Montana Cannot Afford Senator Rehberg: 40 Reasons He’d Be A Disaster

A little less than a year ago, I put together a list of the best reasons Montana voters should6437358163_5082a5de9a_m reject Dennis Rehberg as he challenges Senator Tester. In the intervening year, little has changed—except that Representative Rehberg has become worse, authoring legislation and writing budgets that would do serious damage to Montana.

The list of reasons Rehberg doesn’t deserve to win another election in Montana is certainly reason enough reason to vote for his opponent Jon Tester, but one other piece of information bears repeating. All of these reasons to reject Rehberg are balanced by a record of no achievement. In over a decade as our Representative, Rehberg has no legislative achievement to speak of. It’s hard not to remember that his spokesman Erik Iverson, often called the incredibly insulting “Rehberg’s brain,” could only point to naming post offices when asked what Rehberg had done.

All of these reasons to reject Rehberg come from the last two years, since his last election. They don’t even touch his disrespect for Montana Indians, his calls to privatize Social Security, or even his penchant for travel misadventure, ranging from homophobic pranks to drunken horse riding.

This is the record of Representative Rehberg in just the past two years—a clear measure of a man who clearly lacks the resume, temperament, and judgment to be a U.S. Senator.

Tomorrow—why Montanans should enthusiastically support Jon Tester. Today, a litany of reasons why anyone but Dennis Rehberg should represent us.

MONTANA SPECIFIC ISSUES

ENVIROMENT, HUNTING AND FISHING

OLDER MONTANANS

CIVIL LIBERTIES

WOMEN

STUDENTS

  • He announced that Pell Grants (which help poor and middle class students attend college) were becoming the “welfare of the 21st century.”
  • He wrote language to cut Americorps, a cost effective program to improve communities and get more kids to college.
  • Concerned about wasteful spending, he didn’t go after defense contractors who’ve made obscene profits in Iraq and Afghanistan, but hungry schoolchildren.

HEALTH CARE

  • He wrote language which would have decreased the safety of our nation’s drug supply, increased dangers in the blood supply, increased lead in children’s toys, and reduced the FDA’s ability to regulate tobacco consumption. The language was so bad that the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association and American Lung Association all attacked Rehberg’s bill.
  • He wrote a secretive appropriations bill so lacking in transparency that even members of the committee were surprised by its content. It gutted national service programs, defunded vital reproductive health services, and aid for college students.
  • He wrote language to restrict federal spending on tobacco prevention.
  • He attacked a National Institutes of Health initiative designed to get drug treatments more quickly to those suffering from diseases.
  • He took thousands from the tobacco industry before writing legislation restricting the FDA’s ability to control the product.
  • He took money from chemical manufacturers before defunding a federal project to determine carcinogen threats from chemicals.
  • He suggested that drinking in moderation and exercise would solve the health care crisis.

TAXES

ETHICS

ELECTIONS

0 comments