Rush Holt's Other Side

WARNING: Do not break the law before, during, or after reading anything I mention.


Rush Holt exploits the most heartfelt emotions of his constituents. He uses them, their unique situation in society, and the peculiar passions that they are personally attached to, for political advantage, like so many other public officials do, and will continue doing. Rush Holt, and the most extreme Democrat persuasions in Congress, paints every issue with partisan colors. They utilize specious arguments for divisive ends, and pose wicked visions and terrible specters as consequences for not consenting to their utopian schemes. Since our representative is so fond of using veterans, and every other categorized constituent, for popular posturing and pathetic pandering, then it is appropriate for us to take a closer look at Mr. Holt's other side, when he turned his back on veterans.


Rush Holt's record on national security is very troubling, and will be discussed in the near future. His voting record dealing with veterans is somewhat better. Where Mr. Holt has performed well for veterans he should be commended. That is the good side of our representative; but, as we have come to know, or will find out more in the future, Rush Holt has another side, one that is downright disgraceful and hypocritical. Rush Holt is a part-time advocate. He chooses when and when not to support specific constituents. At certain times, Mr. Holt firmly stands at your side, and other times, he abandons you for the sake of some partisan profit or allegiance to obscure principles that do not reflect our general sentiments. Mr. Holt's inconsistency is well documented, and the following items are only tiny portions of a lengthy public record.

If Rush Holt is such a great advocate for veterans then why did he vote against H.R. 3010 (109th) 2005-2006, which provided $1.9 million for the National Veterans Employment and Training Services Institute, and $29.5 million for the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Programs and the Veterans Workforce Investment Programs? Why did Mr. Holt vote against H.R. 2684 (106th) 1999-2000, which guaranteed $48 million for transitional housing loans for the Homeless Veterans Program Account, and $321 million for medical and prosthetic research?

Rush Holt was one of the 13% who voted against H.R. 4546 (107th) 2001-2002. This bill, which became a law just like all bills mentioned in this piece, included a 10% increase for "military retired pay for enlisted personnel credited with extraordinary heroism in the line of duty." It also "extended the period of eligibility for the use of Selected Reserve educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill to 14 years." Mr. Holt was also one of the 11% who voted against H.R. 2116 (106th) 1999-2000, which provided nursing home care for veterans, and "a program to enhance the provision of specialized mental health services to veterans" dealing with PTSD and substance abuse issues. The bill also included extending "the veterans readjustment counseling program" and "a program for furnishing housing assistance for homeless veterans."

How can Rush Holt claim to be a champion for veterans with a voting record like this? Let us retire Rush Holt in November. The citizens of New Jersey's 12th Congressional District have had enough partisan politics.  We do not need any more opportunistic manipulators playing with our fears and hopes for political profit.

Rush Holt's Disturbing Duality

WARNING: Do not break the law before, during, or after reading anything I mention.


Rush Holt is a political partisan in its most extreme form. He consistently supports disturbing political interests that diverge from the general interest of New Jersey's 12th Congressional District. Rush Holt is an opportunistic political creature. He has exhibited a curious display of colors that are well adapted to the environment where he prowls. If you closely follow Rush Holt's voting record, you will see a trail of misguided adventures led by the most radical Democrat's in Congress. The voters in district 12 must send Rush Holt home in November. We do not need a representative that serves interests other than ours. It is time to exert our rightful influence as citizens and cast aside the career politician obstructing our general will. Mr. Holt's voting record does not accurately represent his public pronouncements. Although this exercise represents a small sample of a larger, and more disturbing, voting record, it does reflect upon the nature of our representative, and his troublesome actions.


If Rush Holt is a strong proponent of education, and a worthy advocate for teachers, then why did he vote against those interests on several occasions, especially when he was in the minority? A closer look at Mr. Holt's dismal voting record clearly reflects that he has acted, and will continue to act, as a partisan Democrat, aligned against our collective welfare. The votes he makes for us have been turned over to the reckless will of a radical element nestled in the hierarchy of the Democrat Party. Why did Rush Holt vote against H.R. 1141 (106th) 1999-2000, which provided $56 million for educating the disadvantaged?

Why did our congressman vote against H.R. 3090 (107th) 2001-2002, which enabled teachers a tax deduction on income for school supplies paid for out of their own pockets, and also voting against extending this teacher tax deduction in H.R. 1308 (108th) 2003-2004, the very next congressional session? Why did Rush Holt vote against providing $5 million "for national service scholarships for high school students performing community service" in H.R. 2684 (106th) 1999-2000?

Why did our representative vote against H.R. 3010 (109th) 2005-2006, which provided $6.8 billion "for making payments under Head Start Act[,]" $100 million "for competitive grants to local educational agencies, including charter schools...to develop and implement performance-based teacher and principle compensation systems in high-need schools[,]" and $1.5 million "to provide information on diagnosis, intervention, and teaching strategies for children with disabilities?" This is not the voting record of a consistent advocate for education and teachers.

We must hold Rush Holt accountable for this reckless partisan adventure. We must get an explanation for the votes he casts in Congress. Rush Holt must provide specific reasons why he voted against the interest of education and teachers while proudly proclaiming to be their champion in Congress. Rush Holt's duality is worrisome. His political partisanship is second only to Nancy Pelosi. They have taken us for a ride on the Utopian Express, using every issue and crisis as a means to extend their radical ideology, and expansive political schemes, all the while dangerously blowing through every check and balance in the way, and fueling their journey with taxpayer money. It is time to stop the train of abuses that is hurling down the track, soaking up our liberty and property along the way. The only remedy is to change conductors. We can start this November by voting Rush Holt out of our seat.