Thursday, August 5, 2010
Politics Cooper and Blackburn Voted Against Bill Providing Healthcare To 9/11 First Responders and Clean-up Workers
Posted by Brantley Hargrove on Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 2:01 PM
Rep. Anthony Weiner exploded. Recriminations streaked across the chamber from both sides like volleys. Republicans called it a "slush fund" (A term the GOP apparently uses now for money set aside for worthy causes; think Joe Barton and BP). And Democrats inexplicably decided to require a two-thirds majority to pass the legislation. The Zadroga bill should have been a gentle lob. An easy vote. But it wasn't. These are Tennesseans who voted against compensating those sickened by the falling towers. It was surprising to see Cooper's name in the "nay" column. He was one of only four Democrats voting against. He's a deficit hawk, but these benefits are also a drop in the bucket, and voting against them makes about as much sense as voting against extending unemployment benefits (which the unemployed will re-inject into the economy) while voting to continue tax cuts for the wealthy (which is money the wealthy can afford to save).
Voted Against
Congressman Marsha Blackburn of the 7th
Congressman Jim Cooper of the the 5th
Congressman John Duncan of the 2nd
Congressman Phil Roe of the 1st
Voted For
Congressman Bart Gordon of the 6th
Congressman Lincoln Davis of the 4th
Congressman John Tanner of the 8th
Congressman Steve Cohen of the 9th
Comments (5)
Showing 1-5 of 5
like
dislike
Now we know most of these political folks do not care about the victims of 9/11 but a tool for them to use to promote hate and anger among the voters to get money and votes ,I think every voter must study each and every vote that they cast then decide to keep them or not,.
The democrats required a 2/3 rds vote to prevent any amendments being added. They were terrified that the Republicans would add an amendment that would specifically forbid illegals from receiving benefits from the bill, and thus have to take a stand on the issue. This from a Bloomberg interview of Rep. Peter King of Long Island, the Republican sponsor of the bill.
The bill is wasteful (ie overspending) in that an enormous amount of benefits have already been extended to the victims and workers at the Trade center site.
Perhaps there is more to it than just being mean to 9/11 "victims" or first responders as they have been called. I do believe they get their insurance, too. So, why would someone vote for this bill?
FDNY spokesman Frank Gribbon attributed the spike in disability pensions to 9/11.
While 264 firefighters retired with lung ailments from 1994 to September 2001, the number since has nearly tripled in the seven years since. Gribbon said. Before 9/11, seven firefighters were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, but 75 were diagnosed since the terror attacks, he said.
In addition, 303 firefighters have disability pensions granted under post-9/11 state legislation that presumed many disabilities - from new cancers to respiratory and gastrointestinal disease - were caused after 40 hours of work at Ground Zero. Another 140 had orthopedic injuries. Even before 9/11, Gribbon said, the Legislature passed laws that "presume" that certain cancers, heart ailments and lung disease are job-related, making it easier to retire on disability.
"We are not embarrassed by this," said Jack McDonnell, president of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association. Danger, injury and illness go along with the job," he said.
