I know Ron Paul probably won't see this, given how busy he is in Congress and how many people vie for his attention and wish to contact him, but I want to put this out there. Hopefully he does see it, and if you agree with me, please write something similar - and send it to him or post your own open letter.
Dear Congressman Paul,
My name is Brendon DeMeo, and I'm a Political Science major from the University of Massachusetts Lowell. During your presidential campaign, I started to embrace the message of liberty. I knew something was deeply wrong in regards to the war on terror, and the Republicans sold out their party on almost every issue. They had no real passion behind their words, no real beliefs, and their rhetoric was all about gaining power whereas you were educating America. I was one of the people you educated.
At the Conservative Political Action Conference this year, every person on the ballot - Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Dick Cheney, Mike Huckabee and more - gave hollow speeches, besides you. And, many of the people there started to see that, as you and folks from the liberty movement educated them. I recall seeing one man, who sat in front of me and cheered for all the neocon speakers before you, completely change his disposition towards you during the afternoon of your speech. When you first came on the stage, he sat down and gave you a little clap, out of respect. At first, he was booing you during a few parts, or withholding applause. But I could tell your words resonated with him, because you gave a heartfelt speech which appealed to not only his intellect, but his heart, and it must've, because at the end he was standing up with almost everyone else in the packed room giving you a standing ovation, and he was cheering mightily.
You were on that strawpoll for a reason. That reason is because there are a lot of people out there want you to be president, when it all comes down to it. In addition, there's a reason you won that poll this time. It's because your campaign woke a lot of people up and since your campaign Campaign for Liberty has woken a lot of people up. At CPAC, we witnessed the fruits of your labor, and of the labor of liberty activists all over the country. The Revolution has come very, very far.
Right now, President Obama is destroying the country, just like President Bush did. The debt is completely out of control. Obama is promoting things like forced national service, higher taxes, false populism that empowers corrupt establishments, tons of new power for the Federal Reserve, corporatist/fascist healthcare, and never-ending war an interventionism. This is taking a toll on our nation. People who voted for Obama, at least the smart ones who look at what he does, rather than what he says, and aren't so in love with his façade that they try to rationalize his every broken campaign promise, are starting to get fed up with him. A lot of people at the healthcare town hall protests last summer were concerned former Obama voters who didn't know he was such a statist when they cast a ballot for him. I have friends and family members who regret voting for the man, and they're looking for a REAL candidate this next election - not another politician, like Romney or Huckabee or Palin. They're no longer craving a cult of personality candidate like Obama was, because they know they were terribly duped in 2008. They also don't want another interventionist, "spendopublican," who promotes the growth of the police state, a higher debt, higher taxes or more inflation, and government interference people's personal lives.
We need you to run for President of the United States once again. We need you to oust Obama, while defeating the Big Government Republicans along the way. We need you to educate people once again - blowback is the real root cause of Islamic terrorism, the income tax must be abolished, Medicare and Social Security must be phased out in a manner which doesn't put people on the streets but ends those programs before they implode and there's mass suffering across America. We need someone to promote a real healthcare plan, stand firm against one-world government schemes, the United Nations, and the Federal Reserve. In fact, I feel that a Ron Paul presidency would result in ending the Federal Reserve.
Some people say you're not the most charismatic speaker. But your followers are the most charismatic followers of any leader in the whole world. They're the most politically and economically intelligent ones too, and they understand the Constitution, and the proper role of government. We'll work extremely hard for you. I'm prepared to go organize for you in Massachusetts the day you announce your intentions to run for president. I'll dedicate my life - at least what I can dedicate - to the campaign, as I have to the Liberty movement, of which you are a huge part. The movement has grown exponentially in terms of numbers, and after all the things we've learned about political organizing from Campaign for Liberty, the Leadership Institute, and more, we're ready to take the movement to the next level.
So, Congressman Paul, I implore you to run for President in 2012. Even if you do not win - even if you do not win the primary, the movement will grow leaps and bounds once again. And with millions of more Americans onboard, the movement will grow far greater than it did during and after the 2008 campaign. After CPAC, I know you're the man we need to run in 2012 - there is no better possible candidate. In addition, your campaign would provide a boost to liberty candidates nationwide, as Americans head to the polls not only to cast a ballot for you, but 2012 liberty candidates at every level of government. It will provide a massive boost to the liberty movement. Whatever help you'll need, we'll be there to provide it.
I was drawn to the Ron Paul pro freedom movement during his campaign to become the nominee for president because of his qualities of character and personal integrity as well as his record of devotion to the principles of the American Revolution. In addition it was invigorating to find so many other citizens were drawn to it as well with such enthusiasm.
When I found out that Ron Paul founded the Campaign For Liberty I joined when the membership was just over 6,000. During the next year there was exponential growth resulting in its present numbers exceeding 227,730. But the growth in recent weeks and months has been excruciatingly slow with less than 100 new members each day.
The same activists post on the forums with the occasional new bee. I don't have the impression that the members are as active as they used to be in letting others know about our existence. There are examples of intense activism locally in spots across the country. But there is no longer any sign of the exponential growth with membership growing by doubling in a short period of time.
Perhaps I should have expected this between elections but I thought we were different given what we know, thanks to Ron Paul and the authors he has recommended, and the state of deteriorating affairs under the current leadership in the country.
I try to stay hopeful because the membership does grow and there are signs that there will be involvement of C4L in upcoming elections. We were helpful in getting our reps to join the Audit The Fed HR 1207 movement too.
I still believe we have reason on our side including a wealth of knowledge about economic theory and understanding of Constitutional issues and how they apply today. We know that government intervention both domestically, e.g. the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 coupled with Fannie May and Freddie Mac, the FHA, the Federal Reserve creation of the paper to cause the sub prime mortgage interest crisis, and in foreign affairs, e.g. military bases in over 130 countries costing over one trillion a year to maintain, has gotten us into our current fiscal situation with a rising national debt in the tens of trillions and growing federal government whose politicians ignore the limits and use sophistry to justify their usurpations with the support of the Supreme Court.
I still inform people I meet about the Campaign For Liberty and post about it everywhere I have the opportunity. I hope you are doing so too. I still wish that members become more involved in at least letting others know the Campaign For Liberty exists and that our growth becomes exponential again someday soon.
A two full page article on the Tea Party movement appeared yesterday, 16 February in the New York Times. Although Ron Paul is mentioned in the article there is no mention of his Campaign For Liberty nor of the Young Americans For Liberty. It is stated that there is a growing interest in Ron Paul across the country. In the article it is pointed out that people who have never been politically active are being drawn to the Tea Party movement because of their concerns about the financial crisis with foreclosures and unemployment growing as well as the efforts of the current administration to involve the federal government in a nationwide takeover of the health system.
Anger and fear seem to be the prevailing attribute of such tea party joiners and activists rather than any consistent ideology or understanding of what is happening and what needs to be done. There appears to be no leader and there are obvious attempts to take over the movement by a variety of presumptuous wannabes including the Republican Party leadership.
No need to reinvent the wheel! Ayn Rand grew up in Russia and experienced first hand the Bolshevik Revolution and life under the Communist Party. She had discovered in literature that man is capable of being heroic (a character in Victor Hugo's Ninety Three) and retained that vision as well as a desire to create such characters as a writer.
She came to realize that a hero is a man or woman who choses to be loyal to his or her values. The question was just which values are worth being loyal to. That is which ethical system makes sense. She studied history and identified the philosophy or theocracy which has prevailed in every society since the most primitive including the Soviet Union.
She realized that the kind of hero she envisioned would not be welcomed, rather that the prevailing philosophy would not be compatible with the kind of ideal person she envisioned. Ayn Rand was individualistic and valued the individual human life as her highest value.
She rejected the notion that the individual ought to hold the interests of others above his own or that it would ever be justifiable to sacrifice the individual for the alleged "good of society." Her philosophy holds that Man has a certain identity and that his essential distinguishing characteristic is the possession of a volitional conceptual consciousness.
Her philosophy holds that a right is a moral sanction to take an action in a social context and that the source of the rights of Man is his nature. The ideas expressed above come from her article The Objectivist Ethics in The Virtue Of Selfishness and an article entitled Man's Rights which appears in the VOS and in Capitalism:The Unknown Ideal.
The concept of no one having the right to initiate force is appealing but doesn't go deep enough.
The socialists and altruists consider they are morally superior to those who simply defend the rights of people to their earned property. They consider they are superior and hold the moral high ground because they are willing to have force used or its threat to be used to take wealth away from those they characterize as evil, selfish and greedy, to be given to those who are in need!
In order to win this kind of conflict one has to demonstrate at least to those listening to the argument, that the socialists and altruists premises are mistaken and that if their premises are fully implemented you end up with a totalitarian dictatorship, with some degree of tyranny along the way.
Otherwise you only argue that they have no right to take or tax and they claim that they do for a good cause. Virtually everyone in our society has been indoctrinated at home and in the schools and churches that man is immoral and selfish and that one should hold the needs of others above one's own, with the implicit premise that man is a sacrificial animal.
The only way to win the freedom of the individual is to challenge the premise that man is a sacrificial animal and that it is justifiable to force him to give up his earnings for the good of others. Ayn Rand dramatizes the clash of her rational alternative with the prevailing wisdom in Atlas Shrugged, which you know has been recommended by Ron Paul in The Revolution: A Manifesto.
Like it or not, we are living in a time when the ideology which prevails in our society and in the world is being challenged because it has proven to lead to tyranny wherever it has been practiced.
Man is not a sacrificial animal but is treated as if he were by our own government, witness the taxation of earned income, business profit, inheritance, property, sales and excise; regulation of business and industry, talk of reinstitution of the military draft; inflation of the currency; compulsory public education; ignorance of and flagrant disregard to the constitutional limits enumerated by the Founders; legal tender laws forcing us to accept worthless pieces of paper with pictures of politicians as payment for work or debts, etc
Implicit in all this is that the individual has no rights unless politicians decide to enslave others for his benefit or to enslave him for the benefit of others.
Poll: Do you believe the individual has a right to his or her own life with no unchosen obligations?
During my four decades of voting, I have often voted for the lesser of two evils. By the time the last election rolled around, I had had enough. I was faced with a Big Government Republican and a Bigger Government Democrat/Marxist. I finally threw my hands up and declared, "I've been doing this my whole life! If you vote for the lesser of two evils, there's only one thing you're sure to get...EVIL!" So I voted Libertarian.
I didn't give any more thought to the lesser-of-two-evils doctrine until the Scott Brown election in Massachusetts. After the election, I read some of my compatriots' remarks about how they were happy that they hadn't supported him because he didn't espouse all the principles that they held. He was just the lesser of two evils.
I, on the other hand, worked to elect Scott Brown. For the first time ever, I exhorted friends, family, and political allies to send a candidate money. I sent money-something I rarely did. Did I think that Scott was the ideal candidate to uphold the Constitution, to stop tax-and-spend fiscal policy, to reduce the size and scope of government? No. I wasn't even sure that he might not vote for a watered-down Obama health care plan or amnesty. Wasn't he the lesser of two evils? Yes. Then what had changed since the McCain/Obama election to the Brown/Coakley election to make me willing not only to choose but also to actively support one of the horns of the dilemma?
Before the Presidential election, it was clear to me that Obama was a Marxist. He, in his own words, described how he sought out Marxists teachers, mentors, and associates in college and then proceeded to teach Marxism and advocate it. As a political activist, he chose leftist revolutionary associates such as William Ayers, a wife who had no pride in her country and found it mean-spirited, a minister who was a racist and an America basher. As a Senator, he voted with the far left more than any other legislator. As a presidential candidate, he advocated re-distribution of wealth, government takeover of health care and energy, and a "fundamental transformation" of America. For a libertarian like me, he was obviously the greater of the two evils.
But I was tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. So I voted for neither. I "paid my money and took my chances." I told my friends, "If you liked Jimmy Carter, you're going to love Barack Obama!" I was expecting an inexperienced leftist ideologue who would add to my frustrations, taxes, and subjugations to a greater extent than Jimmy but still in the ballpark of Democratic presidents who preceded him.
I have found that, for aspirants to the Oval Office, talk is cheap. Many say one thing before they get there but act differently once they arrive. The gravity of the command of not only the USA but also of the whole Western World has a sobering and tempering effect on those who assume such responsibility. I was expecting such modification in our new President.
It didn't take long to discover that I had misjudged this newcomer's ambition, ruthlessness, arrogance, and audacity. Under the pretext that the sky was falling, he took control of financial institutions, banks, and car companies. He rushed through legislation that was supposed to fix the economy but mainly served to advance his power grab. He conspired with his Congress to take control of labor by taking the secret union ballot away from workers and by forcibly unionizing health care workers, to seize control of the health care industry, to take control of business, and to burden an already failing economy with massive energy taxes, regulation, and gov't control. He unleashed Interpol to conduct operations in the US without having to abide by US law or the Constitution possibly so that they could enforce global warming, hate-speech, or other desired UN laws that he could never get passed with the approval of the American people.
He appointed "czars," who were beyond the reach of Congress, to carry out his policies. One was an avowed communist. One wanted to use to sterilizers in the drinking water to control population and to authorize forced abortions. One lauded Chavez for taking control of his nation's media and worked to drive conservative talk radio out of business by assessing ruinous licensing fees. One wanted to use the taxpayer-funded NEA to create propaganda for him. One wanted to surrender US sovereignty to the UN.
He broke virtually every campaign promise and showed himself to have no regard for the truth except when it advanced his agenda. In the way of Chicago politics from whence he came, he used every dirty trick, strong-arm tactic, arm-twisting pressure, bribe, and back-room deal he could to achieve his ends. He showed no regard for the Constitution nor for the rights of our citizens.
This is understandable. A good Marxist champions the triumph of the state over the individual and does not care what he says or does as longs as it accomplishes that end.
So what if our economy crashes? So what if we all wind up on the dole or starving or in political prisoner gulags? Hey! If you're going to make an omelet, you've got to break a few eggs. Right? After all Chairman Mao, who is the favorite political philosopher of one of O's appointees, said that he was willing to "sacrifice" half of China's population to complete his People's Revolution. Lucky China! He only had to kill off 70 million Chinese to get it done.
This brings me to my re-evaluation of the lesser-of-two-evils principle. I have been forced to conclude that there are limits to its application or perhaps it should only be applied with a caveat.
Let's say that I am being asked to eat either a bad-tasting, unhealthy vanilla ice cream or a bad-tasting, unhealthy strawberry ice cream. Even though I might have more affinity for vanilla, I could rightly say that I refuse either on the grounds that I would be choosing the lesser of two evils. After all, each is going to be unpleasant to the taste and contribute to my lack of health. This is the kind of arena in which the two-evils doctrine functions very well.
But does it work in this situation? Now I am going to be force-fed one of the ice creams above, but one of them is laced with arsenic. If I were a strict adherent of the lesser-of-two-evils dictum, I would say, "I'm not going to choose the lesser of two evils," and, in so doing, risk death instead of minor harm. Of course, I would not do that. None of us would. We would choose the no-arsenic ice cream.
What has changed that has caused us to abandon the two-evils philosophy? It is because the evils are not comparable. One is catastrophically worse than the other. If a sadistic mugger gives me the choice between being beaten and having my children killed, I'm going to take a beating. Both choices are evil, but one choice is life-ruinous while one is painful and temporarily debilitating. We would all choose the lesser evil.
Therefore, in order to apply the two-evils doctrine, we must not only ask if we are faced with two evils, but we must further ask if the evils are reasonably comparable. If not, we must choose the non-catastrophic one.
This brings me back to Scott Brown. By the time his election reached national attention, the GOP had had several notable showings at the polls. The mood of the people seemed to be shifting away from the President and toward his opponents. As phenomenal as it seemed, Brown seemed to have a chance to win in a state where the GOP hardly ever won.
If he pulled off the win, he would deprive the Dems of a filibuster-proof Senate and strike fear in the hearts of all Dems facing re-election. That might be enough to stop the passage of further pieces of "The Transformation of America"-most especially, an amnesty bill. If amnesty passed, there might be enough illegal alien votes in 2012 to get O re-elected. If Scott Brown could stop that, he was getting my vote and money even if he shared no principles with me.
Why did I care? Wasn't O just the greater of two evils? After watching O and company at work for almost a year, my answer was no. I no longer thought that O lived in the land of Jimmy Carter or, more contemporarily, Joe Biden. My judgment was that he more properly should be placed in the company of Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, or Mao Tse Tung. Granted, he didn't have the iron grip on our country that those tyrants had on theirs, but that wasn't for his lack of trying. He was grabbing as much power, by hook or crook, as he possibly could with all possible haste and there was no reason to think that he would cease of his own accord. Someone or something was going to have to stop him if he were going to be stopped at all. I saw Scott Brown as the means to that end.
What had changed for me? I no longer saw the choice as between two comparable evils even though one was worse than the other. I saw the choice as more between a thunderstorm and a hurricane. Choosing between Jimmy Carter and Joe Biden is a situation where the lesser of two evils doctrine works. Choosing between Joe Biden and Mao Tse Tung is a case where it does not. For me, working to get Scott Brown elected or suffering the re-election of Barack Obama also was not.
Reasonable people may differ about my analysis of our current President. However you view him, I hope that my account will give you pause before you automatically apply the lesser-of-two-evils doctrine to make a decision. I hope you will first ask, "Are the two evils relatively comparable or is one so disastrous that it should not be equated with the other?" After Scott Brown, I know that I will.
Idaho's Campaign for Liberty is highlighting the neglected but common-sense principles we champion and reinserting them into the political conversation.
Then we helped organize Sovereign Idaho's Converge on the Capitol on January 18th. Among the seven State Representatives who spoke about legislation we are supporting, Rep. Phil Hart and Rep. Lenore Barrett each announced the Idaho Sound Currency bills they are introducing. Yes, this is so popular there are two bills being introduced.
Let the public discussion begin! It will take a huge effort to inform our friends, neighbors and citizen legislators about sound money and how it will benefit Idaho. Stay tuned as these bills make their way through the legislative process.
1111 LHOB Washington, DC 20515-2101 DC Phone: 202-225-5335 DC Fax: 202-226-1224 [Website] [Contact]
57 Suffolk Street Holyoke, MA, 01040 413-532-7010 413-532-6543
78 Center Street Pittsfield, MA, 01201 413-442-0946 413-443-2792
463 Main Street Fitchburg, MA, 01420 978-342-8722 978-343-8156
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. Richard E. Neal MA-2nd (D)
2208 RHOB Washington, DC 20515-2102 DC Phone: 202-225-5601 DC Fax: 202-225-8112 [Website] [Contact]
2 Congress Street Milford, MA, 01757 508-634-8198 508-634-8398
300 State Street Suite 200 Springfield, MA, 01105 413-785-0325 413-747-0604
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. Jim McGovern MA-3rd (D)
438 CHOB Washington, DC 20515-2103 DC Phone: 202-225-6101 DC Fax: 202-225-5759 [Website] [Contact]
8 North Main Street Suite 200 Attleboro, MA, 02703 508-431-8025 508-431-8017
255 Main Street Suite 104 Marlborough, MA, 01752 508-460-9292 508-460-6869
34 Mechanic Street 1st Floor Worcester, MA, 01608 508-831-7356 508-754-0982
371 South Main Street Suite 102 Fall River, MA, 02721 508-677-0140 508-677-0992
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for co-sponsoring HR 1207: The Federal Reserve Transparency Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted against HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. Barney Frank MA-4th (D)
2252 RHOB Washington, DC 20515-2104 DC Phone: 202-225-5931 DC Fax: 202-225-0182 [Website] [Contact]
29 Crafts Street Newton, MA, 02458-1275 617-332-3920 617-332-2822
558 Pleasant Street Room 309 New Bedford, MA, 02740-6246 508-999-6462 508-999-6468
The Jones Building 29 Broadway Suite 310 Taunton, MA, 02780 508-822-4796 508-822-8186
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted against restoring the gutted HR1207: The Federal Reserve Transparency Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Ms. Niki Tsongas MA-5th (D)
1607 LHOB Washington, DC 20515-2105 DC Phone: 202-225-3411 DC Fax: 202-226-0771 [Website] [Contact]
305 Essex Street 4th Floor Lawrence, MA, 01840 978-681-6200 978-682-6070
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted against HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Didn't vote on HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for co-sponsoring HR 2194: Expanding Economic War with Iran [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. John F. Tierney MA-6th (D)
2238 RHOB Washington, DC 20515-2106 DC Phone: 202-225-8020 DC Fax: 202-225-5915 [Website] [Contact]
Lynn City Hall Room 412 Lynn, MA, 01902 781-595-7375 781-595-7492
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted against HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for co-sponsoring HR 1207: The Federal Reserve Transparency Act [More info]
Voted against H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. Ed Markey MA-7th (D)
2108 RHOB Washington, DC 20515-2107 DC Phone: 202-225-2836 DC Fax: 202-226-0092 [Website] [Contact]
188 Concord Street Suite 102 Framingham, MA, 01702 508-875-2900
5 High Street Suite 101 Medford, MA, 02155 781-396-2900
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for co-sponsoring HR 2194: Expanding Economic War with Iran [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. Michael E. Capuano MA-8th (D)
1414 LHOB Washington, DC 20515-2108 DC Phone: 202-225-5111 DC Fax: 202-225-9322 [Website] [Contact]
110 First Street Cambridge, MA, 02141 617-621-6208 617-621-8628
Roxbury Community College 1234 Columbus Avenue Campus Lib Roxbury, MA, 02120-3400 617-621-6208 617-621-8628
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted against HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted for co-sponsoring HR 2194: Expanding Economic War with Iran [More info]
Voted against restoring the gutted HR1207: The Federal Reserve Transparency Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. Stephen F. Lynch MA-9th (D)
2348 RHOB Washington, DC 20515-2109 DC Phone: 202-225-8273 DC Fax: 202-225-3984 [Website] [Contact]
155 West Elm Street Suite 200 Brockton, MA, 02301 508-586-5555 508-580-4692
88 Black Falcon Avenue Suite 340 Boston, MA, 02210 617-428-2000 617-428-2011
Voted for HR 1: ["The Scamulus Package"] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Voted for HR 1388: ["Obama's Camps"] Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act [More info]
Voted for HR 1256: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2346: 2009 $106B War Supplemental [More info]
Voted for HR 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 [More info]
Voted for H.R. 3435: Another $2 billion for clunkers [More info]
Voted for HR 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009
Voted for HR 2647: Imperialism Authorization Act of 2010 / Hate Crimes Creation Act [More info]
Voted against restoring the gutted HR1207: The Federal Reserve Transparency Act [More info]
Voted for HR 2847: Making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes [More info]
Voted for HR 4061: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 [More info]
Mr. William Keating MA-10th (D) (freshman)
315 CHOB Washington, DC 20515-2110 DC Phone: 202-225-3111 DC Fax: 202-225-5658 [Website] [Contact]
1250 Hancock Street Suite 802- Quincy, MA, 02169 617-770-3700 617-770-2984
297 North Street Suite 312 Hyannis, MA, 02601 508-771-0666 508-790-1959
Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty. [?]
