ch: Read This!

Did Your Congressperson Help our Troops?

Rhetoric is easy. Any politician with a high-priced team of speechwriters and consultants can fashion speeches, ads and fliers that disguise his or her record on issues of the day. Rather, when looking at members of Congress, it’s important to examine how they voted on legislation and whether their rhetoric matches actions.

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, a non-partisan group “dedicated to pushing for solutions to the Troops’ issues and concerns through issue advocacy,” just released its 2006 Congressional Scorecard.

Find out how your member voted here.

For example, here in Minnesota I’m represented by retiring Representative Martin Olav Sabo, retiring Senator Mark Dayton, and Senator Norm Coleman. Rep. Sabo got a B+, Senator Dayton an A-, and Coleman a D.

Why the D for Coleman? A record of not supporting military funding on key troop issues.

Here are two key votes:

Coleman voted against “Dorgan Amdt. No. 4292; To establish a special committee of the Senate to investigate the awarding and carrying out of contracts to conduct activities in Afghanistan and Iraq and to fight the war on terrorism.”

Because of Senators like Norm Coleman, the amendment to look into contracting fraud failed.

Coleman voted to table the “Durbin Modified Amendment No. 4781, to appropriate, with an offset, an additional $2,000,000 for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army for the improvement of imaging for traumatic brain injuries. (By 54 yeas to 43 nays (Vote No. 222).”

Because of Senators like Norm Coleman, the amendment to help treat traumatic brain injuries failed.