Rep. Maurice Hinchey in 2011 so far

Since the begining of the year we have spoken with several elected officials representing parts of Central New York. We have made efforts to receive any and all press releases and announcements and to distribute them to our readers. We have made sure that the campaign promises made to us on video, or to the public are being kept and followed. But there is a problem.

While the State elected politicians are making sure that we, and therefore you, are well informed the same cannot be said for all levels of Government. Looking at the Representatives and Senators for New York there is a vast silence – unless there is news that benefits their political clout. Even with news that highlights their political image, most of the Federal politicians in New York have been oddly quiet.

Looking at Representative Maurice Hinchey we see that since the start of the new year he has sponsored H.R. 336: To amend the Truth in Lending Act to protect consumers from usury, and for other purposes and HR 391, as well as co-sponsored 2 Bills.

Focusing on the Bills he has sponsored, Rep Hinchey is very vigourously attempting to save help 1 illegal alien. Yes a single illegal alien. H. R. 391 submitted Jan 20, 2011 by Rep. Hinchey alone and without co-sponsors, asks Congress make

“Emilio Maya shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.”

Who is Emilio Maya? He must be pretty important since Rep. Hinchey has taken the time, and therefore public tax money, to introduce 2 Bills before Congeress to personally help him (the first was HR 4618 in 2010 – not passed). Actually he [Maya] is an illegal alien (“Maya and his sister Analia came to Saugerties from Argentina over 10 years ago, remaining after their visas expired to work and start a business.”) that got to stay in America as an undercover informant for ICE. Somewhere along the way the deal was broken and Emilio had to go – until Rep. Hinchey took the cause.

In 2010 unemployment for Binghamton (part of the 22nd Congressional district of Rep. Hinchey) alone was 8.3% or 9,450 people. None of them got a Bill from Rep. Hinchey. The best they might have gotten was the Health Care Reform that New Yorkers did not want, and still do not want – and Rep. Hinchey voted for anyway.

As for the co-sponsored Bills, they are H.R. 191: Public Option Deficit Reduction Act, and H.Res. 20: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Senate should ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). In both cases Rep. Hinchey was among dozens of other politicians co-sponsoring the Bills.

HR 20 is summarized as

“Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) the full realization of the rights of women is vital to the development and well-being of people of all nations; and (2) the Senate should, therefore, give its advice and consent to the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.”

The bigger issue (as HR 20 is essentially improbable to not be passed) is HR 191. A Bill that seems like it should have been covered by another Bill that Rep. Hinchey loved – Health Care Reform.

It is summarized as

“Public Option Deficit Reduction Act – Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to offer through Exchanges a health benefits plan (public health insurance option) that ensures choice, competition, and stability of affordable, high-quality coverage throughout the United States. …create a low-cost plan without compromising quality or access to care. Sets forth provisions related to the establishment and governance of the public health insurance option, including that such plan: (1) may be made available only through Exchanges; (2) must comply with requirements applicable to other health benefits plans offered through such Exchanges, …(3) must offer bronze, silver, and gold plan levels. Requires the Secretary to: (1) establish an office of the ombudsman for the public health insurance option; (2) collect such data as may be required to establish premiums and payment rates; (3) establish geographically adjusted premiums … (4) establish payment rates and provide for greater payment rates for the first three years. Requires repayment of start-up costs for the public health insurance option. Authorizes the Secretary to utilize innovative payment mechanisms and policies to determine payments for items and services under the public health insurance option.”

Did you notice that? Do you know what it means?

“…provide for greater payment rates for the first three years.” Why? Why should a public health insurance option cost more for the first 3 years? Why pay a premium for something that is blatantly not worth the money?

“…utilize innovative payment mechanisms and policies to determine payments for items and services …” What exactly does that mean? Does that have anything to do with the 16,000 IRS agents that were hired because of the Health Care Reform? Does this mean that bank accounts would be open to the Government? Could the Government automatically withdraw payment for this public health insurance option?

Either way, why is it still not possible for a person in New Hampshire to buy health insurance in Texas, or anyone in any State other than their own? If there is an insurance plan being sold in the cash-strapped State of California, that covers all the basics required in New York but is cheaper, why can’t it be bought? Instead a public health insurance option will be utilized, that may in fact cost more and provide less. Does that make sense? Rep. Maurice Hinchey has never explained why interstate healthcare plans are not part of the Health Care Reform.

What else has Rep. Maurice Hinchey been up to?

Well he has failed to vote for or against any of the last 9 votes in the House (10 not voting out of 25 votes – 5 yea – 8 nay). The votes that Rep. Hinchey had no opinion on include:

On Passage – House – H.R. 359 To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions Passed 239-160, 35 not voting

On Passage – House – H.Res. 49 Providing Capitol-flown flags for recipients of the Medal of Honor – Under Suspension of the Rules Passed 424-0, 10 not voting (2/3 required)

On Passage – H.Res. 38 To reduce spending through a transition to non-security spending at fiscal year 2008 levels Passed 256-165, 13 not voting

Rep. Hinchey has also tried to re-elect Nancy Pelosi as Speaker, voted Yea to:
On Passage – House – H.Res. 22 Reducing the amount authorized for salaries and expenses of Member, committee, and leadership offices in 2011 and 2012. – Under Suspension of the Rules Passed 408-13, 11 not voting (2/3 required)

and of course voted against:

On Passage – House – H.R. 2 Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act Passed 245-189, 1 not voting

On Passage – H.Res. 9 Instructing certain committees to report legislation replacing the job-killing health care law Passed 253-175, 6 not voting

Not exactly the most illustrious record, but likely to make far-left supporters happy. Though no one should be surprised at the noncommital voting for anything to do with the deficit (HR 359) – as it is something that Rep. Hinchey made clear he does not recognize or understand

What else has Rep. Hinchey been doing? Right this second Rep Hinchey is complaining about losing the earmark for building Marine One. He makes a strong and valid point that Marine One should not be made by a foreign nation. We would love to tell you more about this PR opportunity – but Rep. Hinchey and his press manager Mike Morosi refuse to speak with us. Which continues to make us wonder why they are afraid to speak with the press. What is so important they Rep. Hinchey virtually hides from the press unless he has something he wants to tout.

Has Rep. Maurice Hinchey lived up to the campaign promises of 2010? Is he doing what constituents want? Has he made it clear that he is voting (or not voting) with a preference for his Party instead of the benefit of the people. Would you like to hear more? So would we, but until then we will just follow Rep. Hinchey and his voting record.

Only your support allows us to provide mid-term election coverage, political event coverage, and our political commentary. Visit Alchemy at World of VASS, and/or World of Vass, and/or our store on eBay – help keep us going. We appreciate your support.

About the Author

Michael Vass
Born in 1968, a political commentator for over a decade. Has traveled the U.S. and lived in Moscow and Tsblisi, A former stockbroker and 2014 Congressional candidate. Passionate about politics with emphasis on 1st and 2nd Amendments.

Thank you for lending your voice. We appreciate hearing what you have to say.

%d bloggers like this: