Rep. Rob Simmons (R-CT) is backing away from supporting the "cut-the-poor, help-the-big-interests federal budget" that he voted for last year!!!! Doesn’t like the revised budget bill’s theme of “Protect the well-connected, bash the poor” as evidenced by tossing out provisions that would have sought savings from drug companies and preferred-provider organizations (the famous $22 billion that Hillary was upset about), and replacing them with new burdens on lower-income Americans who rely on Medicaid.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/30/AR2006013001161.htmlWhere's the Budget Outrage?
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006; Page A17
<snip> President Bush hopes for a new start with his State of the Union address. The words from last year he wants to wipe out of the political lexicon include "Brownie," "Katrina," "heck of a job" and "Social Security privatization."
But there is an uncomfortable bit of business left over from the Republican disaster year of 2005 that will test the seriousness of the party's supposed commitment to change. The cut-the-poor, help-the-big-interests federal budget passed last year needs final ratification in the House. The vote could take place as soon as tomorrow.<snip>
At least one Republican, Rep. Rob Simmons of Connecticut, has had a change of heart, thanks to laudable grass-roots pressure -- which, to his credit, Simmons acknowledged.
"I voted for it in December," Simmons said of the budget in a statement released last week. But after consulting with constituency groups, Simmons decided that the bill "remains unsatisfactory" and that "the budget, as it stands, falls short." Moderate Republicans who had no business voting for this bill in the first place should be challenged to join Simmons.<snip>