Friday, March 03, 2006

Schwarz barely passes taxes test

A group claiming to have “no political ax to grind” recently ranked U.S. Rep. Joe Schwarz one of the most liberal Republicans in Congress on tax and spending issues.
Rankings from the National Taxpayers Union have fueled the anti-Schwarz sentiment of Club for Growth, an anti-tax group supporting Schwarz’s opponent former state Rep. Tim Walberg in the August primary election.
Schwarz scored 47% or a C-, meaning the Battle Creek Republican’s voting record “represents a minimally acceptable voting record on controlling taxes and spending,” according to the group.
The average Republican scored 60% (or a B) and the median score in the House of Representatives was 48%.
Michigan’s entire 15-person delegation (10 Republicans, five Democrats) averaged 39%. Schwarz's closest Michigan Republican allies were Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids (50%, C), and Rep. Candice Miller, R-Harrison (52%, C).
For taxpayers who put much stock in these stats, click here for Club for Growth’s own rankings.

5 Comments:

Blogger Radcliffe said...

Nice job finding that piece of info.

3:40 PM  
Blogger Radcliffe said...

Good work on finding that info.

2:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your intro--A group claiming to have “no political ax to grind...” is very telling.

How can you repeat their claim when David Keating is a leader of NTU and also the executive director of Club for Growth?

No ax to grind? Remember, Club for Growth is the group loading Walberg's campaign coffers with out-of-state cash.

Keating's involvement in both groups reeks. He runs two groups who push tens of thousands of out-of state dollars into our district to influence our elections.

This type of campaigning is insulting to us in the seventh district.

1:34 PM  
Blogger Allan said...

The only interest that Club for Growth has is economic freedom. They have no personal connection to the candidates.

Attacking "out-of-staters" is a strange form of bigotry. American citizens have every right to contribute to races across the country, since those Congressmen affect them just as much as their own.

10:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Allan, interesting point about people being able to spend money to influence elections. I heard recently on the news that someone was looking at limiting campaign fundraising to the representatives districts. That makes so much sense. Its not like i can afford to send every single one of the 435 members of congress a check, but some people can. Why should they be able to help someone run for my representative? The representatives could spend a heck of a lot more time working for us as opposed to working for dollars.

12:49 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Who links to me?