Tuesday, August 12, 2014

SEE THE CANDIDATE ON CABLE TV!

U.S. Congressional Candidate Kenneth Stepp (Dem) wasl be a guest on the “TRUTH or POLITICS” show Monday, August 11th at 6:00pm.  Candidate Stepp was interviewed by our “TRUTH or POLITICS” host Darlene Price. Candidate Stepp is running against Hal Rogers. The show wasl broadcast live from the McCreary County Park Senior Citizens / Community Center.  All are welcome and admission is free. Radio Station “WHAY – 98.3fm” broadcasted the show live and MBR T.V. channel 2 filmed the show for later broadcasting as well.

Friday, August 08, 2014

UNLIKE HAL ROGERS, KENNETH STEPP IS A FRIEND OF THE WORKING PEOPLE AND OF LABOR UNIONS!

Hal Rogers Voting
Record Regarding Labor Unions

2014United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions14%
2013-2014International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Positions (House)0%
2013-2014International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Lifetime Scores (House)27%
2013American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Lifetime Score20%
2013American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions20%
2013International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions35%
2013International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions100%
2012American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions19%
2012American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Lifetime Score20%
2012International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions16%
2012Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions0%
2011-2012International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions (House)100%
2011-2012United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions0%
2011American Federation of Government Employees - Positions4%
2011American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions0%
2011American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Lifetime Score13%
2011American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
2011International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions0%
2010American Federation of Government Employees - Positions0%
2010American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions0%
2010American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
2010International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions25%
2010International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - House of Representatives Score50%
2009-2010Communications Workers of America - Positions11%
2009-2010International Brotherhood of Teamsters - Positions7%
2009-2010International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions100%
2009-2010National Farmers Union - Positions0%
2009-2010Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions3%
2009American Federation of Government Employees - Positions8%
2009American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Lifetime Score22%
2009American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions14%
2009American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions22%
2009International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions16%
2009International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions0%
2009Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions9%
2009United Auto Workers - Positions7%
2009Women Employed - Positions0%
2008American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions13%
2008American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Lifetime Score23%
2008American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Lifetime Score13%
2008American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions14%
2008Center for Worker Freedom - Positions78%
2008International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions0%
2008Latin America Working Group - Positions0%
2008Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions16%
2008Utility Workers Union of America - Positions0%
2007-2008International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Positions24%
2007-2008International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions100%
2007-2008National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score75
2007-2008United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions13%
2007American Federation of Government Employees - Positions7%
2007American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions17%
2007American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions22%
2007Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers - Positions50%
2007Center for Worker Freedom - Positions81%
2007International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions16%
2007International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions20
2007Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions26%
2007United Auto Workers - Positions7%
2007Utility Workers Union of America - Positions40
2006American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions29%
2006American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions29%
2006International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions16%
2006International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions33%
2006Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions33%
2006Transportation Communications Union - Positions16%
2006United Auto Workers - Positions15%
2005-2006American Road and Transportation Builders Association - Positions66%
2005-2006International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Positions17%
2005-2006National Farmers Union - Positions0%
2005American Federation of Government Employees - Positions0%
2005American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions13%
2005American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
2005International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions0%
2005International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions25%
2005Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions6%
2005Transportation Communications Union - Positions0%
2005United Auto Workers - Positions14%
2004American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions20%
2004American Postal Workers Union - Positions20%
2004Communications Workers of America - Positions0%
2004International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions0%
2004International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions0%
2004Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions14%
2004Transportation Communications Union - Positions11%
2004United Auto Workers - Positions6%
2003-2004American Federation of Government Employees - Positions8%
2003-2004American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
2003-2004American Road and Transportation Builders Association - Positions100%
2003-2004Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers - Positions21%
2003-2004International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Positions17%
2003-2004National Farmers Union - Positions0%
2003American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions7%
2003American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
2003Communications Workers of America - Positions0%
2003International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions0%
2003International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions12%
2003International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Positions22%
2003Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions0%
2003Transportation Communications Union - Positions29%
2003United Auto Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights7%
2002American Federation of Government Employees - Positions8%
2002American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions13%
2002American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
2002Communications Workers of America - Positions25%
2002International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions0%
2002International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions25%
2002Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions0%
2002Transportation Communications Union - Positions0%
2002United Auto Workers - Positions0%
2001-2002American Postal Workers Union - Positions13%
2001-2002International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Positions38%
2001-2002National Farmers Union - Positions50%
2001American Federation of Government Employees - Positions7%
2001American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions17%
2001American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions10%
2001International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions22%
2001International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions60%
2001Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions33%
2001Transportation Communications Union - Positions43%
2001United Auto Workers - Positions15%
2001United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions25%
2000American Federation of Government Employees - Positions18%
2000American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions10%
2000American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions14%
2000Communications Workers of America - Positions13%
2000International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions40%
2000Service Employees International Union (SEIU) - Positions14%
2000United Auto Workers - Positions7%
1999-2000National Farmers Union - Positions67%
1999American Federation of Government Employees - Positions10%
1999American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions7%
1999American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions0%
1999Communications Workers of America - Positions17%
1999International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions50%
1999International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions40%
1999Transportation Communications Union - Positions29%
1999United Auto Workers - Positions15%
1998American Federation of Government Employees - Positions14%
1998Communications Workers of America - Positions17%
1998International Brotherhood of Boilermakers - Positions40%
1998National Farmers Union - Positions67%
1998Transportation Communications Union - Positions25%
1998United Auto Workers - Positions18%
1997-1998International Brotherhood of Teamsters - Positions13%
1997American Federation of Government Employees - Positions36%
1997American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) - Positions0%
1997American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions25%
1997Communications Workers of America - Positions25%
1997National Farmers Union - Positions100%
1997United Auto Workers - Positions14%
1997United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions23%
1996American Federation of Government Employees - Positions10%
1996American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) - Positions8%
1996Communications Workers of America - Positions on Workplace Rights56%
1996National Farmers Union - Positions47%
1996United Auto Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights5%
1996United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions0%
1995International Brotherhood of Teamsters - Positions8%
1995National Farmers Union - Positions40%
1995Transportation Communications Union - Positions30%
1995United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights0%
1994National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score67%
1994United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions25%
1993National Farmers Union - Positions67%
1993United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights38%
1991American Postal Workers Union - Positions29%
1989-1990National Federation of Federal Employees - Positions21%
1989International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - Positions17%

HAL ROGERS' VOTING RECORD RATING ON EDUCATION!


33%

Hal
Rogers' Voting Record on Education

2014Population Connection - Positions (Jan. 9, 2014)0%
2013-2014National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions0%
2013American Library Association - Positions22%
2013National Education Association - Positions0%
2013National Education Association - Positions0%
2012American Library Association - Positions0%
2012National Education Association - Positions0%
2012National Education Association - Positions0%
2012The American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association - Legislation Evaluation (House Only)1%
2011-2012American Association of University Women - Positions0
2011-2012American Security Council Foundation - Positions100%
2011-2012National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions0%
2011-2012The American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association - Positions1%
2011American Library Association - Positions0%
2011American Security Council Foundation - Positions100%
2011National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions0%
2011National Education Association - Positions0%
2011National Education Association - Positions0%
2010American Library Association - Positions0%
2010American Security Council Foundation - Positions100%
2010Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) - Positions50%
2009-2010American Association of University Women - Positions0%
2009-2010National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions16%
2009-2010School Nutrition Association - Positions (House Only)0%
2009-2010The American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association - Positions29%
2009American Association of University Women - Positions0%
2009American Library Association - Positions13%
2009American Security Council Foundation - Positions100%
2009National Education Association - Positions on Public Education Teaching Profession IssuesF
2009National Education Association - Positions on Public Education Teaching Profession IssuesF
2009Population Connection - Committee Votes Score0%
2009Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) - U.S. House Score100%
2008American Library Association - Positions11%
2007-2008American Association of University Women - Positions50%
2007-2008American Security Council Foundation - Positions100%
2007-2008National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions35%
2007-2008National Education Association - Positions on Public Education Teaching Profession IssuesF
2007-2008National Education Association - Positions on Public Education Teaching Profession IssuesF
2007-2008School Nutrition Association - Positions0%
2007-2008The American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association - Greek American Issues Score39%
2007American Association of University Women - Positions50
2007American Library Association - Positions10%
2007Association For Supervision and Curriculum Development - Positions25%
2007National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions12%
2007National Association of Elementary School Principals - Positions25%
2007National Education Association - Positions on Public Education Teaching Profession IssuesF
2007National Education Association - Positions on Public Education Teaching Profession IssuesF
2007Population Connection - Positions on Population Stabilization0%
2007Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) - Positions0%
2006National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions50%
2006Population Connection - Positions0%
2005-2006American Association of University Women - Positions30%
2005-2006National Education Association - Positions0%
2005-2006National Education Association - Positions0%
2005American Association of University Women - Positions33%
2005National Association for College Admission Counseling - Positions25%
2005National Association of Elementary School Principals - Positions0%
2005Population Connection - Positions0%
2005Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) - Positions50%
2003-2004American Association of University Women - Positions0%
2003-2004American Security Council Foundation - Positions100%
2003-2004National Education Association - Positions21%
2003-2004National Education Association - Positions21%
2003-2004National Parent Teacher Association - Positions0%
2003-2004National School Boards Association - Positions40%
2003-2004Population Connection - Positions0%
2003-2004School Nutrition Association - Positions33%
2003American Association of University Women - Positions0%
2003American Library Association - Positions100%
2003National Education Association - Positions17%
2003National Education Association - Positions17%
2003National School Boards Association - Positions20%
2003Population Connection - Positions0%
2002American Security Council Foundation - Positions75%
2002National Education Association - Positions0%
2002National Education Association - Positions0%
2002Population Connection - Positions11%
2001-2002American Association of University Women - Positions0%
2001-2002National Parent Teacher Association - Positions50%
2001American Association of University Women - Positions0%
2001National Education Association - Positions33%
2001National Education Association - Positions33%
2001Population Connection - Positions10%
2000National Education Association - Positions0%
2000National Education Association - Positions0%
2000Population Connection - Positions0%
1999-2000American Association of University Women - Positions0%
1999-2000Home School Legal Defense Association - Positions60%
1999-2000National Parent Teacher Association - Positions29%
1999American Association of University Women - Positions0%
1999National Education Association - Positions30%
1999National Education Association - Positions30%
1999Population Connection - Positions0%
1997-1998American Association of University Women - Positions0%
1997-1998Home School Legal Defense Association - Positions80%
1997-1998National Education Association - Positions38%
1997-1998National Education Association - Positions38%
1997-1998Population Connection - Positions0%
1997American Association of University Women - Positions0%
1997National Education Association - Positions57%
1997National Education Association - Positions57%
1997Population Connection - Positions0%
1996National Education Association - Positions0%
1996National Education Association - Positions0%
1996Population Connection - Positions0%
1995-1996American Association of University Women - Positions0%
1995-1996



United States Student Association - Positions0%

Tuesday, August 05, 2014

KENTUCKY RANKED NUMBER NINE!

"The 10 most corrupt states in the U.S.
"Thomas R Machnitzki/Wikimedia

"New research takes a look at decades of corruption convictions to find the crookedest states in the union.

"When we think of government corruption (as one tends to do),  our biased minds often gravitate to thoughts of military juntas and third world governments. But, of course, corruption is everywhere, in one form or another. And it’s costing U.S. citizens big time.
"A new study from researchers at the University of Hong Kong and Indiana University estimates that corruption on the state level is costing Americans in the 10 most corrupt states an average of $1,308 per year, or 5.2% of those states’ average expenditures per year.
"The researchers studied more than 25,000 convictions of public officials for violation of federal corruption laws between 1976 and 2008 as well as patterns in state spending to develop a corruption index that estimates the most and least corrupt states in the union. Based on this method, the the most corrupt states are:
1. Mississippi
2. Louisiana
3. Tennessee
4. Illinois
5. Pennsylvania
6. Alabama
7. Alaska
8. South Dakota
9. Kentucky
10. Florida
"That these places landed on the list isn’t exactly surprising. Illinois, which has gain notoriety for its high-profile corruption cases in recent years, is paired with states like Mississippi and Louisiana, which are some of the least economically developed in the country. The researchers also found that for 9 out of the 10 of the most corrupt states, overall state spending was higher than in less corrupt states (South Dakota was the only exception). Attacking corruption, the researchers argue, could be a good way to bring down state spending without hurting services that people need.
Researchers also found that spending in these states was different than their less corrupt counterparts. "According to the report, “states with higher levels of corruption are likely to favor construction, salaries, borrowing, correction, and police protection at the expense of social sectors such as education, health and hospitals.”
"The paper explains that construction spending, especially on big infrastructure projects, is particularly susceptible to corruption because the quality of large, nonstandard projects are difficult for the public to gauge, while the industry is dominated by a few monopolistic firms. Corrupt states also tend to, for obvious reasons, simply have more and better paid public servants, including police and correctional officers. The researchers argue that the need for correctional officers is greater in corrupt places too because “the overall extent of corruption will be higher in states with higher numbers of convictions of public officials.”
"Of course, it’s not all bad news, as the study also found the least corrupt states too. Citizens of these states–Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa, Vermont, Utah, New Hampshire, Colorado, and Kansas–can take solace in the fact that they’re not getting ripped off as badly as the rest of us."
"Editor’s note: A previous version of this story incorrectly referred to Indiana University as the University of Indiana." 
KENNETH STEPP REMAINS OPPOSED TO CORRUPTION.  STEPP FOR CONGRESS!

Cheney and Paul squaring off!

"2009 Rand Paul Speech: Cheney Manipulated US Into Iraq War for Profit




Monday, 07 Apr 2014 03:23 PM
By Sandy Fitzgerald

Close 
       


Sen. Rand Paul claimed in 2009 that former Vice President Dick Cheney exploited the 9/11 attacks in order to lead the United States into war in Iraq to benefit military contractor Halliburton, where Cheney had been CEO before heading to Washington, a video unveiled by blog Mother Jones' writer David Corn shows.

In the video unearthed of a speech given at Western Kentucky University, Paul argues that Cheney opposed the first Bush administration's plans but changed his mind over Halliburton, Corn reports.

 "He's being interviewed (in 1995), I think, by the American Enterprise Institute, and he says it would be a disaster, it would be vastly expensive, it would be civil war, we'd have no exit strategy. He goes on and on for five minutes — Dick Cheney saying it would be a bad idea," Paul says in the video.

"And that's why the first Bush didn’t go into Baghdad. Dick Cheney then goes to work for Halliburton. Makes hundreds of millions of dollars — their CEO. Next thing you know, he's back in government, it's a good idea to go into Iraq."

Paul, a presumptive Republican presidential candidate in 2016, also said in the speech that 9/11 "became an excuse for a war they already wanted in Iraq."
 The unearthed video was shot shortly before Paul announced his Senate candidacy plans.

Paul's 2009 theory wasn't unique, as Iraq war opponents used the same claims about the beginnings of the war, Corn noted.

Corn notes that Cheney blasted isolationists in his own party March 29 at the Republican Jewish Coalition's spring leadership meeting at casino magnate Sheldon Adelson's hotel.

"One of the things that concerns me first about the [2016] campaign, that I'm worried about," Cheney said, "is what I sense to be an increasing strain of isolationism, if I can put it in those terms, in our own party," Cheney told the various Republican leaders at the private event.

While he did not name names, Corn contends that he was talking about Paul."

So Paul and Cheney are squaring off?  It's about time some Republican disagreed with Cheney and his neo-cons.   I disagree with Cheney and his Iraq war too.  Stepp for Congress!

U.S. Congressional Candidate Kenneth Stepp (Dem) will be a guest on the “TRUTH or POLITICS” show next Monday, August 11th at 6:00pm. Candidate Stepp will be interviewed by our “TRUTH or POLITICS” host Darlene Price. Candidate Stepp is running against Hal Rogers. The show will broadcast live from the McCreary County Park Senior Citizens / Community Center. All are welcome and admission is free. Radio Station “WHAY – 98.3fm” will broadcast the show live and MBR T.V. channel 2 will film the show for later broadcasting as well.

U.S. Congressional Candidate Kenneth Stepp (Dem) will be a guest on the “TRUTH or POLITICS” show next Monday, August 11th at 6:00pm.  Candidate Stepp will be interviewed by our “TRUTH or POLITICS” host Darlene Price. Candidate Stepp is running against Hal Rogers. The show will broadcast live from the McCreary County Park Senior Citizens / Community Center.  All are welcome and admission is free. Radio Station “WHAY – 98.3fm” will broadcast the show live and MBR T.V. channel 2 will film the show for later broadcasting as well.

“TRUTH or POLITICS” show next Monday, August 11th at 6:00pm.

“TRUTH or POLITICS” show next Monday, August 11th at 6:00pm.

Sunday, August 03, 2014

PLEASE CLICK BELOW TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE CAMPAIGN NOW!

https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/kennethstepp


TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE KENNETH STEPP FOR CONGRESS CAMPAIGN, PLEASE CLICK:
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/kennethstepp

2013 spending bills

Obama warns House GOP he won't sign spending bills that break debt deal By Erik Wasson - 04/18/12 05:24 PM ET The Obama administration on Wednesday stated for the first time that the president will not sign any 2013 spending bills until the House abandons the spending levels in Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget. That budget cuts spending next year by $19 billion compared to the August debt-ceiling deal. Factoring in an increase in defense spending, the Ryan budget cuts domestic programs by $28 billion. The deal struck last August sets the budget at $1.047 trillion. Ryan's (R-Wis.) budget makes deeper cuts and comes in at $1.028 trillion. Acting White House Budget Director Jeff Zients wrote to the heads of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on Wednesday to lay down the threat. “Until the House of Representatives indicates that it will abide by last summer’s agreement, the President will not be able to sign any appropriations bills,” the letter states. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers's (R-Ky.) office said the "hollow" threat would not deter the committee and said refusal to sign spending bills would mean Obama was choosing to shut down the government. "Both the Republican-led House and the Democrat-led Senate support completing Appropriations bills to fund the federal government in a responsible and timely manner. The Chairman is committed to carrying out this essential work, which has already begun, and will not be the least deterred by hollow press releases in the guise of ‘official’ correspondence," spokeswoman Jennifer Hing said. "This year, when Appropriations bills pass both the House and the Senate, the President can choose to sign them, or else he can choose to shut down the federal government, put our people at risk, and imperil our economic recovery." Rogers started this week to move his 12 bills based on the Ryan budget number of $1.028 trillion in overall discretionary spending. First out of the gate was a relatively non-controversial energy title that actually increased spending. The White House made clear that this funding for the Department of Energy would not be allowed to go forward until all the spending levels of all 12 bills are restored to the levels in the August deal. “Unfortunately, the House Budget Resolution for FY 2013 breaks our bipartisan agreement and proposes $28 billion in new cuts in annual non-defense spending — exactly the area where we have already cut the most,” Zients writes. “The result is that the resolution’s framework allows only two options: every appropriations bill will provide inadequate funding, or some bills will provide adequate funding so that other bills will face even deeper, more problematic cuts. Both approaches break last summer’s agreement, and neither is acceptable,” Zients said. The Senate is producing bills based on the August debt-ceiling deal. Unless Congress can agree on 12 annual spending bills, the government will need a stopgap spending bill after Sept. 30 to avoid a shutdown on the eve of the election. Rogers and other appropriators tried to get the GOP to stick to the August debt deal in the Ryan budget but failed in their effort in the face of pressure from conservative members.

Ukraine in Crisis

Eastern approaches

Ex-communist Europe

Ukraine in crisis

The disappearing country




THE KIEV authorities' hold on Donbas and much of the wider region of eastern Ukraine has disappeared. President Oleksandr Turchynov had said that a military operation was imminent and that anyone who left the seized buildings by 6am on April 14th would not be prosecuted.
But by nightfall, as fog covered the Donbas, it was clear that no concerted government action to take back the region was under way. The region’s police appear to have defected en masse to the pro-Russian side. Police buildings in the town of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk fell to armed men on April 12th and there were reports of other municipal buildings being taken elsewhere. A Ukrainian security services operation to restore authority in Sloviansk failed. Military or police helicopters flew over the town and unconfirmed sources said crowds prevented them from landing.
Along the highway leading from the regional capital, Donetsk, barricades have gone up, manned by men wielding clubs and metal batons. Some are armed with guns. At the entrance to Sloviansk, bigger barricades have been erected. In nearby Kramatorsk, small groups of men stood by the police station and nearby barricades.

On the morning of April 13th Arsen Avakov, the Ukrainian interior minister, announced that a fight-back for the east of the country was beginning. A few hours later a film was circulating of stalled armoured personal-carriers, a slumped man who appeared dead and another one on the ground apparently wounded. Mr Avakov said that one had died and five had been wounded in the shootout.
Another film showed a group of well-organised men in military uniform storming the police station in Kramatorsk. They are seen to be followed by men in civilian clothes. On April 13th a few dozen unarmed men were manning new barricades by the police station. The military unit seen in the film was no longer in evidence, having possibly moved elsewhere. Ukrainian officials say they are troops from Russia.
Earlier in the day, at the barricade leading into Sloviansk, the first line of defence was a group of old ladies holding icons and saying they wanted nothing but peace. Behind them was a tyre barricade. On the side Molotov cocktails were being prepared. Behind this were men with clubs, who appeared to listen to orders being given by two uniformed armed men.
Russian flags and those of the self-proclaimed Donetsk Republic were flying at all the barricades and seized buildings. But what people want is unclear. Some say they want more autonomy, some want a federal Ukraine and some want to be incorporated by Russia. In Sloviansk small groups in front of the barricades by the seized police station chanted: “Donbas rise up!”
Many people railed against their low quality of life. They shouted that they worked hard while western Ukrainians were lazy and had to be subsidised by them. No one who supported the Ukrainian government was in evidence. On the outskirts of Kramatorsk, Dimitry Padushkin was quarreling with a small group of men sent to stand at the entrance of a decrepit and non-functioning municipal airport that he said he owned.
Away from the group of men, who said they had been posted there to see that no Ukrainian forces landed, Mr Padushkin said that local pro-Ukrainians were frightened. “Of course there will be conflict,” he said. And for Russia, “this region will not be enough. They want everything. They will take all Ukraine.”

      An expansionist Russia is contrary to America's interest.  We should be very generous sending materiel to the Ukranian authorities.  The Russian seizure of Eastern Ukraine is similar to the "Bloodless Coup" in which Hitler grabbed Czecholsovakia for Nazi Germany.  Applications for NATO should be freely accepted and ruled upon by NATO from the nations surrounding Russia, the former Soviet Socialist Republics, and the former Warsaw Pact countries.   I believe almost all of the former Warsaw Pact is already in NATO.  The expansion of  Russia should be met by an expansion of NATO.   After all, NATO was not designed for combat in Asia, it was designed as an alliance to protect European and North American peoples from Moscow's expansion of territory and influence.   I'd hate to see war with Russia, but we need to get more members of NATO.  Maybe what's left of the Ukraine--former home of Nikita Khruschev--could join NATO.

Congressman Hal Rogers' Strikes Against Your Liberty!


Contact: 202-225-4601
Website: http://halrogers.house.gov

Name: Harold Rogers


Congress: Kentucky, District: 5, Republican


Cumulative Freedom Index Score: 52%


Status: Active Member of the House

Score Breakdown:
36% (113th Congress: 2013-2014)


Key Votes:




"H R 4435: On Agreeing to the Amendment 13 to H R 4435
"Vote Date: May 22, 2014Hal Rogers' Vote: NAYBad Vote.
"Indefinite Military Detention.

"During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2015 (NDAA, H.R. 4435), Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the indefinite military detention of any person detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force authority in the United States, its territories, or possessions by providing immediate transfer to a trial and proceedings by a court. It also would strike language that would provide for mandatory military custody of covered parties.

"The House rejected Smith's amendment on May 22, 2014 by a vote of 191 to 230 (Roll Call 234). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because any attempt to limit or prohibit indefinite military detention is desirable, especially since persons detained may include U.S. citizens. Indefinite military detention is a blatant violation of the Sixth Amendment, and an executive who can wield such powers is akin to a monarch or dictator. As Rep. Smith said during consideration of the amendment: "That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take someone and lock them up without due process. It is not necessary. This President has not used the authority. President George W. Bush did not use it after about 2002 and then only in a couple of instances. It is not necessary. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this country."

Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted YEA to Smith's Amendment (Roll Call 234) to attempt to limit or prohibit indefinite military detention  to prohibit the indefinite military detention of any person detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force authority in the United States, its territories, or possessions by providing immediate transfer to a trial and proceedings by a court because because any attempt to limit or prohibit indefinite military detention is desirable, especially since persons detained may include U.S. citizens. Indefinite military detention is a blatant violation of the Sixth Amendment, and an executive who can wield such powers is akin to a monarch or dictator. As Rep. Smith said during consideration of the amendment: "That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take someone and lock them up without due process. It is not necessary. This President has not used the authority. President George W. Bush did not use it after about 2002 and then only in a couple of instances. It is not necessary. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this country."



"H R 4435: On Agreeing to the Amendment 17 to H R 4435
"Vote Date: May 22, 2014Hal Rogers' Vote: NAYBad Vote.
"Use of Military Force.

"During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2015 (NDAA, H.R. 4435), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to sunset the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force 12 months after the enactment of the 2015 NDAA.

"The House rejected Schiff's amendment on May 22, 2014 by a vote of 191 to 233 (Roll Call 237). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, while granted by Congress, gives the president almost unlimited powers to invade countries, overthrow governments, and assassinate people under the pretext of waging the "war on terror." Congress essentially handed over its constitutional authority to declare war to the executive branch, thus giving the executive unconstitutional abilities. Any attempt to end the Authorization for the Use of Military Force is a step in the right direction."



Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted YEA  on Roll Call 237, the Adam Schiff amendment to sunset the 2001 Authorization for the Use of military Force 12 months after the enactment of the 2015 NDAA because  the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, while granted by Congress, gives the president almost unlimited powers to invade countries, overthrow governments, and assassinate people under the pretext of waging the "war on terror." Congress essentially handed over its constitutional authority to declare war to the executive branch, thus giving the executive unconstitutional abilities. Any attempt to end the Authorization for the Use of Military Force is a step in the right direction."






H R 4152: To provide for the costs of loan guarantees for Ukraine
Vote Date: April 1, 2014Vote: AYEBad Vote.
Ukraine Aid.

This bill (H.R. 4152), as amended by the Senate (see Senate vote below), would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine.

[ The Senate version of this legislation - offered in the form of a substitute amendment to the House version, H.R. 4152 - would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that the U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine. ]

The House voted for this legislation on April 1, 2014 by a vote of 378 to 34 (Roll Call 149). We have assigned pluses to the nays because foreign aid is unconstitutional. The rationale for providing U.S. aid to Ukraine is that the country needs our assistance to resist Russian hegemony and build "democracy." Yet the oligarchs wielding power in Ukraine are hardly "democrats," and (because money is fungible) U.S. assistance could effectively be funneled to Russia in the form of Ukrainian energy and debt payments.



Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted Nay on Roll Call 149 This bill (H.R. 4152), as amended by the Senate (see Senate vote below), would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine.  I would have voted Nay, because The rationale for providing U.S. aid to Ukraine is that the country needs our assistance to resist Russian hegemony and build "democracy." Yet the oligarchs wielding power in Ukraine are hardly "Democrats," and (because money is fungible) U.S. assistance could effectively be funneled to Russia in the form of Ukrainian energy and debt payments.





















"S 540: Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act
:"Vote Date: February 11, 2014Hal Rogers' Vote: AYEBad Vote.
"Debt Limit Suspension.

"This bill (S. 540), entitled the "Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act," would suspend the national debt limit on federal debt through March 15, 2015 - the temporary aspect of the legislation. But the additional debt accumulated between enactment of this bill and March 15, 2015 would not be "temporary," since on the following day the legislation would automatically re-establish the debt limit at a higher level, reflecting the additional debt.

"The House passed S. 540 on February 11, 2014 by a vote of 221 to 201(Roll Call 61). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government should live within its means, suspending the debt limit is even worse than raising it, and most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional."



Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted against this "infinity debt ceiling act" because the government needs to have a debt ceiling, and Congress abdicates its responsibility when it gives the President a blank check and an unlimited debt ceiling, as Hal Rogers and the Republican House of Representatives has done.






















"H R 3547: Omnibus Appropriations.
"Vote Date: January 15, 2014Hal Rogers' Vote: AYEBad Vote.
"Omnibus Appropriations.

"During consideration of the omnibus appropriations bill (H.R. 3547), Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) moved that the House concur with the Senate version of the bill that would provide about $1.1 trillion in discretionary spending in fiscal 2014 for the following federal departments and agencies: Agriculture ($20.9 billion), Commerce-Justice-Science ($51.6 billion), Defense ($572 billion), overseas contingency operations associated with the war in Afghanistan and other counterterrorism operations ($85.2 billion), Energy-Water ($34.1 billion), Financial Services ($21.9 billion), Homeland Security ($39.3 billion), Interior-Environment ($30.1 billion), Labor-HHS-Education ($156.8 billion), Legislative Branch ($4.3 billion), Military Construction-VA ($73.3 billion), State-Foreign Affairs ($49 billion), and Transportation-HUD ($50.9 billion). The legislation satisfies the $1.012 trillion cap on discretionary spending established by the December budget deal, which had repealed a portion of sequestration cuts provided by the 2011 debt limit law. This amounts to a 2.6 percent increase in discretionary spending compared to the sequester-reduced level for fiscal 2013. The bill also includes $98 billion not subject to the budget cap, including funding for war-related and anti-terrorism programs, as well as disaster relief.

"The House concurred with the Senate version of the omnibus appropriations bill on January 15, 2014 by a vote of 359 to 67 (Roll Call 21). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this budget agreement Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our $17 trillion national debt."



Unlike Republican Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted Nay to Roll Call 21 because  with this budget agreement Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our $17 trillion national debt.





"H J RES 59: Making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes
"Vote Date: December 12, 2013Hal Rogers' Vote: AYEBad Vote.
"Budget Agreement.

"During consideration of the Budget Agreement for fiscal 2014 (House Joint Resolution 59), Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) moved that the House concur with the Senate version of the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H. J. Res 59) that would increase the discretionary spending caps for fiscal 2014 and 2015 to $1.012 trillion and $1.014 trillion, respectively. This represents an increase of $26 billion for 2014 and $19 billion for 2015. Furthermore, this amounts to the elimination of $63 billion in sequester cuts for 2014 and 2015. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) explained his no vote on this budget agreement in a Facebook post for December 24, 2013: "Instead of real compromise to reform the biggest budget items contributing to our $17 trillion debt - Social Security, military spending, and Medicare - the bill increases federal spending for special interests by tens of billions of dollars and pays for it by raising taxes on millions of Americans."

"The House concurred with the Senate version of the Budget Resolution on December 12, 2013 by a vote of 332 to 94 (Roll Call 640). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this budget agreement Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our $17 trillion national debt."



Kenneth Stepp would have voted Nay to Roll Call 640 the Budget Resolution on December 12, 2013, because "Instead of real compromise to reform the biggest budget items contributing to our $17 trillion debt - Social Security, military spending, and Medicare - the bill increases federal spending for special interests by tens of billions of dollars and pays for it by raising taxes on millions of Americans."





"H R 2775:  the bill suspended the federal debt limit through February 7, 2014, and continued funding government operations through January 15, 2014 at the fiscal 2013 post-sequestration spending level.
"Vote Date: October 16, 2013Vote: AYEBad Vote.
"Continuing Resolution (GOP Cave-in).
"The impasse over the continuing appropriations bill came to an end when, on the 16th day of the partial government shutdown, the House concurred in a Senate amendment that rewrote the House bill H.R. 2775, which had only contained a provision to prevent ObamaCare subsidies to individuals without verifying income, etc. As amended, the bill suspended the federal debt limit through February 7, 2014, and continued funding government operations through January 15, 2014 at the fiscal 2013 post-sequestration spending level. It did not include any provision to defund ObamaCare.

"On October 16, 2013, Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) offered a motion to concur in the Senate amendment, and the House agreed to his motion by a vote of 285 to 144 (Roll Call 550). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the negotiated deal contained in this bill constituted a cave-in by 87 Republicans that ended the government shutdown as well as the Republican attempt to defund the unconstitutional ObamaCare law."



Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted against this "infinity debt ceiling act" because the government needs to have a debt ceiling, and Congress abdicates its responsibility when it gives the President a blank check and an unlimited debt ceiling, as Hal Rogers and the Republican House of Representatives has done.

Thursday, July 31, 2014

HAL ROGERS FOR THE INFINITY DEBT LIMIT!

"S 540: Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act
"Vote Date: February 11, 2014Hal Rogers' Vote: AYEBad Vote.
"Debt Limit Suspension.

"This bill (S. 540), entitled the "Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act," would suspend the national debt limit on federal debt through March 15, 2015 - the temporary aspect of the legislation. But the additional debt accumulated between enactment of this bill and March 15, 2015 would not be "temporary," since on the following day the legislation would automatically re-establish the debt limit at a higher level, reflecting the additional debt.

"The House passed S. 540 on February 11, 2014 by a vote of 221 to 201(Roll Call 61). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government should live within its means, suspending the debt limit is even worse than raising it, and most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional."



Unlike Republican Congressman Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted NAY to S 540 the Infinity Debt Ceiling Act, putting the federal government debt ceiling at infinity, because the federal government should live within its means, suspending the debt limit is even worse than raising it, and most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional and unwise.











FOUR MORE STRIIKES BY HAL ROGERS AGAINST YOU!

H.AMDT. 579: An amendment to prohibit the use of funds for military operations in or against Libya except under a declaration of war against Libya pursuant to clause 11 in section 8 of article I of the Constitution.
Vote Date: August 7, 2011Hal Rogers' Vote: NAYBad Vote.
Libya. During consideration of the Defense appropriations bill, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) introduced an amendment to prohibit the use of funds in the bill to carry out military actions against Libya unless Congress declares war against Libya.

The Founding Fathers assigned this power to Congress because they did not want a single man deciding when to go to war. Yet President Obama usurped this congressional war-making authority by initiating offensive military actions against Libya without even asking advice from Congress, much less requesting the required declaration of war.

The House rejected the Kucinich amendment on July 8, 2011 by a vote of 169 to 251 (Roll Call 530). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution only Congress has the power "to declare war."



Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp, as your Congressman would have voted yea to the above Roll Call 530 Kucinich amendment because under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution only Congress has the power "to declare war."





S. 365: Budget Control Act of 2011
Vote Date: August 1, 2011Hal Rogers' Vote: AYEBad Vote.
Debt Deal. This legislation (S. 365) provided for an immediate $400 billion increase in the national debt limit, while allowing the President to raise the ceiling an additional $500 billion unless Congress passes a resolution of disapproval.

This legislation also established a process for reducing future cumulative deficit projections by up to $2.4 trillion for fiscal years 2012 through 2021, including the establishment of a supercommittee tasked with recommending cuts totaling up to $1.5 trillion for the 10-year period. If the supercommittee were to fail in recommending at least $1.2 trillion in cuts (and, as we know, the supercommittee failed to recommend any cuts), then the legislation would trigger automatic cuts totaling up to $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

The debt-raising/deficit-cutting package created the appearance that Congress was doing something to rein in out-of-control spending. But in reality, the total national debt would still increase even if the entire dollar amount of cuts called for in the legislation were identified and enacted, since the cuts are not cuts in the absolute sense but cuts in future budget projections. The national debt would continue to go up, but not as fast as before, for the simple reason that cutting (say) $1.2 trillion over 10 years will not offset projected annual $1 trillion-plus deficits.

"The House passed S. 365 on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269 to 161 (Roll Call 690). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the debt deal allows both the national debt and spending to continue their upward trajectories. Moreover, the budget process established by the legislation is clearly unconstitutional since no Congress can bind the actions of future Congresses via the so-called automatic cuts."









Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp would have voted against the above Roll Call 690
because the debt deal allows both the national debt and spending to continue their upward trajectories. Moreover, the budget process established by the legislation is clearly unconstitutional since no Congress can bind the actions of future Congresses via the so-called automatic cuts.








H.Con.Res. 51: Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove the United States Armed Forces from Libya
Vote Date: June 3, 2011Hal Rogers' Vote: NAYBad Vote.
Libya Troop Withdrawal. House Concurrent Resolution 51 would have directed President Obama, "pursuant to ... the War Powers Resolution, to remove the United States Armed Forces from Libya." The War Powers Resolution bars the President from militarily engaging the armed forces for more than 60 days without congressional approval. Obama had not sought congressional approval for undertaking military action in Libya. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), who sponsored H. Con. Res. 51, noted: "In the weeks leading up to the war, the administration had time to consult with the Arab League, the United Nations, the African Union, but apparently had no time to come to this Congress for approval."

The House rejected Kucinich's resolution on June 3, 2011 by a vote of 148 to 265 (Roll Call 412). We have assigned pluses to the yeas not merely because Obama's Libya deployment is now in violation of the War Powers Act's 60-day requirement for congressional authorization, but also because it violates the Constitution, which clearly assigns to Congress the power "to declare war."



Unlike Hal Rogers, Congressman Kenneth Stepp would have voted for the above Roll Call 412 not merely because Obama's Libya deployment is now in violation of the War Powers Act's 60-day requirement for congressional authorization, but also because it violates the Constitution, which clearly assigns to Congress the power "to declare war."





"S. 990: PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011
"Vote Date: May 26, 2011Hal Rogers' Vote: AYEBad Vote.
"Patriot Act Extension. This legislation (S. 990) extended for four years three provisions of the Patriot Act that were set to expire: the "roving wiretap" provision that allows the federal government to wiretap any number of a suspect's telephone/ Internet connections without specifying what they will find or how many connections will be tapped; the "financial records" provision that allows the feds to seize "any tangible thing" that has "relevance" to an investigation; and the "lone wolf" provision that allows spying on non-U.S. citizens without a warrant. These provisions violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which requires that no warrants be issued "but upon probable cause" (a much higher standard than "relevance"), and that warrants must contain language "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

"The Patriot Act even allows the FBI to issue warrants called "National Security Letters" without going to a judge, though this provision was not set to expire and therefore was not part of this legislation.

"The House passed the Patriot Act extension on May 26, 2011 by a vote of 250 to 153 (Roll Call 376). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the provisions that were extended, as well as the Patriot Act as a whole, violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution."



Unlike Hal Rogers, Kenneth Stepp, as your Congressman would have voted NO to the Patriot Act Extension (S. 990) because the provisions that were extended, as well as the Patriot Act as a whole, violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.