*
California Congressman Duncan Hunter may be more conservative than most people in Washington, then again, Hillary Clinton is more conservative than most people in Washington. However, Duncan Hunter has shown that he doesn't always abide by the Constitution he took an oath to uphold.
Here is some of his actual record, which exposeswhere he has voted unconstitutionally. The % conservative is his conservative rating by the New American, which uses the Constitution as the voting guide.
1998 50% Conservative
(22) Constitutional Disclosure of Intelligence Spending, Amendment to H.R. 1775. During consideration of the fiscal 1998 intelligence authorization bill, Representative John Conyers (D-MI) offered this amendment to require publication of the amount spent for intelligence activities and the amount requested by the President for such purposes for the following year. Spending levels for U.S. intelligence agencies (CIA, DIA, NSA, NRO, etc.) are classified but are estimated by news agencies to total about $30 billion per year. This secrecy conflicts with the constitutional provision stating that “a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.” The CIA has simply exempted itself from this constitutional requirement. Nevertheless, the House rejected the amendment on July 9, 1997 by a vote of 192 to 237 (Congressional Record, pages H4984-85, roll call 254; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”).
Spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax, hide, hide, hide.
(23) Juvenile Block Grants, H.R. 1818. This legislation would authorize between $800 million and $850 million in federal block grants to states for juvenile crime prevention during 1998-2002. Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) noted during debate on H.R. 1818 that the bill “furthers Congress’ unconstitutional interference in crime control and prevention by dictating the nature and shape of juvenile crime programs for each of the 50 states.... The Tenth Amendment limits the federal government to those functions explicitly enumerated in the Constitution.... Therefore the federal government has no authority to finance or manage state programs regarding social programs such as juvenile crime.” The House passed the bill anyway on July 15, 1997 by a vote of 413 to 14 (Congressional Record, pages H5245-46, roll call 267; we have assigned pluses to the “nays” and minuses to the “yeas”).
See above.
(26) Eliminating Tobacco Subsidies, Amendment to H.R. 2160. During consideration of the fiscal 1998 agriculture appropriations bill, Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY) offered this amendment to prohibit any money in the bill from being used to pay the salaries of officials who distribute subsidies for tobacco farmers — in effect killing the subsidy. The House rejected the Lowey amendment on July 24, 1997 by a vote of 209 to 216 (Congressional Record, pages H5698-99, roll call 310; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”). Of course, some congressmen voted for the amendment, not because of any principled opposition to agricultural subsidies, but because of the health hazards of smoking. Thus, it is instructive to compare this vote with the next one.
(27) Eliminating Sugar Loan Subsidies, Amendment to H.R. 2160. Like Vote #26, this amendment would have effectively ended an agricultural subsidy by prohibiting salary payments to officials who implement the sugar industry’s non-recourse loan subsidy program. Representative Dan Miller (R-FL) noted that because of this program the consumer “pays $1.4 billion more” in food costs. The House rejected the amendment on July 24, 1997 by a vote of 175 to 253 (Congressional Record, pages H5706-07, roll call 312; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”).
Subsidize everything!
(34) National Educational Testing, Amendment to H.R. 2264. During consideration of the fiscal 1998 Labor/HHS/Education appropriations bill, Representative William Goodling (R-PA) offered this amendment to ban any funds in the bill from being used to create a “voluntary” national educational achievement test. Noting that there are numerous state and private educational achievement tests already available, Representative Charlie Norwood (R-GA) reasoned, “What this debate is really about is not testing, but it is about curriculum.... If the federal government establishes testing on which all of our school systems are judged, the next step will be for the federal government to establish a national curriculum to match the test.” The House adopted the Goodling amendment on September 16, 1997 by a vote of 295 to 125 (Congressional Record, page H7350, roll call 398; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”).
So much for all you who think your public schools are still okay. They won't be for long under Hunter.
1997 80% Conservative
(13) Automatic Funding of Federal Government, Amendment to H.R. 1469. This amendment, sponsored by Rep. George Gekas (R-PA), would put the federal government's spendathon on auto-pilot at the previous year's funding level if Congress and the President fail to pass a budget by the start of the next fiscal year. Rep. David Obey (D-WI) observed that such an action "rewards inaction by the Congress. It rewards lack of hard choices by the Congress.... [It] means we cannot increase the [appropriations] that we agree ought to be increased [or] cut the ones that ought to be cut." In addition, this amendment would allow Congress to side-step its constitutionally derived spending authority. The amendment was passed by the House on May 15, 1997 by a vote of 227 to 197 (Congressional Record, pages H2761-62, roll call 134; we have assigned pluses to the "nays" and minuses to the "yeas").
Spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax, hide, hide, hide.
Summer 1999 50% Conservative
(5) Designating the Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord as Wild and Scenic Rivers, H.R. 193. This bill would designate a combined total of 29 miles of three rivers in Massachusetts as Wild and Scenic under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. Although the bill would prevent the federal government from actually acquiring title or easements for any of the land adjacent to the sections of river in question, through a loophole the government could still acquire such land or easements “under other laws for other purposes.” The House passed the bill on February 23, 1999 by a vote of 395 to 22 (Congressional Record, page H679, roll call 23; we have assigned pluses to the “nays” and minuses to the “yeas”).
Hunter is also a greenie!
(6) Peace Corps Authorization and Expansion, H.R. 669. This bill would authorize $1.3 billion for the Peace Corps through fiscal 2003 — including $270 million in fiscal 2000, an increase of $29 million over the current level. The new funding would allow for an expansion in the number of Peace Corps volunteers from the current level of 6,700 to 10,000 by 2003. The House passed the bill on March 3, 1999 by a vote of 326 to 90 (Congressional Record, page H913, roll call 31; we have assigned pluses to the “nays” and minuses to the “yeas”).
The Peace Corps may be a good idea, but so is supporting our missionaries. Not with our tax dollars.
(7) Authorizing U.S. Peacekeeping in Kosovo, House Concurrent Resolution 42. This bill would authorize the President to “deploy United States Armed Forces personnel to Kosovo as part of a NATO peacekeeping operation implementing a Kosovo peace agreement.” Representative Tom Campbell (R-CA), who opposed the measure, noted: “the United States has not been attacked. Serbia, in whose sovereign territory we recognize Kosovo to be, has not invited us to enter. The United States would thus be exercising force against the sovereign territory of a country that has not attacked us....” The House adopted the measure on March 11, 1999 by a vote of 219 to 191 (Congressional Record, pages H1249-50, roll call 49; we have assigned pluses to the “nays” and minuses to the “yeas”).
Duncan is a NWO lackey.
(10) Prohibit Funding of Ground Troops In Kosovo, H.R. 1569. This legislation would prohibit funding of U.S. ground forces in Yugoslovia without prior congressional authorization. At the time of this vote, U.S. forces were already engaged in the air war against Yugoslavia — without prior congressional authorization. The House adopted the measure on April 28, 1999 by a vote of 249 to 180 (Congressional Record, pages H2413-14, roll call 100; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”).
(11) Removal of U.S. Troops From the Kosovo Conflict, House Concurrent Resolution 82. This measure would direct the removal of the U.S. military from the conflict in Yugoslavia, ending our offensive operations against that nation. Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) noted: “The Serbs have done nothing to us, and we should not be over there perpetuating a war.” The House rejected the measure (thereby acquiescing to President Clinton’s offensive against Yugoslavia while later hypocritically voting against a declaration of war) on April 28, 1999 by a vote of 139 to 290 (Congressional Record, page H2427, roll call 101; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”).
(12) Authorizing Air Operations for the Kosovo Conflict, Senate Concurrent Resolution 21. This legislation would authorize continuing offensive air operations and missile attacks against Yugoslavia. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) said that “it should be obvious that the President does not need this resolution to use air power because he is already using it” — an observation that speaks volumes about the failure of Congress to assert its authority by insisting on the removal of U.S. forces (vote #11). The House rejected the resolution on April 28, 1999 by a vote of 213 to 213 (Congressional Record, pages H2451-52, roll call 103; we have assigned pluses to the “nays” and minuses to the “yeas”).
(13) Preventing U.S. Invasion of Yugoslavia, Amendment to H.R. 1664. Representative Ernest Istook (R-OK) offered this amendment to the Defense supplemental appropriations bill to prohibit the use of any funds authorized therein for “any plan to invade the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with ground forces of the United States, except in time of war.” Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL) objected to the amendment on the grounds that it was similar to H.R. 1569 (vote #10), and therefore unnecessary. “They are very, very similar,” said Stearns. “Do members think they have to make another stand...?” Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) argued otherwise: “It was said that this is the same vote that we had last week, but last week’s vote is sitting on the table and it is going to sit there. This one may well go someplace and have an effect.” The House rejected the amendment on May 6, 1999 by a vote of 117 to 301 (Congressional Record, pages H2891-92, roll call 119; we have assigned pluses to the “yeas” and minuses to the “nays”).
How many countries can we invade for no good reason?
(19) Gun Control, H.R. 2122. This legislation would clamp down on gun sales at gun shows, which for the purposes of this bill are defined as any event “at which 50 or more firearms are offered or exhibited for sale, transfer, or exchange” or at which there are ten or more vendors. Under this bill, a person offering a firearm for sale who is not himself licensed is prevented from selling that firearm directly to the buyer. The licensed vendor must complete a background check before the transfer of the weapon. The House rejected the measure on June 18, 1999 by a vote of 147 to 280 (Congressional Record, pages H4656-57, roll call 244; we have assigned pluses to the “nays” and minuses to the “yeas”).
Hunter is no hunter - he is a gun grabber and is violating his oath of office.
