Over
the course of the past week, the House of Representatives passed eight
continuing appropriation measures in the wake of the federal shutdown. Two of
these measures, H.J Res. 76 and H.J Res 91 were sponsored by Representative
Frelinghuysen. These pieces of legislation are titled, respectively, the
National Nuclear Security Administration Continuing Appropriations Resolution
of 2014 and the Department of Defense Survivor Benefits Continuing
Appropriations Resolution of 2014. The former piece of legislation ensures
funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) throughout the
government shutdown. The latter secures various benefits for relatives of
fallen soldiers.
Frelinghuysen used
some pretty heavy moralistic rhetoric to defend his legislation. He lauded the
role of the NNSA in our national security, saying “the NNSA is responsible for
maintaining our nuclear deterrent, securing vulnerable nuclear materials around
the world to keep them out of the hands of terrorists.” (Frelinghuysen
Statement on the Nuclear Weapon Security and Non-Proliferation Act) As far as
the DOD Survivor Benefits Continuing Appropriations resolution is concerned,
Frelinghuysen wrote in his weekly newsletter that “our government has no
greater responsibility than to take care of the families of our brave men and
women that have fought and died for our country.” (Frelinghuysen e-news letter)
The former legislation passed the house along a partisan line, and the second
passed unanimously. After all, it is difficult to argue against the notion that
the United States has a great responsibility to its fallen soldiers and their
families.
Frelinghuysen’s
actions may be morally commendable, but that sort of analysis would be dry and
unfruitful. Upon further investigation, evidence from all of the legislation
passed in the House this past week suggests that specific representatives
sponsored legislation when they had an electoral interest in the matter at
hand. Frelinghuysen is a perfect emblem of this framework. He happens to have a
significant interest in supporting the defense industry and in serving as a
strong voice for veterans.
A good example of
this is the H.J Res 79, the Border Security and Enforcement Continuing
Appropriations Resolution, sponsored by Rep. John Carter (R TX-31) His district
is a demographically unique area in Texas. Its population is 73.2% white, and
16.3% Hispanic. (Wikipedia)[1]
This is at odds with the entire state; its Hispanic population is in the area
of 40%, and many white Texans have expressed concern over this. It makes sense
to suggest that Carter’s predominantly white electorate would share this
concern, and would like to see the continued operation of Texas’ border
security.
This evidence
suggests that Frelinghuysen’s security initiative too could have been more than
a moral prerogative to preserve our countries defense and to fund the families
of fallen soldiers. Therefore, it seems that the connection between this
legislation and the fact that the defense industry has thus far pledged $47,00
to his 2013-2014 campaign committee is not merely a coincidence.
(opensecrets.org)
As I have
mentioned in previous posts, Rodney is a veteran and has done a great deal to
benefit veterans throughout his time in Congress. He has, in large measure, staked
his reputation on this issue, and his website describes his legislative
accomplishments on behalf of veterans and their families in detail. It is
reasonable to suggest that individual veterans and the VA were both literally
and figuratively pushing him to sponsor this legislation.
Looking back on
the past week, it is appropriate to commend Rodney for “doing the right thing.”
However, there is reason to believe that he did not necessarily act for the
“right” reasons. Had he not taken action on the measures that he did, he would have had a lot of money and his reputation at stake.
“right” reasons. Had he not taken action on the measures that he did, he would have had a lot of money and his reputation at stake.
Works Consulted:
1)http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/bdquery/D?d113:5:./temp/~bdlXFx:@@@D&summ2=m&
7) http://frelinghuysen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=34§iontree=8,34
1 comment:
It is interesting to think about the overlap, possibly, between F.'s electoral, policy and PARTISAN goals here. The way you've framed this seems to suggest that F. can work seamlessly toward all three?
Post a Comment