By Joe Carbonari
Rep. Ryan Zinke’s vote for the omnibus spending bill is interesting. Both of our senators, Steve Daines and Jon Tester, voted the other way. I’m a little confused. Tester got his wildlands bill in. It’s taken some flak from both those who wanted less development and those who wanted more. That’s often a good sign.
Tester, though, said there was a lot of “crap” in the omnibus bill overall – special deals for special people. He voted “no” and we still got ours.
Daines’ “no” vote was more conventional. He said he liked the tax breaks and the freeing of U.S. oil for export – good for the people of Montana. Still, he safely voted “no” against this “big government” bill, got us its benefits anyway, and can campaign against it later. Not bad.
Zinke may have done even better. He fought for the Land and Water Conservation Fund that has allowed us to preserve more of the public treasures of our state. It was included. The tax cuts were to his liking, as was the lifting of restrictions on exporting oil. His vote was not critical.
Zinke could have taken the free ride and voted “no.” Instead he chose this opportunity to display his “independence” and to showcase his dedication to the national defense. He is intelligent, canny, charismatic, and personable. He is being groomed. His star is on the rise.
By Tim Baldwin
Rep. Ryan Zinke wrote a guest column explaining his reasons for voting for the $1.8 trillion, 2,000-page omnibus bill. Zinke said he voted for the bill because it funded military, allowed oil exports and funded conversation. Zinke admitted that America’s spending is out of control, which must be redressed. Zinke thinks his vote chose the lesser evil.
No one liked the bill in total. Democrats disliked the bill because it reduced domestic programs; only 18 voted against it. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz expressed opposition but did nothing to slow down the bill’s passage. Other congressmen warned of measures that funded unconstitutional federal action, such as massive unwarranted surveillance and creating sanctuary cities for more undocumented immigrants and refugees.
What held this bill together then? Big oil. Nancy Pelosi said that without the oil embargo provision, Republicans would not have voted for it. Seeing this, President Barack Obama thanked Paul Ryan for “helping government work” by mustering enough Republican votes. Ryan avoided some responsibility, however, saying the omnibus bill was half-baked when he replaced John Boehner as speaker of the House.
Apparently, to most Republicans, oil interests ranked more valuable than constitutional limitations on the federal government. Then again, a 2,000-page spending bill has many “evils” from which to rationalize a vote either way. Despite the gripes from people and politicians, the federal government will continue as usual until a critical mass of people demand otherwise.