President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

50%

50%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 26, 2018 11:03 AM UTC

Mike Coffman Loves, Hates Omnibus Spending Bill

  • 14 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Rep. Mike Coffman. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

As a footnote to last week’s passage of a 2,200-page spending bill, here’s Rep. Mike Coffman’s press release explaining his sort-of no vote on the legislation–keeping in mind that Coffman voted yes on the motion to proceed to debating the bill, unlike a number of fellow Republicans who lodged a protest vote against debating a bill they hadn’t read.

Which was Coffman’s stated reason for voting against the bill himself:

“Today, I voted against the omnibus for the same reason I have done so in the past. While the omnibus contains some very good policy, I could not in good conscience vote on a 2,232-page, $1.3 trillion bill, without adequate time to review it. And let there be no doubt about it — while too many in my party have been obstructionist on DACA, Congressional Democrats have made it clear with this larded-up spending deal that the Democratic Party prioritizes pork barrel spending on items like subsidized trains in the northeast over finding a fix for DACA kids. This is a very bad day in the nation’s capital.”

But here’s the thing–Coffman did vote to proceed to debating the bill, which given the much wider margin on the final vote for passage was arguably the more decisive vote. And despite Coffman’s deploring of the rushed consideration of bill, he nonetheless praised it:

You would have no idea that Coffman voted against the bill from that Tweet, would you?

What you have here is just another case of Rep. Coffman hoping to have it both ways on a divisive issue–like voting against repeal of the Affordable Care Act after repeatedly calling for Medicare cuts, or running campaign ads implying, context-free, support from Planned Parenthood without mentioning Coffman’s repeated votes to defund Planned Parenthood. In this case, Mike Coffman wants credit for passage of a line-item for veteran’s mental health he supports without mentioning that he actually voted against it.

Once in awhile, it looks like principle. When it’s every single big vote, he just looks silly.

Tweet
Share

Comments

14 thoughts on “Mike Coffman Loves, Hates Omnibus Spending Bill”

      2. I'm going to make a sign and bring it to his debate or just follow him around hen he dodges the debate

        Coffman: 
        Repeal & Replace Obama Care!  FAIL
        Oversight of the VA Hospital : FAIL
         

        Ok Guy ok
        Retired Vet: yep

        He's a vet who's an ok guy but a failure in the important ways. 
        My neighbor is a retired vet and an ok guy.  Let's vote for him. Or anyone.

         

  2. Perhaps Mike will end up being the new Sec. of Veterans Affairs. Which has a shorter career future: running for re-election in CD 6 or taking a seat in Trump's cabinet?

  3. Coffman actually has sponsored some decent legislation for veterans – PTSD care, sexual assault reporting process for men as well as women, fixing the problems with the CHOICE card.

    But then Coffman never wants to actually pay for and implement these things.  The VA still stands as the nation's largest government health care program, and Coffman can't advocate for that. So he does keep trying to have it both ways.

    Coffman has grandstanded on why the VA hospital hasn't been opened yet (supposed to open this summer, but don't hold your breath), yet he is not, fundamentally, a problem solver, because he doesn't play well with others.

    Jason Crow  has been and would be a much better advocate for veterans and everyone in CD6.  And Roger Edwards would just try to privatize the VA.  So if someone were to be elected VA secretary, by Trump logic, it would be Edwards, the guy who wants to blow up the institution, not the guys who want to fix it.

    1. You fix that which is capable of being fixed. The VA is profoundly broken and not capable of being fixed. Let’s work together for a new solution in support of our Veterans.

      1. Roger, veterans love their VA, they just don't like waiting for the care. Vets appreciate being able to have caregivers who understand their issues, who don't necessarily order 5 point restraints if a vet starts shouting because something triggered his PTSD. They don't scold or shame the incontinent vet who soils the floor. They have the best staff anywhere, angels in scrubs.

        I know this from my own experiences when I was my ex's primary caretaker. Now our son has taken that responsibility on, but he and my ex prefer VA care to any other, because of that culture that's been built up over time.

        From the Military.com article:

        Their survey found that regardless of political party, branch of service or geography, America’s veterans strongly oppose privatizing VA health care. Eighty percent oppose turning VA health care into a system of private sector vouchers, and more than half of the veterans surveyed said that they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who supported privatization, including 53% of veterans who identified as Republicans, 57% of independents and 67% of Democrats.

        You have to know that the choice card program is buggy as hell. Vets still have to wait months, or in emergencies they get shunted to hospitals that may have a bed, and are happy to charge the VA (and taxpayers) for the care, but it won't be appropriate for the veteran. They usually don't have the records, won't dispense the proper meds, mean well but have no clue about treating wounded warriors. The best they can do is sedate the vet and put him in a bed.

        1. Mama,

          I understand your point and I know you have real world experience: how sorry I am for the suffering of families who must deal with the aftermath of war. 

          Almost every direct care person I have encountered at the VA hospital is committed to quality care. What the VA is not committed to is quality management.

          The VA bureaucracy is corrupt and so large; tweaking around the margins will not improve or deliver the reforms veterans need.

          How do taxpayers require the VA to reform its management practices?

          1. Taxpayers want the VA to be more efficient and get vets seen sooner. They do want it to be more financially accountable. I do agree with Mike Coffman (and you, probably) on one thing: the VA shouldn't be playing general contractor. They suck at building hospitals on time. But the Army Corps of Engineers isn't so great at it, either.

            As far as policy for veterans, I like IAVA's 6 policy fixes:

            1.Sustain Campaign to Combat Suicide Among Troops and Veterans

            2. Sustain Campaign to Recognize and Improve Services for Women Veterans

            3.Defend Veteran and Military Education Benefits

            4. Defend and Reform Government Support for Today’s Veterans

            5.Initiate Support for Injuries from Burn Pits and other Toxic Exposures

            6.Initiate Empowerment of Veterans Who Want to Utilize Cannabis

            Do you support any of these policies, Roger?

            1. Yes, I support ALL of them.

              We have a new CU hospital under construction in Highlands Ranch. As fast as they are progressing construction should be less than 2 years. Just one contrasting example of the Mike Coffman hospital failure.

  4. Here is a link to the details on the Highlands Ranch hospital. Five new hospitals with not quite twice the sq footage could have been built for the same price paid for the Aurora VA hospital.

    Just think, one could have been in Colorado Springs, one in Grand Junction, one in Cheyenne. Such poor decision making to locate one massive complex in the highest cost environment in the U. S. The VA can’t compete with the wage base for doctors. By law the VA can not be the highest wage base in the local economy. And no VA employee can make more than the President of the United States. Good luck in finding the employees to staff this monstrosity.

    https://www.Denver post.com/2016/05/26/uchealth-to-open-315-million-hospital-in-highlands-ranch/

    1. Your link doesn't work. Hit the edit button, scoot the post next to Denver, and it should work. Like this:

      https://www.Denverpost.com/2016/05/26/uchealth-to-open-315-million-hospital-in-highlands-ranch/

      That's a nice hospital. It still won't do as good a job meeting the needs of veterans as a dedicated VA hospital. But yes, the VA should get out of the hospital-building business. I think that they will at least have more oversight- that was something Coffman accomplished.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

65 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!