, time to all start commenting again!
Loading ...
Vote:
I realize that politicians may not have time to read everything but that is what they have staffers for.
Simpson would be better off just admitting he voted party loyalty. At least he’d sound credible.