Government-ish
Drum honor role. I recently criticized Kevin Drum, so I am pleased to think especially highly of this post which I think you should read (also, as Drum says, always click the link especially if it is a vox.com link)
My comment
I am always impressed by your insights, but, that said, I think this post is important. In particular, I think you have coined an important word “government-ish” which belongs in the lexicon next to “truthiness”. As all 3 of you note, the US Federal Government is not prosecuting parents for spanking their children. Nor, indeed are state and local governments. But Oprah says you shouldn’t do that and she is government-ish.
In the interview, Wuthnow said “a government and a culture” . It isn’t that he thinks they are two aspects of the same entity (Oprah and Donald are both carbon based life forms but don’t have much else in common). But I think the people he interviewed do.
So what is this culture which is government-ish ? “Culture” isn’t used as anthropologists use it, nor is it high culture. I think it is (still) mostly television, with lesser roles for pop-music, movies, radio, and prominent web-sites. You brought up Oprah and “authorities,” so called by uh Oprah (not government officials, not people with a lot of cites in the peer reviewed literature, but people on “Oprah” called authorities by Oprah (I assume you don’t use “scare quotes” and your quotation marks had something to do with quoting someone)).
There is something “government-ish,” which is resented. It isn’t in power in Washington. There is something elite, which is resented, even if it doesn’t have the wealth of the Kochs, the power of Trump, the fame of — damn Trump again, or the status Billy Graham had. Not the richest, or most powerful, famous, or esteemed, but an elite in some other way. The “goverment-ish” borg also includes the “media,” which does not include Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, or Breitbart.
In any case, the government-ish media elite sure includes Oprah Winfrey, Barack Obama, and LeBron James
Now what do these people have in common ? I mean aside from brains and money ?
Except that liberals never try to “understand” anyone who doesn’t agree with them. They just write the person off as at best invincibly ignorant or at worst stupid and ignore them in the future.
I once tried to convince a group of liberals in a discussion group that winning an election was a bout obtaining the maximum number of voters, and that we could do that by converting some of those who were not in our group to join us. We would not do that, I suggested, by insulting them and calling them names, which is all this group was doing. I was told that I was wrong, and that to win all we had to do was to be sure that as many of us as possible voted. We didn’t need to convert anyone, we just needed to make sure none of us stayed home on election day.
In other words, we didn’t need to convince anyone of anything, we didn’t need to sell any policies, we just needed to pump up our own base.
Bill,
I do not know about you, but in my entire life I have never met a Republican voter that voted for any Democratic candidate. To be fair, I have never met a Democratic voter who had ever voted for a Republican candidate.
I would imagine it happened pre Nixon to a certain extent and I am sure there may actually be some tinp, tiny numbers who have switched their votes, but it is totally insignificant.
And here is the real point.
“Sean Illing
But that’s just racism and cultural resentment, and calling it a manifestation of some deeper anxiety doesn’t alter that fact.
Robert Wuthnow
I don’t disagree with that. I’m just explaining what I heard from people on the ground in these communities. This is what they believe, what they say, not what I believe.”
https://www.vox.com/2018/3/13/17053886/trump-rural-america-populism-racial-resentment
It has been going on for decades now, hidden in plain sight so obvious that they made movies detailing what the GOP does to win elections.
“We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who’s to blame for it.”
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112346/quotes
Right there is every single trump speech.
EM:
I read the article’s conversation.
I am certainly not as articulate as many of the people here. I am numbers related in thinking; but, I also count. Different but a parallel thought is the idea of representation in government. This does not come from a president, a SCOTUS Justice, a Senator, a governor, and today even a Congressional Representative. The nation has grown to big and diverse and government by representation has moved away from us. What is interesting about this, the founding fathers knew this would come to pass over time and had put in play a way to handle representation in Congress.
Back to the first sentence of my reply. I am always curious when I read something, what is the meaning or hidden meaning. There are usually reoccurring patterns of thoughts and words. If it is frequent enough, it will catch my eye and register. The word “these” occurs 19 times in pointing to people, towns, places, resentments, etc. and all relate back to people. The word “these” really does hold them at arms length and identifies a difference in a not so polite way. Drop the word “these” and it becomes a different and meaningful study.
As I have stated elsewhere and here to, the issue is representation and the lack of it today for people. Average size of a Congressional district is 700,000. Montana’s lone Congressional District is >1 million while Wyoming’s is 580,000. The districts are not going to get smaller and the issue of representation is going to get worst. The Reapportionment Act of 1929 defeated the purpose of the House which was to represent by population. It also gave license to Representatives to ignore segments of the population easily. Rural as opposed to urban and vice versa. Black and Hispanic Americans as opposed to White. etc. The people believe their needs and thoughts are being ignored and they respond to the ideologues such as Trump, Limbaugh, Milo, etc.
From Drum’s original message:
” … if liberals want to win elections they need to figure out how to appeal to at least some of them”
“There are plenty of people who are simply beyond reach for liberals. They’re either racist or sexist or they love guns or maybe they’re just plain mean. ”
OORRR, maybe they are ready to follow someone — desperate to follow anyone — who will at least mouth promises to make their world great again.
” … Mr. Obama] would have won Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin each time even if Detroit, Cleveland and Milwaukee had been severed from their states and cast adrift into the Great Lakes.)”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/upshot/how-the-obama-coalition-crumbled-leaving-an-opening-for-trump.html
Obama won by posing as a regular guy v. Wall Street Romney. Trump won by playing the blue collar hero v. Wall Street Hillary.
Should be perfectly obvious how to win these voters back without any reference to differing cultural standards — what ever those might be. I’m a 28 year (“lifer”) NY, CHI, SF) taxi driver — not sure where I fit in: geographically sophisticated urban? 🙂
The one issue that Repubs can’t win is unions.
[snip]
Why Not Hold Union Representation Elections on a Regular Schedule?
Andrew Strom — November 1st, 2017
“Republicans in Congress have already proposed a bill that would require a new election in each [private employer] unionized bargaining unit whenever, through turnover, expansion, or merger, a unit experiences at least 50 percent turnover. While no union would be happy about expending limited resources on regular retention elections, I think it would be hard to turn down a trade that would allow the 93% of workers who are unrepresented to have a chance to opt for unionization on a regular schedule.”
[snip]
One, three or five year election cycle — local plurality rules — should work.
To get this issue going I’m thinking of going out to work sites — or worker sites (got to avoid employers’ gaze) — and conducting an informal poll to then report around to the country. Question: how would you feel if you woke up one morning and discovered that your workplace (and every other non-gov) will have regularly scheduled union certification elections.
If I could report almost universal happiness — even better jumping up and down excitement (why don’t you try asking, dear reader) of my question from 100 or so people — maybe that would give the newspapers something to report. Something that actually happened is more important to them than big theory. (If you try it, start with the lower 40% — they know what they need.)
Or maybe I could query a genuine (real) progressive polling organization to find out how much they would charge to conduct a similar poll — maybe using GoFundMe to pay for it. Maybe suggesting that — but really hoping they get the idea and do it themselves BECAUSE IT REALLY IS THE GREATEST VOTE RE-CAPTURING IDEA.
Most of the rot in this country — compared to other modern democracies — is result of de-fanging the average person economically and politically (like, you know, rural voters) via de-unionization. Don’t believe me, ask the Koch brothers who are working ever harder on it.
Defanged by decades of illegally firing organizers and joiners in the face of non-existent legal penalties. No need to set up a punitive penalty plan in the adversarial criminal justice system which can be played endlessly. Simply circumvent the illegal tampering with the labor/owner/consumer market. Simply require union elections anyway. America (not others) needs this all-in-one social remedy desperately.
Republicans have their public and private workplace, regularly scheduled union certification plans. Where’s the Democrat’s on this democracy make or break issue? The Democrats are losing because the have a certification elections gap! :-O
*************************************
Spammed about 7,500 with this so far — mostly newspapers — anybody who might be interested in biggest newspapers in all 50 states; over 100,000 big, over 50,000 small, 3 X 25,000 ND.
http://ontodayspage.blogspot.com/2018/05/ask-40_28.html
Apparently about 1/3d of registered voters are independents. Not trying to appeal to them would seem foolhardy for either party. Admittedly many of them lean one way or the other but they are at least possibly persuadable.
They are registered as independents, they do not vote independent.
Just a total myth.
“Of course, the critical question about leaners is not their self-description, but their behavior.
Despite their initial attempt to adopt the independent label, leaners vote very much like partisans, giving the vast majority of their support to the party to which they feel closer. In 2008, 90 percent of Democratic leaners voted for Barack Obama and 82 percent of GOP leaners supported John McCain. Between 1992 and 2008, on average, 77 percent of independents who lean toward the Democrats voted for that party’s presidential candidates, while over 80 percent of Republican leaners did likewise, rivaling the support offered by those who initially claimed to be partisans.
This is hardly esoteric knowledge. Political scientists have been aware of these facts since the mid-’80s, and most basic college texts on voting behavior highlight such findings. Yet the myth lives on, propagated by the unaware and those more interested in shocking than in truth telling. ”
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/mark-mellman/192503-myth-of-the-independent-voter
That’s a lot of comments.
Bill H. Odd use of “liberal” — very close to the opposite of the original meaning. In any case I know one. I am one. I definitely have right wing friends & we try to convince each other. Now we aren’t talking about the rural anti morality decline right, but definitely conservative (eg Reagan political appointee).
I do know someone who has switched party, but he was provoked. Oh an another was in the Harvard Neoconservative Club and is now a leftish Democrat. People don’t change their minds during debates or even friendly discussions. They don’t change their minds when facing new data. But they do change their minds — I guess when not thinking about the issues.
I read once someone noting that he had changed their minds on many things (including “slippery slope arguments”) but couldn’t say when, because it was always thinking of a topic after a while and noticing the thoughts aren’t those he remembered.
On winning elections, I do think it is turnout turnout and turnout. Relatively few people change from voting for one party to voting for the other. Many from not voting to voting.
That doesn’t make it right to insult people — it is morally wrong (also one doesn’t want to fire up the other candidate’s base and get them to vote. )
On the 1 third independents, the key fact is that less than 10% of voters say they are independent and don’t lean either Republican or Democratic. The self declared leaners also report voting intentions (or votes when exit polled) very similar to self described partisans. A lot of people use “I’m an independent” for “I think for myself” that is “I think rather than following instructions from a party boss”. Very few of them are genuinely undecided about, say 2024 (I’m not snearing, I will vote for the Democratic candidate whoever she is).
It is offensive to liberalism (original meaning) that we don’t learn from each other, striving for and sometimes reaching agreement. Even my claim that people change their minds when they aren’t paying attention is offensive to liberal doctrine. But facts are facts.
I’d say elections are about turnout. As I typed above, this includes depressing turnout of people who would vote for the other candidate if they voted . I think a way to do this is to pretend to reach out to them– to be very polite and respectful in tone — to be a non-infuriating adversary. I think Obama was very good at this in 2008 (mainly infuriating his supporters who thought he was a wimp).
The lesson is don’t say anything about “clinging to guns” and if your point is that they aren’t all deplorable (that was Clinton’s point) phrase it without the “all”. She was saying many people (non-deplorable) support Trump because they are suffering & she has to speak to them.
If she had put it that way (every single time (and not including the parenthetical “non-deplorable”) then Republicans would have had to focus on her e-mails, Bill’s foundation, their speaking fees and say she claimed to have invented the internet.
I am rambling. The latest tangent is that for the people discussed in the posts, it doesn’t really matter what liberals and Democrats say. What matters is what Fox News and Rush Limbaugh say we say. They will flat out lie if they have too. There is no way to go for years without ever slipping and saying “clinging” although one might avoid “deplorable”. Also I read this insight on Kevin Drum’s blog (he put it better but said exactly what I am trying to say in this last (I promise) paragraph.
“Civility Now” would be about as effective as “Serentity Now” was to Costanz’s father.
I question deeply whether being uncivil to gop voters increases their turnout. I also believe that being uncivil to gop pols would increase Dem turnout.
What would be wrong with having run ads in the runup to the 2016 election that blatantly called trump a stone cold racist who would run all over the Constitution implementing his racist thoughts? You care about equality, you better vote this year.
Anyway, as Drum points out. Gop voters are going to hear that these things are being said by Dems even it they were said once, or not at all.
As Bill Maher once said, “I just want Dems to grow one ball. Not two. Just one.”
My mistake. When i said it is wrong to insult “people” I forgot that Trump is technically human. I meant it is wrong to insult rural people as a group or people with limited formal schooling. I meant to write “it is wrong to insult groups of people for the actions of some members of the group, unless membership is a choice implying acceptance of those actions (I added that to avoid the implication that one shouldn’t insult Republican politicians as a group — they chose to be with each other).
I certainly think that honest decent people shouldn’t politely lie to hide the fact that they know Trump is racist. I’d also guess that there are people of perfectly normal intelligence who haven’t figured this out. Some of them may even be over 2 years old (I think a mentally alert 3 year old should have grasped the fact).
So yes attack Trump. Failure to do so would strike me as cowardice. I will vote in any case, but it is important to convince the kids to vote & I don’t think that means being mealy mouthed .
I meant to argue against insulting large groups such as rural US citizens. I’m pretty sure we don’t disagree about civility (I didn’t advocate being civil with Republican politicians or operatives or wingnut welfare recipients or Fox non-journalists or anything). Reading my comment, I can see my use of “people” without further qualification was a mistake.
I do recognise that Trump, Hannity, and Limbaugh are human beings. When I said don’t insult “people,” I didn’t mean to suggest that they aren’t people (and of course I didn’t suggest they shouldn’t be insulted). I was just being sloppy.
EMichael, Considering the fact that the last presidential election was won by 10-15,000 votes in key electoral college states, ignoring 10% of those who call themselves independent is unwise. By the same token, there are those who called themselves Republicans in the past and voted that way who have now disowned the party (Steve Schmidt for example). Those are votes that can be sought and should not be ignored. “Purity” of appeal can result in a George McGovern result. Trump’s base is solid. It has to be overcome in numbers gathered from wherever they can be found.
RW
I do not see anything exceptional about a Harvard Neocon club membership and a supposed left wing democrat. There has been a Clinton Kagan link since Strobe Talbot brought Mrs. Kagan in in 1993. The expansion of NATO and breaking up Serbia is all with the neocons.
And Bill Krystol is now in line with MSNCB……….
The mainline left wing democrat is no longer seen as soft on permanent war in fact the image of war for humanitarian reason called “civilian protective operations is as insane an excuse to unleash organized, high tech, good margin of profit state sanctioned murder as any I can think of.
JackD,
“Considering the fact that the last presidential election was won by 10-15,000 votes in key electoral college states”
Considering that NYT’s Nate Cohn (top data man) says Trump won by taking Obama’s place — both pretending to be the hero of the working person
Considering that Republicans have a bill in their hopper that “would require a new [union certification] election in each [private] unionized bargaining unit whenever, through turnover, expansion, or merger, a unit experiences at least 50 percent turnover”
Why not win that 10-15,000 votes back (and many millions more) by advocating regularly scheduled certification elections at every private workplace (one, three or five year cycle — local plurality rules)? It is so easy to do — it is just electoral gold laying in the street begging us to pick it up.
Why not switch those votes back? Why not RW, too? ???
Denis, OK by me but don’t you think they’ll only call for new elections in places the are already union shops and not non union places? That’s not such a good deal.
Jack, you understand that this calls for elections in the 93% of private workplaces that are not union now (and the other 7% that are of course). In any case I always say: ask the 40% — the 40% earning less than $15/hr. Think McDonald’s, Walgreen’s, Target, Walmart and even Costco.
7% union in private business sounds very unlikely as a result of free choice. I don’t know why Americans should be any dumber than highly unionized Germans (almost no majority unions in Germany by the way). There is the fact that so many unions have disappeared for so long that many Americans can hardly imagine having one. Get the blue collar vote back anyway for those who only care about the politics.
Denis,
Do you have a source for the content of that bill?
JackD,
Do you think Schmidt voted for Clinton? I don’t, and that’s the key.
I do not understand this “appeal” to independents thing at all. Were independents covered by the ACA?
You run on your policies and attack Rep policies and attack their candidates and voters. You are never getting them to vote for your, and I doubt there are many “real independents” that vote according to the candidates. They just answered the poll questions to make them seem that way.
Makes them fell good, but I think they only vote one way.
Dennis,
Have you missed this right to work explosion?
Jack,
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2723/text
where I got this:
EMichael: In the last election, some usual Democratic votes in rural and small city areas went for Trump. Reversing those is both possible and desirable. I have no reason to think that there aren’t others out there as well. As to Schmidt, the real question is what he and others will do in the immediate future.
EMichael,
You are talking red states of course, not the hopefully coming blue wave Congress. I don’t think the Republican legislators in those states were reacting to a groundswell of opposition to labor unions. I think it was just the Republican rank and file politicians who went along on the race to the bottom with their leaders, like Wisconsin Governor Walker — not to mention their “Greatest Leader.”
JackD,
Areas is correct. Voters are not. Turnout will change that, not switching trump voters Dem, that will never, ever happen.
You gotta remember this was the first presidential election since the voting rights act was killed, and suppression was at a time not seen since jim crow.
Dennis.
Wisconsin and Michigan are right to work states.
EMichael, you are entitled to your opinion. I don’t share it.
JackD,
That’s fine.
I have a huge family. Six siblings. 23 nieces and nephews. 34 grand nieces and nephews, and even six grand, grand nieces and nephews(is that how you say that?).
We are split about 80/20 liberal and conservative. In over three decadess I have not seen one change in their voitng.
Anecdotal, I agree.
But I have met a lot of fed up people in my life(being on wall street, auto business and banking that’s normal) and every class of people you can think of, but I have never met anyone fed up enough to have voted for Obama, and then vote for trump.
That can’t happen. And when people tell you that, they are lying about voting for Obama cause it makes them non racist.
Anecdotal also. Probably more valid than anything else though.
OK, you sucked me in. I won’t let you do it again. Right after the election, NPR interviewed the mayor of a town in Alleghanys in Pennsylvania that had always voted Democratic and in the last election voted overwhelmingly for Trump because, said the mayor, he promised to bring back the jobs from their closed steel mill. What will they do if Trump doesn’t do that, asked the interviewer, and the mayor said they’d vote him out. That, of course, remains to be seen. What doesn’t is that they’d voted twice for Obama and then voted for Trump. The group you observe may be too small, impressive as it is in family terms.
Well, the key is when you can show me, or that mayor can, that the exact same people voted in that town in 2016 voted in 2012 I will be happy to listen.
And my anecdote was an admitted anecdote.
But I need more proof than the comments of a mayor in the Alleghenies. After all, they have been voting Rep in state elections for decades.
Both of you, 🙂
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/upshot/how-the-obama-coalition-crumbled-leaving-an-opening-for-trump.html
Trump won by trading places with Obama — blue collar pretender Trump v. Wall Street Hillary — same game as pretend-progressive Obama v. Wall Street Romney.
Trump won because he lied to his constituency. While Obama accomplished many things, he was blocked by plan from doing much more because Republicans decided to obstruct everything a Black President did even before day 1 of his taking office. Based upon his being Barack Obama alone, McConnell stated he would make him a one term president. I would have loved to see Barack Obama shut down the government over unemployment compensation; but then, he would have given the power to Republicans. If anyone needs to be called out publicly for their supposition, conjecture, and falsehoods; it is Trump and the Republicans whose silence and inability to vote against Trump on “anything” gives him the power to accomplish the evil he promulgates upon this nation.
As far as the legislature and just like today, there are Dems who will vote with Republicans for political sake regardless of the harm it promulgates.
Dennis,
Did you realize that the pretent progressive Obama and the Democrats severely regulated Wall Street? That they raised the marginal tax rates of the richest americans more than 60% and used a lot of those taxes to fund the ACA to provide insurance to the poorest americans?
And then spent seven years in a constant stream of futile attempts to do more because of the Rep interference?
Geez, did you forget the filibuster of card check, something near and dear to your heart?
And when legislation was impossible, enacted through a series of executive orders a wide variety of actions to help labor in this country? Which right now is being totally decimated by trump and the gop?
Here, check out what obama did and what trump is doing.
“To hold President Trump accountable, the Center for American Progress Action Fund’s American Worker Project is tracking every action the president takes to weaken job protections for Americans.
Our list includes legislation and orders signed by the president; procedural changes and regulations enacted or proposed by his administration; and official statements of policy, such as the president’s proposed budget. The list does not include political nominations and appointments of individuals with records of enacting anti-worker policies, since these actions happened outside their role in the administration.
We will be updating this page periodically to include new anti-worker policies enacted by the administration. Policies below are listed in reverse chronological order, with the newest actions listed first. This page was last updated on January 26, 2018.”
https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/reports/2018/01/26/168366/president-trumps-policies-hurting-american-workers/
There are 36 of them. Pick a side.
Jack,
Unfortunately all that good action (Obama did no real work for card check) did not add up to any relief for the 42.4% of the country earning less than $15/hr — nothing they could notice anyway. Which lost generations of American wage were totally lost on Obama or he would have been out ferociously pushing and fighting for the one thing that can actually bring democracy back for the average person: rebuilding labor union density.
He doesn’t know because he doesn’t really care:
” Still, in conversations with political allies, Obama insists that today’s domestic mess is a blip on the long arc of history and argues that his own work must be focused on progress over time — specifically on empowering a new generation of leaders. “
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/where-is-barack-obama.html
His “blip” is mostly about Trump? Yea; but it is not about starving us, is it?
Today’s topic: how to regain what the 2016 election lost — how to return the blue collar workers to their natural Democratic place — how to heal Obama-doesn’t-care (Clintons neither)? Offer the 40% (the 80% really — the 80% who are labor price takers, not labor price negotiators — the only genuine path to take their country back:
[cut-and-paste — again]
Why Not Hold Union Representation Elections on a Regular Schedule?
Andrew Strom — November 1st, 2017
“Republicans in Congress have already proposed a bill that would require a new election in each [private employer] unionized bargaining unit whenever, through turnover, expansion, or merger, a unit experiences at least 50 percent turnover. While no union would be happy about expending limited resources on regular retention elections, I think it would be hard to turn down a trade that would allow the 93% of workers who are unrepresented to have a chance to opt for unionization on a regular schedule.”
Dennis,
Damn, just damn.
Sorry, but without 60 Dem Senators card checke was done and no amount of real work can change that.
Further the white working class has voted republican for 50 fen years now, so talking about them returning to “their natural democratic place” is inane. These people are not, and have not, voted because of their paycheck their entire lives.
You think they do? Show me one single piece of GOP legislation, or GOP agreement to legislation, that helps labor.
Meanwhile, yeah, Clinton lost Wis and MI. Two states that went right to work because of their large Rep control of state governments. Mainly due to the white working class votes.
Your incorrect views on these facts is about as anti labor as it gets. You are now part of the labor problem.
As in:
Measure Title: A bill to amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes.
NAYs —48
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Not Voting – 1
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00227#position