By U.S. Representative Tim Huelskamp, who represents the Kansas first district.

Do politics reflect culture, or does culture reflect politics?

In a representative form of government, what happens in Washington should be a reflection of what happens in each of the communities and among the people of our country. Those elected to serve are to carry to Washington the views, ideas, and priorities of their constituents. Not the other way around.

But increasingly, President Obama is attempting to transform the culture of our nation using manipulative political means.

President Obama seeks to replace America’s culture of self-reliance with a culture of dependence, religious liberty with intolerance and compulsion, and the American Dream with more American debt. He relies on the politics of envy and the punishment of success to manipulate the American people into believing that without government they are missing something to which everyone is entitled regardless of effort or merit. He argues “fairness” means everyone has the same outcome, not the same opportunity.

By standing in the way of economic recovery, the Obama Administration has forced a record number of people on to food stamps. But, the President is just fine with that. It means more Americans depend on political elites like him who merely take resources rather than produce them.

By forcing Catholic employers to pay for or provide contraception and abortion drugs, demanding health care providers and medical students to take part in activities that violate their consciences, or censoring military chaplains to preach sermons or perform ceremonies contrary to the tenets of their faiths, the Obama Administration has signaled its willingness to trample on religious liberty. It means bureaucrats have a greater grip on the American people than churches, synagogues, and mosques. It turns an “appeal to a higher power” from a prayer to God to a call to a Washington theocracy.

By refusing to deal with $16 trillion in debt — an I.O.U. larger than the size of the entire American economy — the Obama Administration is comfortable with indebting our children and grandchildren for spending they neither made nor consented to. All the while, Obama has displayed its contempt for those who are already shouldering a disproportionate burden of current taxes. When one percent pays 37 percent of all income taxes, the Obama Administration has the nerve to argue that it is not enough. Never mind that close to half of all Americans pay nothing in federal income taxes.

Making acceptable a culture of dependence, intolerance for faith, and demonization and punishment of hard work and success will have profound negative consequences for our culture. But, perhaps this is why the Obama Administration is doing so.

While those with the bully pulpit should seek to inspire greatness in the American people, all President Obama seems to do is espouse resentment. He wants Americans to envy straw men. He wants them to believe that they are but mere victims of a grand conspiracy to rid them of any and all any recognition and reward for their hard work. Simultaneously, he wants them to believe that hard work should not be recognized and rewarded; that the fruits of their labor are to be handed over to the elite government for its “wise and prudent” redistribution.

Contrary to President Obama’s interpretation of American history and culture, America’s success story is and will continue to be the result of limited government answering the views, ideas, and priorities of its people, not the result of government telling the American people what they need. It is the result of individuals being allowed to thrive, success being rewarded, and the spirit of charity and community responding to the immediate needs of those around us. And, it is the result of generation after generation leaving things better than they found them for the next not because government says to do so, but because God so instructs.

Congressman Tim Huelskamp represents the First District of Kansas. He serves on the House Budget, Agriculture, and Veterans’ Affairs Committees. He can be found at huelskamp.house.gov.

'Perhaps the president of the United States of America is also complicit in this horrible, tragic event'

DOJ selectively picked which news outlets received leaked documents

'You’re not going to find a constituent in my town halls say 'wait a minute -- I'd love to have Kathleen Sebelius have access to my medical records''

Heritage Action is the 501c4 lobbying arm of theHeritage Foundation.  They’ve released what Daniel Horowitz at RedState describes as “the first comprehensive conservative report card of Congress.”  Horowitz writes, “We can now determine which members of the ‘Tea Party Congress’ drink a hardcore brew.”

Unlike most other scorecards, this one was designed to separate the men from the boys.  Most traditional scorecards, and most prominently, the ACU annual report, tend to focus primarily on those votes which fundamentally divide the two parties.  They fail to probe some of the more courageous conservative votes against party leadership.

To that end, any Republican who is even minimally conservative is expected to score at or near 100%.  After all, at a minimum, any Republican should oppose Obamacare, vote down tax increases, and support the Republican annual budget.  This is how the likes of McCain, Graham, and Chambliss have been able to achieve stellar scores.  Except for those like Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and Dick Lugar, most Republicans will vote with their party on the final roll call of major bills.  In fact, anyone who is not on the list of 100% is someone who has voted with the Democrats in contravention to fundamental Republican values.  A perfect ACU score should be the floor, not the ceiling, for a conservative voting record.

The Heritage Action scorecard digs much deeper.

In just the first seven months of the legislative session, they scored 30 votes in the House and 19 in the Senate, many of which dealt with obscure amendments that sought to cut spending beyond the comfort zone of GOP leaders.

Heritage Action tells us up-front:  ”We are tough graders, and we don’t apologize for it.”  Indeed, only 13 of 100 US Senators and only 27 US House members out of 435 scored above 85% on the Heritage grading scale.

Nation-wide, the highest-rated US Senator is Jim DeMint at 99%.  South Carolina Rep. Jeffrey Duncan scored the highest in the US House with 97%.

There are two main categories within the scoring:  1) Whether they co-sponsored the legislation, and 2) How they voted.

Go here to read the details behind the scores for Kansas’ 4 Congressmen and 2 Senators.  Here are the toplines:

KS 1 Rep. Tim Huelskamp R 89%

KS 3 Rep. Kevin Yoder R 70%

KS 2 Rep. Lynn Jenkins R 71%

KS 4 Rep. Mike Pompeo R 78%

KS Sen. Jerry Moran R 77%

KS Sen. Pat Roberts R 71%

Looking inside Tim Huelskamp’s ratings:  Huelskamp scored a 60% on his sponsorship, and a 90% on his voting on key bills.  Huelskamp disagreed with Heritage Action on three items, two of which related to subsidizing farmers.

Kevin Yoder’s sponsorship rating was 0%, and his vote rating was 73%.  Looking at some of Yoder’s votes that were scored as negatives by Heritage Action:

• Again, Yoder co-sponsored none of the legislation deemed important by Heritage Action.
• Yoder voted “No” on an mendment that would reduce 2011 discretionary spending to fiscal 2006 spending levels.
• Voted “Yes” on a temporary “Kick the Can” Spending Measure.  This “legislation provided for the continuing appropriations for the federal government through April 8, 2011 – a short-term funding measure that ‘kicked the can down the road.’”
• Voted “No” to “Pass Alternate Conservative House Budget” that “would bring our country’s federal budget deficit in balance in less than ten years.”
• Voted “Yes” on two farm subsidy bills
• Voted “Yes” on the “Leahy-Smith America Invents Act” that would “Radically Alter Historical American Patent System.”  The “Legislation would overhaul the U.S. patent system, changing how patents are awarded, reviewed and challenged.”
• Voted “Yes” on #h677-2011, to “Increase Debt Limit with Minimal Cuts” and that would “provide for a two-step debt limit increase of $900 billion and $1.6 trillion, in exchange for various “cuts” and statutory spending caps.”

Pat Roberts scored a 50% on sponsorship, and a 72% on voting.

When compared to Senator Roberts, Jerry Moran also scored a 50% on sponsorship, and a slightly better 78% on his voting.

______________________

Connect with Benjamin Hodge at Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and The Kansas Progress. Hodge is President of theState and Local Educational Group of Kansas. He served as one of seven at-large trustees at Johnson County Community College from 2005-’09, a member of the Kansas House from 2007-’08, and a delegate to the Kansas Republican Party from 2009-’10. His public policy record is recognized by Americans for Prosperity, the Kansas Sunshine Coalition for Open Government, the Kansas Association of Broadcasters, the Kansas Press Association, the NRA, Kansans for Life, and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).

 

Rep. Tim Huelskamp said he 'clearly' asked CBO director to point to a single growth-generating government expenditure

Kansas Republican Rep. Huelskam fears that chaplains unwilling to perform same-sex marriages will face threats to their careers