Back to Top

Category Archives: News

Guide to the Nov. 5 TX Constitutional Amendments Election

Why was this so hard to find?

FREE: A Voter’s Guide to the Nov. 5 TX Constitutional Amendments Election

Published October 21, 2013 7:50am by Sentinel Staff

 

 

 

The following Voters Guide, which presents the nine proposed Texas Constitutional Amendments on the Nov. 5, ballot, is funded and published by the League of Women Voters of Texas Education Fund.

 

For more than 90 years, helping voters cast an informed vote when they go to the polls has been the primary goal of the League of Women Voters.

 

As an organization that encourages informed and active participation in government, the League believes that all of us are stakeholders in Making Democracy Work. Neither the League nor the Education Fund supports or opposes any political party or candidate.

 

This guide states the official ballot language for each proposed constitutional amendment, followed by an explanation of the amendment, the arguments for and the arguments against.

 

The propositions were researched by trustees of the League of Women Voters of Texas Education Fund, who reviewed the legislative history and contacted persons and organizations who have supported and opposed the proposed amendments. See the Constitutional Amendments page at www.lwvtexas.org for links to the legislative history and the list of witnesses for and against each of the proposed amendments.

 

Check the League’s website for other helpful information about elections, voting and issues: www.lwvtexas.org.

 

Proposition 1

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a member of the armed services of the United States who is killed in action.

Explanation

The proposed amendment would allow the surviving spouse of a member of the U.S. armed services who was killed in action to be exempt from paying local property taxes based on all or part of the total appraised value of the homestead. This proposed amendment follows prior amendments that have passed, granting property tax exemptions to veterans who are 100% disabled and their surviving spouses.

Under Proposition 1 and its enabling bill SB 163, a surviving spouse is eligible if he or she has not remarried since the death of the spouse who served in the armed forces and if the qualifying homestead was the residence of the spouse at the time of death. Upon remarriage, the surviving spouse would lose the property tax exemption. The surviving spouse would be able to transfer the exemption to a new homestead, but it would be limited to the dollar amount of the prior homestead exemption.

Arguments For

• The proposed amendment would allow local governments in Texas to assist surviving spouses of U.S. armed services members who have been killed in action by providing valuable relief during such a difficult time. Surviving spouses who qualify would be able to save money on property taxes and could use this money elsewhere.

• Surviving spouses would be able to transfer the exemption to a new residence if the surviving spouse chose to move within the state.

Arguments Against

• School districts would receive less revenue from property taxes so the state would have to cover the reduction by pulling from state general revenue, creating a cost to the state.

• Local governments would lose revenue, especially in cities and towns where military families largely populate the area. This would result in a projected yearly loss of up to $84,000 from counties, $93,000 from cities, and $45,000 from school districts by 2018 (SB 163 Fiscal Note). An increase in the number of people who receive property tax exemptions might require local governments to increase taxes for other taxpayers.

 

—–

Proposition 2

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment eliminating an obsolete requirement for a State Medical Education Board and a State Medical Education Fund, neither of which is operational.

Explanation

In 1952, voters amended the constitution to direct the Texas Legislature to create the State Medical Education Board (SMEB) and a scholarship fund to issue loans to medical students who agreed to practice in rural areas of Texas. In 1973, the Legislature created the SMEB. In 1987, the Legislative Budget Board reported that only 11 percent of loan recipients since 1973 were practicing in rural Texas counties, and only 14 percent of those were in medically underserved areas. No new loans have been issued since January 1988.

In 1989, after a recommendation by the Sunset Advisory Commission, the Legislature attached the SMEB to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB). All existing loans have been serviced or turned over to the attorney general for default collection. Loan repayment programs are now used instead of direct loans to medical students to attract physicians to practice in rural Texas.

The proposed constitutional amendment, and its enabling bill HB 1061, would remove references to these defunct entities in the constitution and state law.

Arguments For

• Since the SMEB and its education fund are no longer operational, references to them should be removed from the state’s unwieldy constitution.

Arguments Against

• The SMEB and its education fund are obsolete and no loans have been issued since 1988, so a constitutional amendment to remove references to them is unnecessary.

 

—–

Proposition 3

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment to authorize a political subdivision of this state to extend the number of days that aircraft parts that are exempt from ad valorem taxation due to their location in this state for a temporary period may be located in this state for purposes of qualifying for the tax exemption.

Explanation

Currently, in order to promote economic development in the state, the Texas Constitution allows local taxing authorities to exempt from ad valorem taxation property that is in Texas temporarily. This tax exemption is commonly referred to as a “freeport exemption.” Eligible property includes goods, wares, merchandise, other tangible property, and ores, other than oil, natural gas, and other petroleum products. To be eligible for the exemption, the property must be acquired in or imported into Texas for export; detained for assembly, storage, manufacturing, processing, or fabrication; and shipped out of Texas no later than 175 days after acquisition or importation.

Eligible property currently includes aircraft and aircraft parts used for maintenance or repairs by certified air carriers. The proposed amendment and its enabling bill HB 3121 authorize the governing body of a political subdivision that already grants a freeport exemption to extend, up to 730 days (two years) after acquisition or importation, the date when aircraft parts with an exemption have to be transported outside of the state. The extension would apply only to the political subdivision that grants it.

If passed, the amendment would take effect January 1, 2014, and apply only to a tax year that begins on or after that date.

Arguments For

• The proposed extension of the freeport exemption would provide an economic development tool designed to make Texas competitive in the aerospace industry that contributes billions to the state’s economy. Texas is one of only a few states with a tax on inventory. Since aerospace suppliers often require inventory to be onsite for much longer than 175 days, at least one aerospace company has moved its storage or operations to another state because of the inventory tax.

• Granting an extension would be totally at the option of each local government already granting an exemption.

• Loss of tax revenue to a school district that grants a freeport exemption may be offset by additional state aid, since the amount of the exemption is subtracted from the market value of inventory or property to determine the taxable value for the taxing authority. Any extra cost to the state could be offset by additional revenues from increased economic development and jobs.

Arguments Against

• Singling out one group for special tax exemption status raises issues of uniformity in taxation. If the extension is authorized for aircraft parts, similar industries that make specialized parts and have a high portion of idle inventory may seek similar extensions.

• Granting an extension reduces tax revenues for local governments.

• An increase in exemptions by school districts could result in higher costs to the state.

 

—–

Proposition 4

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of part of the market value of the residence homestead of a partially disabled veteran or the surviving spouse of a partially disabled veteran if the residence homestead was donated to the disabled veteran by a charitable organization.

Explanation

Currently, the Texas Constitution provides that a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran, or the veteran’s surviving spouse, is entitled to an exemption from ad valorem taxation of the market value of the disabled veteran’s resident homestead, subject to certain restrictions.

This proposed amendment, and its enabling legislation HB 97, would provide a similar exemption to a partially disabled veteran or surviving spouse, if the homestead has been donated by a charitable organization at no cost to the veteran. The amount of the exemption would be a percentage of the market value of the residence homestead that is equal to the percentage of disability of the veteran. Proposition 4 would allow the legislature to provide additional eligibility requirements for the exemption, and would not affect whether a qualified disabled veteran was entitled to another exemption for veterans for which he or she may qualify. It also allows partially disabled veterans to be added to the list of individuals authorized to pay property taxes in installments as provided by current law.

Arguments For

• Texas charitable organizations have given homes to disabled veterans, but in some cases the veteran is unable to pay the property taxes, resulting in an unintended consequence of foreclosure. These veterans have sacrificed for our country and are deserving of help. The cost of the exemption is small because only a dozen or so homes per year are donated cost-free to disabled veterans.

• Partially disabled veterans who receive these homes are not likely to return to full employment and need help with their taxes.

Arguments Against

• Singling out one group for special tax exemption status, even though deserving, raises issues of uniformity in taxation and could open the door to continued erosion of the tax base.

• If the purpose of the bill is to help partially disabled veterans keep their homes while they are unable to pay property taxes, the exemption should not be permanent. It should expire when the veteran can afford to pay property taxes.

 

—–

Proposition 5

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment to authorize the making of a reverse mortgage loan for the purchase of homestead property and to amend lender disclosures and other requirements in connection with a reverse mortgage loan.

Explanation

A “reverse mortgage for purchase” allows a senior aged 62 or older to purchase a new principal residence and obtain a reverse mortgage within a single transaction. Texas is the second largest market in the country for reverse mortgages, but the only state that does not offer the “reverse mortgage for purchase” because it is not authorized in the state constitution.

A reverse mortgage is a form of home equity loan that does not require a monthly payment. During the course of the loan, the debt increases with the addition of various costs such as interest, mortgage insurance premiums, and servicing fees, while the homeowner’s equity decreases. Repayment of the loan is deferred until the borrower dies, sells, or moves out of the residence. While reverse mortgages are a small market nationally, approximately 70,000 originated per year, it could grow dramatically in the decades ahead spurred by an aging baby boomer population.

Proposition 5 would enable Texas seniors to use “reverse mortgages for purchase” to acquire a new residence. It would also require reverse mortgage lenders to expand currently required counseling to borrowers to include disclosure of the specific behaviors that can lead to foreclosure on a property.

Arguments For

• This proposition saves costs for seniors by allowing a reverse mortgage loan to be set up as part of a purchase rather than after a purchase to eliminate duplicative processes.

• Using a “reverse mortgage for purchase,” the homeowner can occupy a new residence without making a single mortgage payment. This helps seniors relocate to other geographical areas or downsize to homes that better meet their needs.

• Reverse mortgage loans are typically easier to qualify for than traditional loans, which have income and credit score requirements to support the borrower’s ability to meet repayment commitments.

Arguments Against

• All reverse mortgages are complex financial products. Surveys have found that consumers struggle to understand and make good decisions even after required counseling.

• Homeowners can lose a lifetime of home equity as a result of fraud, scams, misleading advertising, aggressive sales tactics and discriminatory practices sometimes associated with reverse mortgages. This risk increases significantly when state regulation and enforcement are weak.

• As baby boomers consider the reverse mortgage market, their choices may put them at considerable risk at a time in their lives when making a financial recovery is unlikely.

 

—–

Proposition 6

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas to assist in the financing of priority projects in the state water plan to ensure the availability of adequate water resources.

Explanation

The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) develops a state water plan based on information from each of 16 regional water-planning groups. Existing state funding relies primarily on issuance of general obligation bonds, legislative appropriations, and federal grants that finance loans to local and regional water suppliers. In November 2011, voters approved a constitutional amendment that authorized the TWDB to issue additional general obligation bonds not to exceed $6 billion at any time.

Proposition 6 establishes two funds to finance water plan projects: the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT) and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas (SWIRFT). The two funds would receive financial resources for water projects, including revenue authorized by the state legislature, investment earnings and interest, and proceeds from the sale of bonds. The two funds would be part of the state treasury but outside the general revenue fund, a constitutional requirement to give the legislature control over disbursements.

Under Proposition 6, TWDB would have the power to enter into bond enhancement agreements to make bonds more attractive to purchasers. If the legislature provides authorization and the Legislative Budget Board approves, TWDB would have the authority to issue bonds and related credit agreements and to make direct loans for water projects in the state water plan. Repayment of loans would provide a revolving cash flow for additional loans.

HB 1025 authorizes the transfer of $2 billion from the economic stabilization fund, commonly known as the Rainy Day Fund, if the amendment passes. Money in the fund would be available to provide support for low-interest loans, longer repayment terms for loans, incremental repurchase terms for projects in which the state owns an interest, and deferral of loan payments. The enabling legislation for the proposed amendment, HB 4, prescribes how the funds are to be invested and how they may be apportioned within the state water plan. At least 10 percent of funds would be applied to projects designed to serve rural areas and 20 percent for water conservation or reuse.

Arguments For

• Ensuring an adequate water supply is essential to the public and economic health of Texas. These two funds provide a sustainable mechanism for funding water development projects with an initial transfer of $2 billion from the Rainy Day Fund to seed a revolving cash flow for making loans for water projects.

• Responding to the current drought emergency is an appropriate use of the Rainy Day Fund and will provide a better return on investment than if the money were left in that fund.

• Without the necessary funding for priority projects in the state water plan, Texas stands to lose millions of jobs and suffer reduced economic activity and decreased tax revenues.

Arguments Against

• These two new funds are unnecessary as there is already available funding for water development projects administered by TWDB.

• While TWDB needs to proceed with priority projects, taking money from the Rainy Day Fund is inappropriate. Reducing the amount in this fund could reduce the state’s excellent credit rating and affect the state’s ability to respond to a natural disaster or other emergency situations. The legislature should make a separate appropriation from the general fund.

• The state should not take on the financing of water plan projects. Financing should be provided by those benefiting from the projects.

 

—–

Proposition 7

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment authorizing a home-rule municipality to provide in its charter the procedure to fill a vacancy on its governing body for which the unexpired term is 12 months or less.

Explanation

Almost all Texas cities of more than 5,000 population have adopted a home rule or an independent city charter. A home rule city can pass any regulations or laws it deems necessary as long as they are consistent with the state constitution and statutes.

Section 11, Article XI of the Texas Constitution prohibits a city with terms of office between two and four years from filling vacancies by appointment. These cities must fill vacancies by majority vote during a special election held within 120 days after the start of the vacancy.

The proposed constitutional amendment and its enabling bill HB 1372 would authorize a home rule city to provide in its charter a procedure other than a special election to fill a vacancy in its governing body for which the unexpired term is 12 months or less.

Arguments For

• Proposition 7 would cut taxpayer costs. When an elected city official passes away or otherwise leaves office, the Constitution requires the city to hold a special election within 120 days even if only a few months remain in the term. Taxpayers pay thousands of dollars to hold special elections only a few months before a regular election.

• This proposition would provide parity in election regulations. Vacancies for elected city officials with terms of office of less than two years can be filled by appointment. This proposition would allow vacancies to be filled by the same process for all elected officials. It would preserve democratic accountability because cities would have to hold elections as usual after the expiration of an appointed official’s term.

Arguments Against

• Proposition 7 might increase the opportunity for corruption by allowing city officials to appoint one another.

• Voting and elections are the best way to ensure democratic accountability. The cost of special elections is a small price to pay to ensure accountability.

 

—–

Proposition 8

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment repealing Section 7, Article IX, Texas Constitution, which relates to the creation of a hospital district in Hidalgo County.

Explanation

Proposition 8 would remove from the Texas Constitution a 1960 amendment that authorized the creation of a hospital district in Hidalgo County with a maximum tax rate of 10 cents per $100 valuation of taxable property. This limit is below all other counties in Texas, and no hospital district has been created in Hidalgo County. Repealing the 1960 amendment, which applies only to Hidalgo County, would allow it to come under Section 4 of the Texas Constitution which provides for hospital districts in all counties, with a maximum tax rate of 75 cents per $100 valuation of all taxable property.

If Proposition 8 is passed, the formation of a hospital district in Hidalgo County and the district’s tax rate would require approval from the county’s voters during an election.

o Arguments For

• Hidalgo is the only county in the state with a tax limitation of 10 cents per $100 property valuation. It is also the largest county without a hospital district. The existing limitation hinders its ability to create and operate a sustainable district. Passage of Proposition 8 would allow Hidalgo County the same taxing rate that other counties have.

• Hidalgo County has a high rate of uninsured residents, and this proposition could help the county establish a hospital district and obtain federal funds for much-needed emergency care for the poor.

o Arguments Against

• Passage of this proposition would likely increase the taxes for property owners in Hidalgo County, since a hospital district could be created with a tax rate as high as 75 cents per $100 valuation of all property.

• An increase in taxes could hurt the very people this proposition is hoping to serve: the poor.

 

—–

Proposition 9

Official Ballot Language: The constitutional amendment relating to expanding the types of sanctions that may be assessed against a judge or justice following a formal proceeding instituted by the State Commission on Judicial Contact.

Explanation

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC) was created in 1965, through a constitutional amendment, to investigate allegations of judicial misconduct or disability and to discipline judges. The SCJC is responsible for ensuring that Texas judges comply with standards of conduct established in the Texas Constitution and by the Texas Supreme Court. Currently, after a formal disciplinary proceeding, the SCJC may issue an order of public censure or recommend removal or retirement of the judge/justice.

During its review of the SCJC, the Sunset Advisory Commission recommended that the SCJC be authorized to use its full range of disciplinary actions following a formal proceeding. If this proposed amendment passes, the SCJC may at its discretion issue a private or public admonition, warning, reprimand, or requirement that the person obtain additional training or education, as well as the censure or formal recommendations of resignation or retirement.

Arguments For

• Proposition 9 would lead to greater public accountability for judges and justices; continue to promote public confidence in the integrity, independence, competence, and impartiality of the judiciary, and encourage judges to maintain high standards of conduct both on and off the bench.

Arguments Against

• Stronger measures than those provided by Proposition 9 are needed to reinforce the SCJC’s authority to discipline judges and hold them accountable for judicial misconduct.

Senator Cruz returns to Texas welcome after shutdown battle

By Jim Forsyth

SAN ANTONIO (Reuters) – Republican U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, a favorite of the conservative Tea Party movement, returned home to a rousing welcome in Texas on Saturday after his attempt to derail Obamacare with a shutdown of the federal government led to sharp criticism of his tactics as reckless and futile.

“After two months in Washington, it’s great to be back in America,” Cruz joked in speaking to a crowd of about 750 people in a packed downtown San Antonio hotel ballroom.

Cruz was greeted with an eight-minute standing ovation in an appearance organized by the Texas Federation of Republican Women. People in attendance, many of them wearing red to show their support for keeping Texas a conservative-leaning state, lined up to greet him.

The speech and another talk earlier in the day at a panel in Austin marked Cruz’s first public appearance in his home state of Texas since his part in the showdown in Washington over the rollout of Obamacare that resulted in a 16-day shutdown of the federal government that ended on Thursday.

A related stalemate over the debt limit threatened to lead to a default on U.S. government debt until the Senate on Wednesday voted 81-18 to end the crisis and the House of Representatives followed with a vote of 285-144 to approve the plan, allowing government to open without defunding Obamacare.

Cruz in his speech in San Antonio blasted Senate Republican leaders for “failing to stand with House Republicans against the train wreck that is Obamacare.”

He declined to criticize any Republicans by name.

While he said the agreement to end the shutdown and extend the debt ceiling was a “lousy deal for the American people,” Cruz said the battle he and other Republicans waged will end up helping his party.

Cruz became a lightning rod for criticism from Democrats and even from key Republicans when he staged a 21-hour filibuster-style talk on the floor of the Senate last month, as part of his attempt to defund the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The Texas senator, who has been in office for 10 months since his election last year, received scathing criticism from Democrats, the White House and even some of his fellow Republicans in the Senate during the shutdown and the debate leading up to it.

Senator John McCain from Arizona, a former presidential candidate, and Representative Peter King from New York have been two of the most vocal Republican opponents of Cruz’s tactics, with McCain calling Cruz and his allies “wacko birds.”

Cruz also took a hit in the polls. A Gallup poll released on October 10 found he had gained significant name recognition, but the percentage of Americans with an unfavorable view of him has jumped to 36 percent from 18 percent in June.

But the welcome Cruz received in Texas demonstrated his popularity among many Republican activists has grown.

In an interview with Reuters after his speech, Cruz said there is “a lot to be encouraged about” after the battle in Washington.

“We saw what can happen when the American people unite, when the American people stand up,” he said. “What the American people want is economic growth and job creation. They are crying out for something that fixes all the enormous damage that Obamacare is causing.”

(Additional reporting by Kevin Murphy in Kansas City, Missouri; Editing by Alex Dobuzinskis and Eric Walsh)

Restrict our freedoms to “sooth” the phobia of a few?

The Texas Penal Code makes it illegal to display “a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm.”

what the hell does that mean? alarm who? “people leaving the store “expressed concern,”” and ‘men had the rifles “on their laps and in hand.””

in their hand how? as they set it down by the table? there are tons of stories about LIB’S “alarmed” by the site of a gun that isn’t a “gun” a drawing a pic on a t shirt a hand gun that’s really a hand of a 6yo even a POP TART

why should we have laws that restrict our freedoms to “sooth” the phobia of a few?
Look Mr.,Miss. Lib in your average week you are next to , in proximity of 100’s of “arms” just like spiders, snakes, and other dangerous things that can wound or kill.

you are more likely to die in your bathroom than get shot especially by a Law Abiding Citizen. Make no mistake the law abiding is what we are talking about in every gun law debate. criminals by definition do not fallow LAWS.

‘That’s What America’s About’: Armed Gun-Rights Activists Rally at the Alamo | TheBlaze.com

Story by the Associated Press; curated by Dave Urbanski

SAN ANTONIO (AP) — Several hundred gun-rights activists armed with rifles and shotguns rallied outside the Alamo Saturday in a demonstration that broke a longstanding tradition of not staging such events at the enduring symbol of Texas independence.

Organizers called the “Come and Take It San Antonio!” rally after a confrontation two months ago in which San Antonio police threatened to arrest several gun-rights activists who were carrying their rifles outside of a Starbucks. They oppose a local ordinance that they say impinges on gun rights.

Image source: KEYE-TV

Demonstrators carried flags emblazoned with “Come and Take It” and “Don’t Tread on Me” that fluttered above the crowd as gun-rights leaders and politicians spoke about Texas liberty and the Second Amendment.

San Antonio Police Chief William McManus mingled in the crowd, which police estimated was 300 to 400 people. He chatted with rally organizers while a substantial police presence remained outside the event’s perimeter.

The event was organized by several gun-rights groups that advocate for the open carrying of long guns — rifles and shotguns — which is allowed under Texas law.

Open Carry Texas President C.J. Chivers told the crowd that he wanted to hold the event in San Antonio because of a confrontation here between police and gun-rights advocates a couple months ago.

“[The San Antonio Police Department] is no longer going to be messing with us,” Chivers said from a podium, with the Alamo’s famed Spanish mission behind him.

Image source: KEYE-TV

The city has an ordinance that limits the carrying of firearms, especially at public events.

Asked about the enforcement of that ordinance Saturday, McManus said, “there are too many issues associated with trying to enforce every ordinance here today.” He said his priority was that people being allowed to exercise their constitutional rights and that everyone remain safe. He said police preparations had been underway for about two weeks.

Chivers and others credited police in helping to coordinate the event. Before the rally began, announcements were made to remove ammunition from rifle chambers, and volunteers walked through the crowds inserting red straws in rifles to show the chambers were clear.

Colt Szczygiel, 27 — a retired U.S. Marine rifleman who just moved to Converse, Texas from Connecticut in September — was excited to be making his first visit to the Alamo on such an occasion. With a Bushmaster ACR rifle hanging from his shoulder, Szczygiel read a plaque about the site’s history like any first-time tourist.

“It’s great to be able to come here with my rifle for the first time,” he said, adding that Texas’ gun-friendly culture made the move all the more attractive coming from Waterbury, Conn. Szczygiel noted that he’d participated in gun-rights rallies there, but this was his first one in Texas.

Image source: KEYE-TV

Reactions from tourists who happened upon the demonstration were varied.

Don Norwood, 49, of Little Rock, Ark., was visiting with his wife and daughter. He hadn’t expected the demonstration, but gazing over the crowd, he said, “it’s healthy, that’s what America’s about.”

Asked if it made him nervous to approach the old mission chapel through the armed crowd, Norwood said, “no, they’re not a threat to me.”

A 21-year-old from Houston, who would only give his name as Neil, was a little more apprehensive. At the edge of the crowd he paused while his girlfriend snapped photos.

“I was just trying to figure out what was going on and then I saw everybody carrying their weapons and I caught on,” he said. “I don’t own any guns, but I do feel people have the right to bear arms as per the constitution.”

He did express doubts though about the location. “Why here? Why come out in an open park? Why in front of a monument? I do think that’s a little inappropriate.”

It was a question raised earlier by the Alamo Defenders’ Descendants Association. Lee Spencer White, its president, said her group considers the Alamo its family cemetery and as hallowed ground should remain free of demonstrations, which historically have been held on the adjacent plaza.

From 1905 to 2011, the Daughters of the Republic of Texas were the Alamo’s custodians. But in 2011, lawmakers gave the state’s General Land office control of the monument where Col. William Travis and 200 Texas defenders famously died in a Mexican army siege in 1836. It was Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson who approved the rally here.

“I respect the opinions of folks who say this is not the right place,” Patterson said to the crowd on Saturday. “But I submit to you there’s one standard we should apply to gatherings here at this sacred cradle of Texas liberty and that is whether our activity and our purpose would be supported by those men who gave it all.”

Patterson, who is running for lieutenant governor, did ask attendees to not block the path to the mission and to leave their rifles and signs outside when entering the chapel. “Even though you can lawfully do that, we have a reverence for that location where those men died.”

Here’s a report from KEYE-TV:

Here’s a report from KENS-TV on the three men behind the “open carry” demonstration conducted outside of a San Antonio Starbucks which helped lead to Saturday’s demonstration a the Alamo:

Thu Aug 29 16:24:41 PDT 2013

via ‘That’s What America’s About’: Armed Gun-Rights Activists Rally at the Alamo | TheBlaze.com.

plans for Mao’s birthday: 70 million dead

the lefts fav bff from the way past is mao he killed  because of his glorious revolution 70 million people, can you say  Liberal Death Culture. here’s what China should do take the $2.5 billion  divide it by the  70 million dead  35.714285714285714285714285714286 per person killed by MAO say you’re sorry and set them FREE to live their own lives. BTW  China’s “Great Leap Forward”, sounds an awful lot like the obama/left slogan how many will they KILL here ?

The late leader’s legacy is often associated in the West with events such as China’s Great Leap Forward, when tens of millions died through famine, as well as the Cultural Revolution.

http://news.sky.com/story/1155699/outrage-over-chinas-plans-for-maos-birthday

via Outrage over China’s plans for Mao’s birthday.

(treachery, treason, knavery, dishonest, ASSWAGON) McConnell: No More Shutdowns Over Obamacare

 

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear on Thursday that repealing Obamacare would never be used by Republicans again to bring the federal government to a halt.

“One of my favorite old Kentucky sayings is there’s no education in the second kick of a mule,” McConnell told The Hill. “The first kick of a mule was when we shut the government down in the mid-1990s — and the second kick was over the last 16 days.”

“There will not be a government shutdown,” the Kentucky Republican added.

Urgent: Should the House Have Agreed to Debt Deal? Vote Here 

The Obamacare strategy was pushed by several young congressional Republicans backed by the tea party — including freshman Sen. Ted Cruz, who spoke against the healthcare plan for more than 21 hours on the Senate floor last month — which led to a 16-day partial shutdown of the government and jeopardized the nation’s borrowing authority.

“I think we have fully now acquainted our new members with what a losing strategy that is,” McConnell told The Hill. 

The federal government reopened 
on Thursday after a battle-scarred Congress approved a bipartisan measure to end the shutdown and avert the possibility of an economy-jarring default on U.S. obligations.

President Barack Obama signed the measure early Thursday after the House and Senate passed it late Wednesday.

The legislation funds the government through Jan. 15 and extends the nation’s debt ceiling through Feb. 7. It ended a brawl with Republicans who tried to use the must-pass legislation to mount a last-ditch effort to derail the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and demand concessions on the budget.

The White House directed all agencies to reopen promptly and in an orderly fashion. More than 350,000 furloughed federal employees across the country were expected to return to work on Thursday.

Standard & Poor’s estimated the shutdown has taken $24 billion out of the economy, and the Fitch credit rating agency warned on Tuesday that it was reviewing its AAA rating on U.S. government debt for a possible downgrade.

McConnell told The Hill that the fight to stop the healthcare law would not take place in January, either, even though he and many other Republicans “hate, detest, and despise Obamacare.”

Noting that some Democrats would like to repeal the 2.3 percent medical-device tax that is used to finance the healthcare law, McConnell said Republicans are out of luck on ending or altering Obamacare before 2017 “unless Democrats get so shaky about parts of it.

Urgent: Should the House Have Agreed to Debt Deal? Vote Here 

“They may, depending upon the amount of heat they get from their constituents because of rising premiums, because of job loss, because of the chaos of the exchanges, they may be open to changes,” he said.

“But full-scale repeal is obviously something that’s not going to be achievable until I’m the majority leader of the Senate and we have a new president,” McConnell said.

In several exclusive interviews with Newsmax in recent weeks, McConnell related the “math problem” Republicans face in the Senate in trying to repeal Obamacare.

The GOP holds 46 seats in the upper chamber, versus 52 for Democrats. The Senate also has two independents, and they caucus with the Democrats.

“We demonstrated once again that every single Republican is in favor of defunding Obamacare,” he told Newsmax after senators backed a measure to temporarily fund the government that Obama later rejected. “We had a solid party-line vote. Our difficulty, of course, in achieving that has to do with simple mathematics.”

Meanwhile, McConnell told The Hill that he took over the negotiations leading to the final agreement after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and the White House rejected the latest offer from House Republicans.

“By the time I came in [Wednesday], it was clear to me that it was up to me to get us out of the government shutdown and make sure we didn’t default,” he told The Hill.

He said he related the party’s untenable position to fellow Republican senators privately via football analogies, looking toward being in a better position to seek cuts in spending and entitlement programs next year.

“So I met with my members. I said, ‘Look, I think we all know I have a weak hand here,'” McConnell told The Hill. “I’m on my own two-yard line. The offensive line is a little shaky, and what best I think we can do is get off a punt here to try to get into a better field position.”

But his requirements for the deal were that it not raise taxes nor jeopardize the spending cuts imposed through sequestration.

“We didn’t raise taxes and we didn’t bust the caps, but we’ll be back at it in January and February, which is why I call it a punt, with better field position to fight again another day,” McConnell told The Hill.

McConnell: No More Shutdowns Over Obamacare.

MORE Liberal Death Culture: body of baby; bag of teen

WHY pay $200 for an abortion when you can just use a trash can??? Don’t be to hard on this teen in the very near future your kids or grand kids that survive the dumpster will have to make a choice to comply with the Liberal Death Culture laws like China’s One-Child Policy or not. OH whats that you SAY that won’t happen here… really? Kermit Gosnell was found guilty of murdering three babies born alive during failed abortions by “snipping” their spinal cords. His former employees alleged that “hundreds” of babies were killed in this way.

 

Today the body of a baby was discovered in the bag of a 17-year-old teen suspected of shoplifting at a Victoria’s Secret store in Manhatten. People are rightly shocked by this event.

However, what if I told you that this sort of thing is happening routinely, all across the country, as well as in other parts of the world? And that the only reason that it’s making national headlines this time is because the discovery of the baby’s body was at a Victoria Secret store, which gives the story that extra bizarre twist, with just a hint of weird sexuality, that will grab attention?

Take a look at the following list…which is far from complete. I’ve simply compiled some of the most shocking, and most recent incidents.

China’s “sewer baby” was flushed down a toilet, before becoming stuck in a sewage pipe. The baby was rescued by firefighters.

Here are the incidents in just the past eight months or so:

  • October 17 – A 17-year-old girl is stopped at a Victoria’s Secret store in Manhatten for suspected shoplifting, and admits that in her bag she has the body of a baby that she gave birth to the day previous.
  • October 11 – A newborn baby is found, bleeding but alive, with part of his umbilical cord still attached, abandoned on the concrete in the back yard of a house in Queen’s, New York. The baby survived.
  • September 19 – The body of a baby is found at a garbage dump in West Yorkshire, in the United Kingdom.
  • August 28 – A woman gives birth in a bar bathroom in Pennsylvania, stuffs the baby in the water tank of a toilet, and then returns to the bar to watch a fight on TV. The body was subsequently discovered by the bar owner.
  • August 7 – The body of a baby is discovered at hospital rest room in Texas.
  • July 9 – Police discover the body of a baby abandoned in a diaper box in the bushes at a public park in Roseville, California.
  • June 21 – The body of a small baby is found in a solid waste tank in a waste disposal plant just north of Montreal. Police say the baby was likely flushed down the toilet.
  • June 21  – The body of a newborn baby is discovered in a trash can in Oildale, California.
  • June 20 – An Iraqi-born UK woman is found guilty of causing grievous bodily harm after stuffing her baby in a garbage bag and throwing her down a 44 ft. garbage chute.
  • June 14 – A garbage truck driver in Thailand sees a small hand emerge from a garbage bag during a pickup. The baby had a balloon tied around her throat.
  • June 12 – Brittany Cole is arrested in Altheimer, Arkansas, after dumping her infant son in the trash can. She reportedly told police that she was tired of caring for the baby and could no longer do so.
  • June 5 – Twenty-seven-year-old Virginia resident Shavaughn Robinson is charged after allegedly giving birth in a toilet, then placing her daughter in a trash can, and then taking the garbage bag with the baby in it out of the can and tossing it in a dumpster.
  • June 4 – A dog discovers a living baby in Thailand that had been placed in a white plastic bag in a dump. The baby, which was premature, survived.
  • May 30 – Police announce that charges will not be filed against a Kansas teen who gave birth and dumped the body of her baby in a trash can. The teen claimed the baby was stillborn.
  • May 27 – Video footage of firefighters in Jinhua, China, rescuing a baby who had become stuck in a sewage pipe, rockets around the globe. The baby’s mother apparently gave birth on the toilet, and by her own account “accidentally” flushed the baby down the toilet. The mom reportedly hid the pregnancy because the baby was not considered legal under China’s brutal One-Child Policy.
  • May 2 – Cherlie Lafleur, 19, is arrested in Pennsylvania after allegedly attempting to flush her newborn baby down the toilet at her school. When that didn’t work, she reportedly deposited the body in the trash can.
  • Dec. 10, 2012 – The body of a newborn baby is discovered on the conveyor belt of a garbage sorting facility in La Puente, California.

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE

I’ve been working in the news business for nearly 10 years, and I can’t ever recall a similar string of incidents. Recently, to help keep all these disturbing stories organized on our website we even had to come up with a tag, the macabre, but sadly necessary “toilet births.”

So why is this happening all over the place? Good question.

Last month, a prominent Catholic deacon speculated that the rash of such incidents signals the return of the ancient pagan practice of “exposure,” in which parents would simply leave their unwanted newborn babies on a rock or in the wild to die.

“It was the Christians who saved [these babies] and transformed those cultures from cultures of death into cultures of life,” wrote Deacon Keith Fournier.

However, he said, the rise of the abortion culture seems to be bringing the custom back in an unofficial form, with numerous gruesome stories emerging in recent months of parents unceremoniously discarding their newborn children.

“These contemporary examples substitute a trash can or a dumpster for the rock,” Fournier wrote.

But, he said, this trend isn’t surprising, since “babies are treated as trash” in abortion clinics across the country.

It’s hard to argue with that logic. Take a look at these other recent incidents:

  • May 28, 2013 – Report surfaces from China about how Chinese officials forcibly aborted a mother who was 8-months pregnant, literally “yanking” her baby out of her, and then dumping it in the trash can.
  • May 14, 2013 – Three former workers at a Texas abortion clinic run by abortionist Douglas Karpen step forward alleging that babies are routinely murdered after being born alive during failed late-term abortions at Karpen’s clinic.  One of Karpen’s former assistants said the abortionist would even “twist” the babies heads off.
  • May 13 – Kermit Gosnell is found guilty of murdering three babies born alive during failed abortions by “snipping” their spinal cords. His former employees alleged that “hundreds” of babies were killed in this way. In some cases their dismembered feet were kept in jars, or their bodies stuffed into plastic containers and stored in the clinic freezer.
  • May 8, 2013 – Live Action release undercover footage of renowned late-term abortionist Leroy Carhart telling a woman seeking an abortion that after he kills the baby in her womb, it will soften up like “meat in a crock pot,” before the body of the baby is removed three days later.
  • April 29, 2013 – Live Action releases undercover footage of a worker at a late-term abortion facility telling a woman seeking an abortion to just “flush it” if the baby is accidentally born alive during the abortion. “If it comes out, then it comes out. Flush it…if anything, you know, put it in a bag or something or somewhere and bring it to us,” the counselor says.
  • April 19, 2013 – A former employee of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell testfies in court how on one occasion a fully formed baby was born alive into a toilet. Kareema Cross said the baby was making “swimming motions” as if it was trying to get out. Another of Gosnell’s employees, Adrienne Moton, then took the baby out of the toilet, and slit its spinal cord.

And this only touches the surface of similarly macabre stories that have come out of the abortion industry. The Gosnell case alone provided hundreds of pages of nausea-inducing stories of living newborn babies crying, squirming and swimming before being brutally murdered and then dumped in the trash can, or ground up in the clinic’s garbage disposal.

While Gosnell was found guilty because he murdered the babies after they were born, it’s clear that his crimes stemmed directly from the abortionist’s mentality. In many cases if he had killed the babies minutes earlier, it would have been perfectly legal, or, at worst, a violation of the state’s 24-week cut off. To him there was little difference between killing them before or after birth. And is that really all that surprising?

Recently, former Seattle City Council member Judy Nicastro wrote an article in the New York Times touting her abortion of her son at 23 weeks, saying that she was “grateful” that the late-term abortion let her son die “in a warm and loving place.” In the article she describes, as if it were a beautifully emotional moment, how, “I felt my son’s budding life end as a doctor inserted a needle through my belly into his tiny heart.”

Pro-life activists tend to believe that if they convince someone that the unborn child is human and alive, then they will be against abortion. But Nicastro had no doubt that that what happend during her abortion was that the abortionist killed her living son. Not a fetus, but her son. And she is “grateful” for that, and thinks it was a beautiful thing, the right thing to do.

So why are there so many stories emerging of moms or others dumping their babies into toilets or trash cans? Could it possibly be the fact that our politicians, our doctors, and our laws, all agree that killing babies and treating them like trash is acceptable, and a critical part of a “free” society? And if so, should we really be surprised when people behave as if that’s actually true?

Liberal Death Culture Leads to 15-Year-Old Girl Attacked By Group of Teens

This is what happens when you have a Liberal Death Culture, life (all Human life that is) is not precious it’s not special or important. We came from animals so it must then stand to reason we can act like animals. Or. maybe some of us just aren’t as evolved as others, however you want to put it.

 

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) – Speaking exclusively to CBS 3, a 15-year-old high school student, whose identity we are concealing, described a terrifying attack by a gang of at least nine teenage boys as she was leaving an Interboro High School football game Monday night.

The teenage victim described first being taunted by the attackers, who followed her down a neighborhood street, cursing and spitting at her, before she was repeatedly kicked and punched, suffering at least one blow to her head.

“It was scary, just horrible, just the worst feeling in the world,” she said. “He punched me in my back and then kicked me in the back, and then punched me in the back of my head. I couldn’t breathe, I couldn’t move, I couldn’t talk. I was just straight crying.”

The victim says as at least two of the teenagers pummeled her, the others cheered them on shouting, “Come on, let’s get her!” At one point, the victim says, the gang tried to throw her under the wheels of a passing car, which swerved, narrowly missing her.

“They took me by my arm and just threw me out like I was a fishing rod. I was doubled over in pain,” she said. “Everything was just a big, giant blur.”

After being left injured in the roadway, she told CBS 3′s Walt Hunter that she staggered more than a mile to her home, worried she might not make it, before collapsing in the driveway.

Rushed by her parents to Taylor Hospital, she was medevaced to Children’s Hospital where, her parents say, she was treated for a partially collapsed lung and other injuries. After being released 48 hours after the attack, she is now recovering at home as police move forward with their investigation.

“What happened that night is beyond belief to me,” said Joe Parris, the victim’s father.

The victim and her family want to see the attackers brought to justice, and they say they are trying to comprehend what could possibly prompt a pack of strangers to viciously attack a young woman walking home from a football game.

If you have information, please call Glenolden Police at 610-583-1312.

via EXCLUSIVE: 15-Year-Old Girl Attacked By Group of Teens In Delaware County « CBS Philly.

Come And Take It America | DontComply.com

Come And Take It America

We are proud to introduce the next big movement for all Americans that love our freedoms. This is for the people that have enjoyed the good life this country has offered and want a better life for our kids. We want to protect our freedoms by returning this land to a more constitutional version for gun laws. Because without your right to bear arms you cant defend any other rights.

Nationwide movement of armed marches are spreading. If you would like to host a local chapter in your own town please send us details.  These monthly walks through your downtown area with like minded people will continue to keep the right to bear arms fresh in the minds of police. It will show the public that we are law-abiding friendly citizens and are nothing to fear. Find a network of like minded people here.

The stated goals of Come And Take It America are to:

1) Educate Americans on their right to openly carry shotguns and rifles in a safe manner.

2) To condition Americans to feel safe around those of us that carry them.

3) Encourage our elected officials to pass less restrictive open carry legislation.

Alamo-flyer-2

via Come And Take It America | DontComply.com.

October 19th we will stand under weight or arms and declare ‘THIS IS OUR LINE IN THE SAND!”

http://www.dontcomply.com/

Push back is growing to a planned ‘open carry’ gun rights rally which is set for Saturday on Alamo Plaza, 1200 WOAI news reports.

 

Several groups and prominent individuals, including State Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who wrote the state’s concealed handgun law while he was a member of the Texas Senate, plan to gather at the Alamo carrying loaded rifles, including some weapons which are categorized as ‘assault rifles.’

 

“We cannot stand by any longer in silence,” says a statement by a group called ‘Don’tComply.com,’ which is one of the organizers.  “They (police agencies) have been left unchecked too long.  October 19th we will stand under weight or arms and declare ‘THIS IS OUR LINE IN THE SAND!”  We will stand as free men and women!”

 

Even though a concealed handgun license, which required a training course and a background check, are required to carry a handgun in a concealed holster, Texas law allows rifles and other long guns to be carried openly, without any training or permitting required.

 

Michelle Green, who heads the Texas chapter of a group called ‘Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America’ says that law, which dates to the 19th Century, was passed to make sure people could hunt game in rural areas unmolested, and it was never intended to allow people to carry AR-15s in the downtown areas of big cities.

 

“The thought of walking around a Wal-Mart or a Starbucks with a loaded long rifle is alarming, and it is completely disproportional to what anybody needs,” Green said.

 

Gun rights advocates say it is not up to the government to decide what level of weapon they ‘need,’ and say the Second Amendment is clear that no laws can infringe on the right to bear arms.

 

Several people organizing the rally say they are concerned that police departments around the state are targeting law abiding gun owners.  A man is on trial in Belton after he was arrested while carrying a long rifle down a country road while hiking with his son.  DontComply.com says San Antonio Police Chief William McManus has authorized ‘a policy of harassing law abiding citizens and gun owners.’

 

Green says most members of her group own guns and all support the Second Amendment.  But they say carrying a loaded rifle to a downtown rally goes over the line for them.

 

“I think most of us understand the need for hunters to be able to carry their guns when they are hunting out the country,” she said.  But she called the Saturday rally ‘alarming and sickening’ and said the ‘Come and Take it, Line in the Sand’ organizers are a ‘fringe group.’

 

Adding to the controversy is the fact that the Alamo is generally off limits to political rallies, and permission for dozens of political rallies were rejected by the Daughters of the Republic of Texas when they operated the Alamo.  But the Alamo is now under the control of Patterson’s General Land Office.

 

Patterson, by the way, is a candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

 

Read more: http://www.woai.com/articles/woai-local-news-119078/pushback-growing-to-planned-alamo-gun-11745786/#ixzz2hzoRfCX5

Michelle Malkin |Homeland insecurity alert: Dry ice and dry runs

 

 

Homeland insecurity alert: Dry ice and dry runs

by Michelle Malkin

 

Testing, 1, 2, 3, testing. Jihadists never go on furlough. While shutdown theater preoccupies Washington, terror plotters remain on the clock. The question is: Will America keep hitting the post-9/11 snooze button?

At Los Angeles International Airport, two dry ice bombs exploded this week, and two others were found in a restricted area of the airport. According to the Los Angeles Times, the devices “appeared to be outside the terminal near planes where employees such as baggage handlers and others work on the aircraft and its cargo.” [Latest development: Baggage handler arrested in LAX ice explosions.]

That reminds me: It’s been more than a year since watchdogs warned Capitol Hill that our massive homeland security bureaucracy was neglecting these very areas of our nation’s airports. Grandmas, babies and war heroes are routinely groped, manhandled and humiliated in the name of transportation safety. But untold numbers of ground personnel still have easy, breezy access to airplanes and luggage.

via Michelle Malkin |.

Vandals Wreak Havoc In Northeast Philadelphia

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — Residents in one Northeast Philadelphia neighborhood had a rude awakening Wednesday morning when they woke up and discovered vulgar graffiti spray-painted on their cars and homes.

The vandalism happened on four blocks in the city’s Rhawnhurst section. The streets targeted were Hoffnagle Street, Benson Street, Emerson Street and Solly Avenue.

John Carty, a resident on Solly Avenue, says, “I’m just a little disgusted that this would happen, that’s all. The kids have nothing better to do than cause problems for older people.”

According to investigators, the vandals spray-painted racial epithets, sexual symbols and swastikas on cars, houses and fences.

The spray paint vandalism included the saying “Fu* Crakers” and some on the swastikas were backwards.

A woman from Rhawnhurst was surprised by the vandalism and says people are usually friendly in her neighborhood.

“They go by they say hi, it’s been very nice for a very long time.”

Carty, who is set to celebrate his 83rd birthday on Saturday, has a proposition for police if they catch whoever is responsible.

“I’d give them a brush and tell them to paint the house.”

So far, no arrests have been made.

Police are classifying this as a case of juvenile destruction.

The vandalism remains under investigation.

via Vandals Use Spray Paint To Wreak Havoc In Northeast Philadelphia « CBS Philly.

Posted in crime, News|

Booker Wins US Senate Election in NJ

Newark Mayor Cory Booker won a special election Wednesday to represent New Jersey in the Senate, giving the rising Democratic star a bigger political stage after a race against conservative Steve Lonegan, a former small-town mayor.

With three-quarters of precincts reporting, Booker had almost 56 percent of the vote to Lonegan’s 43 percent.

via Booker Wins US Senate Election in NJ.

Posted in AP, Government, crime| Tagged , |

agency downgrades US credit rating

Chinese agency downgrades US credit rating
A teller counts US dollars and Chinese 100-yuan notes at a bank in Hefei, east China's Anhui province on January 16, 2011

A teller counts US dollars and Chinese 100-yuan notes at a bank in Hefei, east China’s Anhui province on January 16, 2011

AFP – A Chinese ratings agency downgraded its US sovereign credit rating Thursday despite Washington’s resolution of the debt ceiling deadlock, warning that fundamentals for a potential default remained “unchanged”.

Dagong lowered its ratings for US local and foreign currency credit from A to A-, maintaining a negative outlook, the agency said in a statement.

The announcement came after the US Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed a bill that extends the nation’s borrowing authority and ends a two-week government shutdown.

“The fundamental situation that the debt growth rate significantly outpaces that of fiscal income and gross domestic product remains unchanged,” Dagong said in the statement, adding Washington’s solvency was vulnerable as old debts were still repaid through raising new debts.

“Hence the government is still approaching the verge of default crisis, a situation that cannot be substantially alleviated in the foreseeable future,” it said.

Dagong made headlines in August 2011 when it lowered its main rating for US sovereign debt after Congress passed an earlier bill to raise Washington’s debt ceiling.

The agency, which is far less prominent than long-established Western competitors including Moody’s, Fitch and Standard and Poor’s, has been working to further raise its profile.

China’s official news agency Xinhua said Thursday in a bylined commentary that US politicians had held the rest of the world hostage in the crisis.

But Beijing welcomed the agreement, saying it will contribute to global economic stability.

http://www.france24.com/en/20131017-chinese-agency-downgrades-us-credit-rating

Posted in Barack Obama, Government, News, Obama| Tagged , |

Voting no 0 Democrats and 144 Republicans.

The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday night passed a bill to reopen the government and avoid a potential national default, bringing a certain end to the 16-day partial government shutdown.

ALABAMA

Democrats — Sewell, Y.

Republicans — Aderholt, N; Bachus, Y; Brooks, N; Roby, N; Rogers, N.

ALASKA

Republicans — Young, Y.

ARIZONA

Democrats — Barber, Y; Grijalva, Y; Kirkpatrick, Y; Pastor, Y; Sinema, Y.

Republicans — Franks, N; Gosar, N; Salmon, N; Schweikert, N.

ARKANSAS

Republicans — Cotton, Y; Crawford, Y; Griffin, Y; Womack, Y.

CALIFORNIA

Democrats — Bass, Y; Becerra, Y; Bera, Y; Brownley, Y; Capps, Y; Cardenas, Y; Chu, Y; Costa, Y; Davis, Y; Eshoo, Y; Farr, Y; Garamendi, Y; Hahn, Y; Honda, Y; Huffman, Y; Lee, Y; Lofgren, Y; Lowenthal, Y; Matsui, Y; McNerney, Y; Miller, George, Y; Napolitano, Y; Negrete McLeod, Y; Pelosi, Y; Peters, Y; Roybal-Allard, Y; Ruiz, Y; Sanchez, Linda T., Y; Sanchez, Loretta, Y; Schiff, Y; Sherman, Y; Speier, Y; Swalwell, Y; Takano, Y; Thompson, Y; Vargas, Y; Waters, Y; Waxman, Y.

Republicans — Calvert, Y; Campbell, N; Cook, Y; Denham, N; Hunter, N; Issa, Y; LaMalfa, N; McCarthy, Y; McClintock, N; McKeon, Y; Miller, Gary, Y; Nunes, Y; Rohrabacher, N; Royce, N; Valadao, Y.

COLORADO

Democrats — DeGette, Y; Perlmutter, Y; Polis, Y.

Republicans — Coffman, Y; Gardner, Y; Lamborn, N; Tipton, Y.

CONNECTICUT

Democrats — Courtney, Y; DeLauro, Y; Esty, Y; Himes, Y; Larson, Y.

DELAWARE

Democrats — Carney, Y.

FLORIDA

Democrats — Brown, Y; Castor, Y; Deutch, Y; Frankel, Y; Garcia, Y; Grayson, Y; Hastings, Y; Murphy, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wilson, Y.

Republicans — Bilirakis, Y; Buchanan, Y; Crenshaw, Y; DeSantis, N; Diaz-Balart, Y; Mica, N; Miller, N; Nugent, N; Posey, N; Radel, N; Rooney, N; Ros-Lehtinen, Y; Ross, N; Southerland, N; Webster, Y; Yoho, N; Young, X.

GEORGIA

Democrats — Barrow, Y; Bishop, Y; Johnson, Y; Lewis, Y; Scott, David, Y.

Republicans — Broun, N; Collins, N; Gingrey, N; Graves, N; Kingston, N; Price, N; Scott, Austin, N; Westmoreland, N; Woodall, N.

HAWAII

Democrats — Gabbard, Y; Hanabusa, Y.

IDAHO

Republicans — Labrador, N; Simpson, Y.

ILLINOIS

Democrats — Bustos, Y; Davis, Danny, Y; Duckworth, Y; Enyart, Y; Foster, Y; Gutierrez, Y; Kelly, Y; Lipinski, Y; Quigley, Y; Rush, X; Schakowsky, Y; Schneider, Y.

Republicans — Davis, Rodney, Y; Hultgren, N; Kinzinger, Y; Roskam, Y; Schock, Y; Shimkus, Y.

INDIANA

Democrats — Carson, Y; Visclosky, Y.

Republicans — Brooks, Y; Bucshon, N; Messer, N; Rokita, N; Stutzman, N; Walorski, N; Young, Y.

IOWA

Democrats — Braley, Y; Loebsack, Y.

Republicans — King, N; Latham, Y.

KANSAS

Republicans — Huelskamp, N; Jenkins, Y; Pompeo, N; Yoder, N.

KENTUCKY

Democrats — Yarmuth, Y.

Republicans — Barr, N; Guthrie, Y; Massie, N; Rogers, Y; Whitfield, Y.

LOUISIANA

Democrats — Richmond, Y.

Republicans — Boustany, Y; Cassidy, N; Fleming, N; Scalise, N.

MAINE

Democrats — Michaud, Y; Pingree, Y.

MARYLAND

Democrats — Cummings, Y; Delaney, Y; Edwards, Y; Hoyer, Y; Ruppersberger, Y; Sarbanes, Y; Van Hollen, Y.

Republicans — Harris, N.

MASSACHUSETTS

Democrats — Capuano, Y; Keating, Y; Kennedy, Y; Lynch, Y; McGovern, Y; Neal, Y; Tierney, Y; Tsongas, Y.

MICHIGAN

Democrats — Conyers, Y; Dingell, Y; Kildee, Y; Levin, Y; Peters, Y.

Republicans — Amash, N; Benishek, Y; Bentivolio, N; Camp, Y; Huizenga, N; Miller, N; Rogers, Y; Upton, Y; Walberg, N.

MINNESOTA

Democrats — Ellison, Y; McCollum, Y; Nolan, Y; Peterson, Y; Walz, Y.

Republicans — Bachmann, N; Kline, Y; Paulsen, Y.

MISSISSIPPI

Democrats — Thompson, Y.

Republicans — Harper, Y; Nunnelee, N; Palazzo, N.

MISSOURI

Democrats — Clay, Y; Cleaver, Y.

Republicans — Graves, N; Hartzler, N; Long, N; Luetkemeyer, N; Smith, N; Wagner, N.

MONTANA

Republicans — Daines, Y.

NEBRASKA

Republicans — Fortenberry, Y; Smith, Y; Terry, Y.

NEVADA

Democrats — Horsford, Y; Titus, Y.

Republicans — Amodei, N; Heck, Y.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Democrats — Kuster, Y; Shea-Porter, Y.

NEW JERSEY

Democrats — Andrews, Y; Holt, Y; Pallone, Y; Pascrell, Y; Payne, Y; Sires, Y.

Republicans — Frelinghuysen, Y; Garrett, N; Lance, Y; LoBiondo, Y; Runyan, Y; Smith, Y.

NEW MEXICO

Democrats — Lujan Grisham, Y; Lujan, Ben Ray, Y.

Republicans — Pearce, N.

NEW YORK

Democrats — Bishop, Y; Clarke, Y; Crowley, Y; Engel, Y; Higgins, Y; Israel, Y; Jeffries, Y; Lowey, Y; Maffei, Y; Maloney, Carolyn, Y; Maloney, Sean, Y; McCarthy, X; Meeks, Y; Meng, Y; Nadler, Y; Owens, Y; Rangel, Y; Serrano, Y; Slaughter, Y; Tonko, Y; Velazquez, Y.

Republicans — Collins, N; Gibson, Y; Grimm, Y; Hanna, Y; King, Y; Reed, N.

NORTH CAROLINA

Democrats — Butterfield, Y; McIntyre, Y; Price, Y; Watt, Y.

Republicans — Coble, Y; Ellmers, N; Foxx, N; Holding, N; Hudson, N; Jones, N; McHenry, Y; Meadows, N; Pittenger, Y.

NORTH DAKOTA

Republicans — Cramer, Y.

OHIO

Democrats — Beatty, Y; Fudge, Y; Kaptur, Y; Ryan, Y.

Republicans — Boehner, Y; Chabot, N; Gibbs, N; Johnson, N; Jordan, N; Joyce, Y; Latta, N; Renacci, N; Stivers, Y; Tiberi, Y; Turner, N; Wenstrup, N.

OKLAHOMA

Republicans — Bridenstine, N; Cole, Y; Lankford, N; Lucas, N; Mullin, N.

OREGON

Democrats — Blumenauer, Y; Bonamici, Y; DeFazio, Y; Schrader, Y.

Republicans — Walden, N.

PENNSYLVANIA

Democrats — Brady, Y; Cartwright, Y; Doyle, Y; Fattah, Y; Schwartz, Y.

Republicans — Barletta, Y; Dent, Y; Fitzpatrick, Y; Gerlach, Y; Kelly, Y; Marino, N; Meehan, Y; Murphy, Y; Perry, N; Pitts, N; Rothfus, N; Shuster, Y; Thompson, Y.

RHODE ISLAND

Democrats — Cicilline, Y; Langevin, Y.

SOUTH CAROLINA

Democrats — Clyburn, Y.

Republicans — Duncan, N; Gowdy, N; Mulvaney, N; Rice, N; Sanford, N; Wilson, N.

SOUTH DAKOTA

Republicans — Noem, N.

TENNESSEE

Democrats — Cohen, Y; Cooper, Y.

Republicans — Black, N; Blackburn, N; DesJarlais, N; Duncan, N; Fincher, N; Fleischmann, N; Roe, N.

TEXAS

Democrats — Castro, Y; Cuellar, Y; Doggett, Y; Gallego, Y; Green, Al, Y; Green, Gene, Y; Hinojosa, Y; Jackson Lee, Y; Johnson, E. B., Y; O’Rourke, Y; Veasey, Y; Vela, Y.

Republicans — Barton, N; Brady, N; Burgess, N; Carter, N; Conaway, N; Culberson, N; Farenthold, N; Flores, N; Gohmert, N; Granger, N; Hall, N; Hensarling, N; Johnson, Sam, N; Marchant, N; McCaul, N; Neugebauer, N; Olson, N; Poe, N; Sessions, N; Smith, N; Stockman, N; Thornberry, N; Weber, N; Williams, N.

UTAH

Democrats — Matheson, Y.

Republicans — Bishop, N; Chaffetz, N; Stewart, N.

VERMONT

Democrats — Welch, Y.

VIRGINIA

Democrats — Connolly, Y; Moran, Y; Scott, Y.

Republicans — Cantor, Y; Forbes, N; Goodlatte, N; Griffith, N; Hurt, N; Rigell, Y; Wittman, Y; Wolf, Y.

WASHINGTON

Democrats — DelBene, Y; Heck, Y; Kilmer, Y; Larsen, Y; McDermott, Y; Smith, Y.

Republicans — Hastings, Y; Herrera Beutler, Y; McMorris Rodgers, Y; Reichert, Y.

WEST VIRGINIA

Democrats — Rahall, Y.

Republicans — Capito, Y; McKinley, Y.

WISCONSIN

Democrats — Kind, Y; Moore, Y; Pocan, Y.

Republicans — Duffy, N; Petri, N; Ribble, Y; Ryan, N; Sensenbrenner, N.

WYOMING

Republicans — Lummis, N.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/16/u-s-house-passes-budget-debt-limit-deal-shutdown-is-officially-over/

%d bloggers like this: