Barrow Hits Anderson On His Votes To Raise Taxes

So here’s the deal, folks. John Barrow has done everything his constituents have asked of him. They were against Obamacare, so he voted against it. They are against government waste, so he got a bill passed eliminating wasteful spending. He is the very definition of a representative. Also, he’d like you to know that Lee Anderson will vote for a tax if lobbyists take him out to dinner.  Ad after the jump…

By the way, I’d like to compliment the Anderson crew on their web site. It’s great. All the issue statements follow the same formula of commonsense quote*/saying, then generalized statement  linking Barrow and Obama plus the word socialism. Then a line about why the federal government shouldn’t be involved in whatever it is the issue is. Unless it is abortion, in which case they should.

* However, Mark Twain didn’t say that line about politicians and diapers. If you have to attribute it to anyone, there’s a Libertarian Gubernatorial Candidate that is most famously linked with it.

** [update] I am not being sarcastic about my affection for Lee Anderson’s web site.


  1. jackson says:

    “So here’s the deal, folks. John Barrow has done everything his constituents have asked of him.”

    Stefan, this is the most ridiculous argument for John Barrow I have ever heard. I don’t see how anyone can say, with a straight face, that his vote against Obamacare was fulfilling the wishes of his constituents when he turned around and voted against repealing it. Its laughable.

    He voted for a massive stimulus that not only wasted millions in taxpayer funds, but did little to improve our economic situation. All it did was get us into more debt with China.

    More over, for the man that refused to repeal the largest tax increase in American history, I find it hard for him to criticize Lee Anderson support of the Fair Tax. Of course, John Barrow said this about Max Burns and every other Republican he has faced. Somehow, their support of a Fair Tax is a tax increase, when in reality its not.

    For a side that continually tries to make out Lee Anderson as some dumb hick, you reasoning here is pretty stupid.

  2. Stefan says:

    1) voting against obamacare was an important vote, because if it failed to pass the house, it would not have become law.
    2) The repeal vote had no purpose other than political grandstanding, as the senate already stated they would not bring it to a vote, much less pass it.
    3) the district supports parts of obamacare – just not the whole thing. You had the votes to strip out the individual mandate, which would force the senate into a hard position and they may have had to vote and send it to the president, but boehner couldn’t make that happen because he couldn’t get the ideologues in line. If Anderson goes to Washington, do you think he’d fall in with the boehner types, or the Paul broun types? Because 12th district voters said they liked the parts Barrow references below, just not the mandate – so if he falls in with the hard liners, as I imagine he would, that isn’t representing the people of the 12th.

    Oh, and here’s barrows statement on the repeal vote below from the ajc:

    “The reason it’s tough is because each side up here is making it tough,” Barrow said of the vote. “That’s what’s wrong with this place. Both sides have the same attitude and both sides are equally wrong, that this has to be an all or nothing proposition.”

    Barrow ticked off the appealing parts and noted even GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney says some of the popular pieces should remain. Barrow said he likes forcing insurers to cover those with pre-existing conditions, preventing lifetime limits on coverage and allowing young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26.

    But ideally Barrow would dismantle several key pieces of the law, including the individual health insurance mandate, the mandate that businesses with 50 or more employees pay for health coverage and the Independent Payment Advisory Board tasked with curtailing Medicare costs that foes fear will lead to rationing of care.

  3. jackson says:

    You can justify it anyway you want, but the few Democrats that are using this line of reasoning (as it relates to Obamacare) are only lying to themselves and worse, their constituents.

    Saying that Barrow didnt support repealing it because it wouldn’t likely pass is even more silly. Barrow has voted numerous times, on numerous measures, for legislation that either had not chance of passing the house. What is his excuse for those votes?

    Anyone likely posting on this site gets the politics of the Obamacare votes. Apparently, though, you think we are too stupid to figure it out.

  4. Stefan says:

    I, also, eschew the reply button.

    Likely wouldn’t pass? The House voted 33 times to repeal Obamacare! The Senate never took it up! How is that not political grandstanding…wait, are you unaware that it actually passed the House?

    What people want is to move past partisan gridlock. There are very few House members whose vote is available to either side – Barrow is one of the, If you replace Barrow with Anderson, he will join the intractable super right wing of the House and further contribute to the problems we have in Washington. You think he’d be a voice for bipartisan ideas? Have you checked out his web site?

    Lastly, I do not think you are stupid. I think you are wrong.

  5. Barrow has NOT done everything his constituents, which I am one unlike yourself. He has not held a single townhall after 5 p.m. in the District, though they have been asked for. The unemployment is skyhigh in GA-12 (, and he has done nothing. I reached out to him after the 2010 election to work in a bi-partisan way to help GA-12 and the high unemployment, and I was ignored. This is NOT a Republican/Democrat issue. It is that he has had 8 years to help GA-12 and he has failed as a Representative.

Comments are closed.