Breaking Down the Hosue Vote on HR2454

The vote in the House on HR 2454, known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act (but more popularly as the "Cap and Trade" bill) is interesting to note. It was not done by party line. The vote was 211 Democrats and 8 Republicans for the bill, while it was 44 Democrats and 168 Republicans opposed to the Bill. One Democrat and Two Republicans did not vote at all on the bill.

Even though the majority of Democrats voted for and a majority of the Republicans voted against, it is interesting to note that there were "defectors", if you will, from the other parties.

Some other ways of looking at this vote in the House of Representatives can be quite telling (and odd, considering some of the choices offered). For instance, you can see by astrological sign how the votes were cast. The vote here was pretty much split down the middle with no sign being more or less for or against. The biggest gap, if you can even call it that, was Scorpio with a 21-11 vote for the bill. (Which is kind of odd, since Scorpio is a water sign. But we will not make any light jokes about Scorpio's "exaltation" being in Uranus.)

Another look at this vote breakdown, by gender, doesn't really offer much insight. The female vote was 45 for and 15 against, while the male vote was 174 for and 197 against. (Side note on this breakdown is that the three not voting were all male.) I guess one could offer up the thought that women are more concerned about the "global warming" and other environmental issues. But that would be quite the sexist view of things.

Even the "Boomer" breakdown says little of where the thinking on this bill is at. The only real thing to point out here is that baby boomers voted more opposing this bill (129 - 143) than the Pre- (65-47) and the Post- (25-22) Boomers. (There were one from each group that comprised the three not voting.)

The more telling breakdown of this vote were the regional differences and, obviously the vote by state. Regionally, the Midwest (47-53) and the West (58-40) were fairly split, with the Midwest mostly being opposed and the West mainly in support. The real differences were between the Northeast, who voted 66-17 for the bill, and the South, voting a more than doubled 50-102 against the bill.

The states, predictably, voted in accordance to how the bill would affect its constituents by and large (such as oil producing Texas, voting 9 yeas and 23 nays). A few notable exceptions were Florida (9 for and 15 opposed), Pennsylvania (8 "yes" votes and 11 "no" votes), and such high energy use states as Massachusetts (all 10 for the bill) and New York (25 - 4 in favor).

For those of you interested the three Representatives not voting, they were:
Jeff Flakes (R-AZ), Alcee Hastings (D-FL) and John Sullivan (R-OK). Congressman Flake offered an official statement regarding the vote. "Unfortunately, Congressman Flake was unable to vote on the bill due to a family obligation. Had he been able to vote today, he would have voted against it." Congressman Sullivan's office informed me that he was on "official leave." And Congressman Hastings office did not get back to me before the publishing of this article. (Although, one could speculate that the process where one politically opposing vote would also stay absent as a quid pro quo deal was in use here.)

No matter where you stand on the issues of this bill, whether you believe that we need to take action to stem the threat of global warming or you believe that the bill is a way to disguise the biggest tax hike in American history, the voting process is always an interesting view of how politics work and a major billis voted on in the world's greatest democratic republic.

You can view more about this particular vote at Washington Post's database, or at the Library of Congress website.

Sources
Congressman Jeff Flake's Official Website
http://flake.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=134743

Washinton Post
http://flake.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=134743