Votes On The Health Care Bill

In one of the most closely watched votes in history, all Republicans voted against the bill and 219 Democrats supported it. A total of 212 members voted against it.

Here is a list of the Democrats who crossed the aisle and voted against the bill:

Rep. John Adler (N.J.)

Rep. Jason Altmire (Pa.)

Rep. Michael Arcuri (N.Y.)

Rep. John Barrow (Ga.)

Rep. Marion Berry (Ark.)

Rep. Dan Boren (Ind.)

Rep. Rick Boucher (Va.)

Rep. Bobby Bright (Ala.)

Rep. Ben Chandler (Ky.)

Rep. Travis Childers (Miss.)

Rep. Artur Davis (Ala.)

Rep. Lincoln Davis (Tenn.)

Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas)

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.)

Rep. Tim Holden (Pa.)

Rep. Larry Kissell (N.C.)

Rep. Frank Kratovil (Md.)

Rep. Dan Lipinski (Ill.)

Rep. Stephen Lynch (Mass.)

Rep. Jim Marshall (Ga.)

Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah)

Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.)

Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.)

Rep. Charlie Melancon (La.)

Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho)

Rep. Glenn Nye (Va.)

Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.)

Rep. Mike Ross (Ark.)

Rep. Heath Shuler (N.C.)

Rep. Ike Skelton (Mo.)

Rep. Zack Space (Ohio)

Rep. John Tanner (Tenn.)

Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.)

Rep. Harry Teague (N.M.)

Ayes Noes PRES NV Democratic 219 34 Republican 178 Independent TOTALS 219 212

—- AYES    219 —

Ackerman

Andrews

Baca

Baird

Baldwin

Bean

Becerra

Berkley

Berman

Bishop (GA)

Bishop (NY)

Blumenauer

Boccieri

Boswell

Boyd

Brady (PA)

Braley (IA)

Brown, Corrine

Butterfield

Capps

Capuano

Cardoza

Carnahan

Carney

Carson (IN)

Castor (FL)

Chu

Clarke

Clay

Cleaver

Clyburn

Cohen

Connolly (VA)

Conyers

Cooper

Costa

Costello

Courtney

Crowley

Cuellar

Cummings

Dahlkemper

Davis (CA)

Davis (IL)

DeFazio

DeGette

Delahunt

DeLauro

Dicks

Dingell

Doggett

Donnelly (IN)

Doyle

Driehaus

Edwards (MD)

Ellison

Ellsworth

Engel

Eshoo

Etheridge

Farr

Fattah

Filner

Foster

Frank (MA)

Fudge

Garamendi

Giffords

Gonzalez

Gordon (TN)

Grayson

Green, Al

Green, Gene Grijalva

Gutierrez

Hall (NY)

Halvorson

Hare

Harman

Hastings (FL)

Heinrich

Higgins

Hill

Himes

Hinchey

Hinojosa

Hirono

Hodes

Holt

Honda

Hoyer

Inslee

Israel

Jackson (IL)

Jackson Lee (TX)

Johnson (GA)

Johnson, E. B.

Kagen

Kanjorski

Kaptur

Kennedy

Kildee

Kilpatrick (MI)

Kilroy

Kind

Kirkpatrick (AZ)

Klein (FL)

Kosmas

Kucinich

Langevin

Larsen (WA)

Larson (CT)

Lee (CA)

Levin

Lewis (GA)

Loebsack

Lofgren, Zoe

Lowey

Luján

Maffei

Maloney

Markey (CO)

Markey (MA)

Matsui

McCarthy (NY)

McCollum

McDermott

McGovern

McNerney

Meek (FL)

Meeks (NY)

Michaud

Miller (NC)

Miller, George

Mitchell

Mollohan

Moore (KS)

Moore (WI)

Moran (VA)

Murphy (CT)

Murphy (NY)

Murphy, Patrick

Nadler (NY)

Napolitano

Neal (MA)

Oberstar Obey

Olver

Ortiz

Owens

Pallone

Pascrell

Pastor (AZ)

Payne

Pelosi

Perlmutter

Perriello

Peters

Pingree (ME)

Polis (CO)

Pomeroy

Price (NC)

Quigley

Rahall

Rangel

Reyes

Richardson

Rodriguez

Rothman (NJ)

Roybal-Allard

Ruppersberger

Rush

Ryan (OH)

Salazar

Sánchez, Linda T.

Sanchez, Loretta

Sarbanes

Schakowsky

Schauer

Schiff

Schrader

Schwartz

Scott (GA)

Scott (VA)

Serrano

Sestak

Shea-Porter

Sherman

Sires

Slaughter

Smith (WA)

Snyder

Speier

Spratt

Stark

Stupak

Sutton

Thompson (CA)

Thompson (MS)

Tierney

Titus

Tonko

Towns

Tsongas

Van Hollen

Velázquez

Visclosky

Walz

Wasserman Schultz

Waters

Watson

Watt

Waxman

Weiner

Welch

Wilson (OH)

Woolsey

Wu

Yarmuth

—- NOES    212 —

Aderholt

Adler (NJ)

Akin

Alexander

Altmire

Arcuri

Austria

Bachmann

Bachus

Barrett (SC)

Barrow

Bartlett

Barton (TX)

Berry

Biggert

Bilbray

Bilirakis

Bishop (UT)

Blackburn

Blunt

Boehner

Bonner

Bono Mack

Boozman

Boren

Boucher

Boustany

Brady (TX)

Bright

Broun (GA)

Brown (SC)

Brown-Waite, Ginny

Buchanan

Burgess

Burton (IN)

Buyer

Calvert

Camp

Campbell

Cantor

Cao

Capito

Carter

Cassidy

Castle

Chaffetz

Chandler

Childers

Coble

Coffman (CO)

Cole

Conaway

Crenshaw

Culberson

Davis (AL)

Davis (KY)

Davis (TN)

Deal (GA)

Dent

Diaz-Balart, L.

Diaz-Balart, M.

Dreier

Duncan

Edwards (TX)

Ehlers

Emerson

Fallin

Flake

Fleming

Forbes

Fortenberry Foxx

Franks (AZ)

Frelinghuysen

Gallegly

Garrett (NJ)

Gerlach

Gingrey (GA)

Gohmert

Goodlatte

Granger

Graves

Griffith

Guthrie

Hall (TX)

Harper

Hastings (WA)

Heller

Hensarling

Herger

Herseth Sandlin

Hoekstra

Holden

Hunter

Inglis

Issa

Jenkins

Johnson (IL)

Johnson, Sam

Jones

Jordan (OH)

King (IA)

King (NY)

Kingston

Kirk

Kissell

Kline (MN)

Kratovil

Lamborn

Lance

Latham

LaTourette

Latta

Lee (NY)

Lewis (CA)

Linder

Lipinski

LoBiondo

Lucas

Luetkemeyer

Lummis

Lungren, Daniel E.

Lynch

Mack

Manzullo

Marchant

Marshall

Matheson

McCarthy (CA)

McCaul

McClintock

McCotter

McHenry

McIntyre

McKeon

McMahon

McMorris Rodgers

Melancon

Mica

Miller (FL)

Miller (MI)

Miller, Gary Minnick

Moran (KS)

Murphy, Tim

Myrick

Neugebauer

Nunes

Nye

Olson

Paul

Paulsen

Pence

Peterson

Petri

Pitts

Platts

Poe (TX)

Posey

Price (GA)

Putnam

Radanovich

Rehberg

Reichert

Roe (TN)

Rogers (AL)

Rogers (KY)

Rogers (MI)

Rohrabacher

Rooney

Ros-Lehtinen

Roskam

Ross

Royce

Ryan (WI)

Scalise

Schmidt

Schock

Sensenbrenner

Sessions

Shadegg

Shimkus

Shuler

Shuster

Simpson

Skelton

Smith (NE)

Smith (NJ)

Smith (TX)

Souder

Space

Stearns

Sullivan

Tanner

Taylor

Teague

Terry

Thompson (PA)

Thornberry

Tiahrt

Tiberi

Turner

Upton

Walden

Wamp

Westmoreland

Whitfield

Wilson (SC)

Wittman

Wolf

Young (AK)

Young (FL)

Join Emptysuit On Twitter

Click On Links:

Idaho Would Sue Government Over Health Care Reform ‎

Summary: Health Care Reform Bill H.R. 4872

Health Care Bill Mystery

Obama Admits He Does Not Know What’s In The Health Care Bill

Transcript: Bret Baier Interview With President Obama

Rush Limbaugh: Obama Is Destroying The Ecomomy

Rush Limbaugh Transcript: No, I’m Not Moving to Costa Rica

Democrats Positions On The Healthcare Reform Bill

Health Care Insurance And Health Care Benefits

Obama Forcing His View Of Health Care On America

Democrats Against Obama’s Health Care

Summary Of Obama’s Proposal For Health Care Reform

H.R. 3962 Summary

Affordable Health Care For America Act “H.R. 3962″

Obama’s Health Care, A Bad Idea

H.R. 3962 Tax Hikes

The Votes On H.R.3962

Obama Health Reform Lies

US Voters Want Congress To Drop Health

About Emptysuit

Your Opinion

[Via http://emptysuit.wordpress.com]

Deep Research Report on China Wind Generator Industry - 2010

2010 Deep Research Report on China Wind Generator Industry was published by QYResearch Wind Energy Research Center on Mar 2010. It was a professional and depth research report on China Wind Generator industry. In the report, the following information will be included:

China Wind Generator Production Supply Sales Demand marketing and technology (equipment) information;

China Wind Generator production and demand from 2009-2014;

China Wind Generator manufacturers Wind Generator Capacity Production Cost Average selling price Production Value Revenue Profit etc information;

China Wind Generator manufacturers Product Information

Downstream client or demand analysis, (included: sales contracts customers etc);

China Wind Generator industry development trend and related conclusions; Finally, we conduct a comprehensive summary of China Wind Generator industry, including the past present and forecast the future, we also made a feasibility analysis of the 1500sets/year Doubly-fed induction Wind Generator project ,we carry out an accurate calculation on investment cost, revenue, profitability, payback period. In a word, it was a depth research report on china Wind Generator industry chain. And thanks to the China Wind Generator marketing or technology experts help and support during QYResearch Wind Energy team survey and interviews.

More Information:

http://www.aarkstore.com/reports/2010-Deep-Research-Report-on-China-Wind-Generator-Industry-39106.html

[Via http://aarkreport.wordpress.com]

Google May Leave China

Google’s decision to cease its operation in China is edging closer to reality after months of negotiations. China Business News reports that Google plans to leave China on April 10.

The report cites an unidentified Google China employee, but this information has not been confirmed by Google. Allegedly, Google gave its China employees the option of moving to the company’s U.S. headquarters or working for its Asia-Pacific operations.

If this is true, it once again raises the question of what, exactly, is Google pulling out from China: its entire operations or just the search engine, which it has declined to censor? The latter now seems more likely.

In any case, if Google does pull out, it may be a long, long time before it returns. Peter Lui, who was formerly Google’s financial controller for the Asia Pacific region, said that Google’s public announcement to leave had “burnt bridges… There is no way Google can ever come back.”

[Via http://lmd308.wordpress.com]

DVD recommendation -- "Red Cliff"

I’m going to go way out on a limb here and recommend John Woo’s “Red Cliff” before I’ve even finished watching the film. It’s a two-parter that clocks in somewhere in the ballpark of five hours, so I’ve only finished part one. That much is enough to highly suggest you check this out. The tale is epic in every sense of the word — the battle-scene action is excellent, the story is great and the movie itself is gorgeous. If you don’t see an update to this post sometime tomorrow night it means part two was not a let down. I don’t expect it to be.

[Via http://davidkirkpatrick.wordpress.com]

Natural Gas Fueled Trucks

Natural Gas Fueled Trucks Mack Trucks, Inc. Brings Natural Gas Power To Refuse Applications New Freightliner natural gas truck Waste Management Fueling Trash Trucks with Natural Gas

COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) AS A TRANSPORTATION FUEL Clean Burning Natural Gas Vehicles  The Pickens Plan From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main article: Pickens Plan

On July 8, 2008, Pickens announced a major energy policy proposal, called the Pickens Plan. The plan promotes alternatives to oil, including wind and solar. A major feature of the plan is replacing the 22% of its electricity that the United States gets from natural gas with wind energy, which would then allow that natural gas to provide 38% of the nation’s fuel for transportation and reduce its dependence on foreign oil. The Pickens Plan calls for the United States to utilize its wind corridor in the middle of the country stretching from Texas northerly through the Great Plains to the Canadian border. He noted in Congressional testimony in July 2008 that his plan would generate new jobs and provide economic stimulus to this area, while noting that it would also require new transmission lines which traditionally antagonize some environmentalists and/or nearby populations.

Critics of the plan, however, point out that it is self-serving: Pickens is a huge investor in wind power, and subsidies and mandates for wind power would help his personal financial position. The announcement of the plan also coincides with Pickens’ need for federal subsidies for wind to be renewed, as he’s already begun placing orders for his planned wind farm in Texas. Pickens plans to spend $58 million on his multi-media effort to promote the Pickens Plan. Pickens multi-media campaign includes old media, such as newspaper and TV, and new media, such as YouTube and Facebook. Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, has expressed support for the Pickens Plan On December 27, 2009 during what is called the “Meet the Press Roundtable” New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg made the Pickens Plan case by talking about the need for energy independence. This discussion was in the context of the failed attack on an airliner on Christmas day, but Bloomberg echoed what Boone Pickens has been saying for the past 17 months: the USA is funding both sides of this war and the USA is transferring its wealth to people who don’t like it very much. Obama Administration Urged to Utilize Natural Gas Pickens on natural gas: You can’t beat it

UPS Deploys 167 Compressed Natural Gas Trucks Natural Gas in the Transportation Sector

China looking to Natural Gas for its Future Energy Needs

Cummins Westport • Natural Gas Engines.

Mercedes-Benz delivers first natural gas Econic semi Port of Los Angeles Negotiating With Vision Industries For Hydrogen Fuel Cell Hybrid-Electric Trucks Daimler introduces new Freightliner natural gas truck Navistar Pursues Natural Gas for MaxxForce 13 Engines

Country Comparison :: Natural gas – proved reserves

The plan is a stop gap till other options become available, we have more Natural gas than we have Oil reserves in this country, it is set up to do fleet vehicles, medium and heavier trucks while consumers would still be left to choose Hybrids and regular (though Pickens is not opposed to its use in personal transportation, it’s not the emphasis) cars. The wind power is supposed to reduce domestic consumption of Natural Gas for electricity and it is cleaner, Obama has also announced plans to create more Nuclear power plants, so it should work in its goals of reducing greenhouse gases and providing  alternatives to Oil imports.

[Via http://dummidumbwit.wordpress.com]

China in Africa: coloniser or development partner?

I just read an irritating article from CBSnews on China in Africa.

Irritating because it is filled with mistakes, emotional appeals and shallow analysis.

Irritating because most of the reader’s comments at the bottom of the article think that this is an excellent piece of writing.

*SIGH*

George Bush’s Aids policy has been a success and welcomed across Africa? Really? His no condom policy was great?

I think other people with more expertise beg to differ.

USA does not have baggage like Europe does in Africa? Does this author know anything about Africa’s history? Ever heard of Patrice Lumumba? As one of the commentators says:

“The United States does not carry baggage from a colonial past as do European countries.? Not from a colonial past, yes. However, propping up dictators who abuse their people and ruin their countries?that is a baggage. So is overthrowing revered leaders like Kwame Nkrumah and spearheading the assassination of beloved patriots such as Patrice Lumumba.”

Then you have the scare tactics such as the false claim that China has leased half of Congo’s farmland (media articles always seem to need to put some random statement with no evidence on this type of “neo-colonialism” by China these days).

In essence the author of the article argues that China’s involvement in Africa is driven by nothing other than China’s quest for political and economic power. There is no such thing as good will involved.

“Roads in Nairobi, notorious for their clogged traffic circles, are being widened and repaved with large billboards telling Kenyans that the work is a gift from the people of China. The fact that the roads will ease congestion for Kenyan motorists is an afterthought to the benefactor which requires modern infrastructure to move African commodities to ports for shipment to China.”

Yes, China’s investments do serve Chinese interests aswell as African interests, but this is the concept of “win-win” situations. And what is the problem with a situation in which both sides can derive benefits?

Isn’t this the very fundamental principle of a free market economy? With out the possibility of win-win outcomes there would be no trade and no interaction. In short there would be no market for anything.

One could of course say that genuine altruism entails the willingness to do something (such as building that road in Kenya) without there necessarily being any advantage to oneself. But let’s be realists here for a second.

Do you honestly think that any country out there is making investments and giving off aid in a purely altruistic manner? The driving force behind any country’s actions is self-interest, in particular in democratic countries because those elected governments are accountable to their people above all other things.

I am not saying that individuals working with aid is doing so with their own country’s national interest at heart. I know lots of people who work  in the aid industry, my parents included, who are genuinely committed to assisting other countries in reducing poverty and improving living conditions. But the state as an apparatus does not have a heart or emotions or feelings of empathy even though individuals working within these institutions may have this.

The article also talks about how America must come forward as a leader and promoter of human rights and liberty.  Similar to what I said above, do you really think that America is just in Afghanistan to promote progressive values?

No doubt this is part of their job there, my brother is in the army in Afghanistan. I know he is there because he truly is fighting for these values and with the aim of creating a better place for Afghanis.

But again lets ask ourselves, why Afghanistan? Why not Sudan? Why not Swaziland or the DRC?

The answer is that a government will have to prioritize, the American’s can’t use military pressure everywhere it is needed. They have to prioritize. And of course they will prioritize Afghanistan which pose a security threat to America. I don’t think this diminishes the importance of their work in promoting human rights in Afghanistan, but my point is that in this world where resources are limited, governments will always have to prioritize. And they will prioritize in their national self-interest first and foremost.

Something else that comes up constantly when China’s aid to Africa is mentioned is how they give indiscriminately to all governments including those who are sanctioned by the West such as Mugabe.

However I object to this vilification of China in an attempt to whitewash Western donors relations with African countries. Of course, just because the West has also been engaged in some pretty gruesome behaviour in Africa it does not make it right for China to do so aswell. But I think we need to look at what is actually being done.

Unlike the West, China are not engaged in creating coup detat, assassinations or install a puppet government in Africa. They are enablers yes, but not actively scheming out political plots . They are simply businessmen, not politicians in a quest for global dominance.

China is pragmatic and adhere to the principle of non-interference. This means that they enable African governments to do as they like. This can be bad in the case of Zimbabwe and Sudan. On the other hand, it also enables African governments who genuinely want to develop their economies to persue the policies they would like to. This is in starch contrast to Western donors who impose policy prescriptions in the name of good governance.

The emergence of China as an alternative source of funding is not just welcomed by sanctioned leaders such as Mugabe, but also by those governments who have their own nation’s interest at heart. Decades of SAP’s have not lead to a miraculous change the economies of African countries.  The imposition on policy restrictions and prescriptions is void of any democratic value (that the West proclaims to promote).

Looking at the development process of economies  such as Korea, Taiwan and Japan one finds that the exact policies used to develop those economies are being banned as conditions for aid in Africa. Despite having good intentions, these policies have amounted to nothing spectacular. The conditions imposed on aid-recipient countries has denied developing countries to implement necessary policies for their economic development, thereby rendered them aid-dependent.

China thus presents an opportunity for countries wishing to emulate the development process of  success countries such as Korea, Japan and even the United States itself.  Of course,  “bad” countries such as Mugabe will not improve with Chinese funding, but at least the “good” ones will now finally regain some bargaining power ower their own policy decisions.

Does this mean that I am against imposing conditions on aid? No.

I see no reason why tax payers in Norway or Sweden should pay for Mswati’s children to go shopping in Paris and Milan. A lender and giver should of course have the right to be assured that the money goes to the people it was destined for, not some greedy individuals pocket. So conditions for transparency and corruption control are important measures. I do think it is immoral to back up regimes that violate human rights.

But the conditions attached to Western aid today does not stop at that. The conditions extend into policy decisions, social policy, economic policy, matters that we normally would consider the job of an elected government to execute are now being imposed by donors abroad. The West tiptoe around issues such as the discrimination against homosexuals (a true human rights issue) in the name of “cultural sensitivity” but instead demand the recipient economy relinquish any economic policy autonomy.

What do we really mean by good governance? A government that is transparent and combats corruption? A government that do not violate human rights? Or a government that opens their trade borders for Wester products? A government that follow specific economic policies that Western countries deem in their best interest (African’s can’t think for themselves seems to be the reoccurring motto amongst Western donors). To give a quote from one of my favourite economists, Erik Reinert:

“Race was convenient for explaining poverty in the colonies, thus exonerating the colonial prohibition of industrial production from blame….African’s were not poor because they had not been allowed to industrialize, they were poor because they were black. Today we when we emphasize the role of corruption n in creating poverty, we are a little bit more politically correct. African’s are no longer poor because they are black, they are poor because blacks are corrupt. In the final analysis the difference is marginal”

Ah that heavy white man’s burden.

We don’t have to choose between ignoring recipient government’s actions completely and imposing our own policies on them. If we want to demonstrate the value of democracy and freedom, the best way is to practice what we preach.

[Via http://shanghaisigrid.wordpress.com]

Google may shut down in China

Google appears to be getting closer to shutting down its strictly monitored search engine in China, according to news reports.

The reports, which cited people close to the situation, indicate that  Google advertisers in China are being advised to switch over to rival Baidu

Inc., out of fears that Google could abandon the country.

Following a targeted cyber attack on Gmail accounts emanating from China in December, Google announced on Jan. 12 that it intended to give all of its users open access to the Internet.

Google has since been negotiating with the Chinese government, as such a move would clash with China’s censorship laws. Those laws forbid access to Internet sites that criticize the government, display pornography or promote certain religious material.

A spokeswoman for Google declined to comment specifically on the negotiations, but reiterated the company’s intentions to remain an open-access site and said Google will soon make announcement on the outcome of its dealings with China.

“We have always said we intend to stop censoring, and we will be making changes soon,” said Jill Hazelbaker, spokeswoman for Google. “We are not detailing our plans at the moment. We will have an announcement soon, as in weeks not months.”

Read full CNNMoney.com story

[Via http://news.blogs.cnn.com]