During the first session of the 109th Congress, Jim Cooper only sponsored 11 bills (but co-sponsored 145 others). Of those 11, six were non-binding resolutions. Just exactly what does he do in Washington? (Yet, he criticizes others for the same thing.)
19-Jul-2006: Following the party line, Cooper sided with 157 fellow Democrats to vote against protecting the phrase 'under God' in the Pledge of Alliegance! The bill's strategy was to put a legislative restraint upon Federal courts, so that they could not "tinker" with the Pledge.
Cooper was the only member of the Tennessee delegation to vote against the Pledge. So, when people on the street tell me that they will vote for Cooper because he is a "life-long Tennessean", my question is, "Where's the proof?" He is certainly out of step with Tennesseans on this issue.
19-Jul-2006: Even though the majority of Tennesseans are against the destruction of innocent human life, Cooper voted to support expanding the scientifically needless embryonic stem-cell research.
Why is it needless? Because there is a non-destructive source of "pluripotent" stem cells. That source is the umbilical cord. When a baby is born, and the cord and placenta are later ejected, they are tossed into a bucket on the delivery room floor. (I saw this happen when my daughter was born.) The blood inside the discarded umbilical cord is a rich source of stem cells that can be grown into a variety of human tissues -- including brain cells. Thus, it is wrong to say that embryos must be "harvested" to help patients with brain diseases (such as Alzheimer's disease). Cord blood is a purer source (and, more importantly, a non-destructive source) of stem cells. Cooper voted against the bill that supported cord-blood stem-cell research. Cooper also tried to override the veto. Why did Cooper support such a heinous bill, when there was a better alternative available? Well.... He got a 100% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America. (He must've worked really hard to support killing babies, because that rating is way up from his 30% rating from the same group in 2003.
13-Jul-2006:Cooper voted against the King amendment to HR 9 (which contains some dangerous provisions). The amendment by Rep. King would have stripped HR 9 of its requirement for multi-lingual ballots in Federal elections. In other words, Cooper voted against the American language in American elections!
Why is the language issue so important? Because understanding the American (English) language is a requirement to become a citizen. Only citizens are allowed to vote. So, the only logical reason to have a multi-lingual ballot is to assist non-citizens in voting!
29-Jun-2006:House Resolution 895 -- Supporting the tracking of terrorists by their financial transactions, and condemning the publication of classified information by the news media. (This was in response to the New York Times publication of information about the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program.)
Cooper was among 174 Democrats that voted no on this resoution. How does one vote against a resolution that simply supports legal measures to stop terrorism, and condemns the news media for irresponsibly revealing secret information?! (And, if that's how he really feels, then why is Cooper a member of the House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities?
08-Jun-2006: Following the party line, Cooper voted against the COPE Act, which would open up competition for cable TV and other broadband services. Competition would help reduce prices.
16-Dec-2005: Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act -- voted NO. (There is a violent gang from Central America, called MS-13, that has infiltrated at least 30 American cities. They are suspected of aiding al-Qaida, which wants to smuggle into the United States. Congressman Cooper sits on several committees -- including the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats, and Capabilities -- that have access to detailed information about our porous borders. How could he vote "no" on Border Security?!)
13-Dec-2005: With our nation's border security threatened, gasoline prices on the rise, and terrorists obtaining nuclear weapons, the Democratic majority in our House of Representatives found time to support a bill that requires the US Mint to issue an entire new series of coins designed to honor all US Presidents and their wives. (Of all the First Ladies alive today, only one is expected to run for president! Hmmmmmm.) The bill will also require a complete redesign of the back of the Lincoln penny! I'm not making this up. It has passed both the House and the Senate: the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005.
Here's the part that disturbs me. The Constitution of the United States requires our government, via the Congress, to coin money. (Paper money is un-Constitutional. And, ever since FDR took our money off the gold standard in 1993, our paper money is technically worthless!) In the justification for the bill, there is no mention of the fact that the Constitution requires coined money. Instead, there is concern that paper money has driven up costs for the manufacturers of parking meters!
14-Sep-2005: voted yes on the Conyers amendment (No. 25) to HR 3132 -- the Children's Safety Act of 2005 . That act established a national sex-offender registry for vicious crimes against children, and strengthens the law against child-pornography. But, Cooper sides with ultra-liberal Conyers to amend the bill, in order to make "discrimination" against sexual orientation and gender identity a Federal hate crime.
To his credit, Jim Cooper votes a bit more like a conservative that some of his fellow Democrats --
such as John Conyers, Maurice Hinchey, Patrick Kennedy, and Harold Ford, Jr.
