When Rep. Reed says he cares …


I voted in support of the American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act because I care about keeping Americans safe by keeping terrorists out of our country. — Tom Reed

Tom Reed may care more about embarrassing our President and our country by refusing to help Syrian war refugees than he cares about terrorism. He seems mighty unconcerned about the many loopholes in firearms regulations.


Tom Reed announced his opposition to the Obama administration’s Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Trade Agreement.

I care about protecting American jobs and workers,” said Reed. “This agreement leaves too many questions about the way forward and has been rushed in order to advance President Obama’s legacy, rather than being thoroughly hashed out to ensure America has a fair trade platform upon which to make it here to sell it there. Creating such a far reaching trade agreement without properly addressing all the details just isn’t right.”

Tom Reed cares most to protect us from possibly advancing President Obama’s legacy evidently.


U.S. Rep. Tom Reed said Monday he is pushing for Congress to pass a spending plan prior to Dec. 11 to keep the government working through next year.  I care about making real progress in Washington for the sake of seniors, veterans and working families from around our region, Reed said.

By passing a common sense spending plan, we are protecting them (seniors, veterans and working families) and the hard‑working taxpayer. It’s only fair that we work together to get this plan signed into law and keep our economy moving forward without the pitfalls of Washington politics, Reed said.

Sure, taxpayers want the government to be funded; the only thing threatening that is GOP wackos. The “pitfalls of Washington politics” are most often due to dissension in Reed’s party.


I voted in support of the North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act because I care about securing our energy future and ending our dependence on Middle Eastern crude oil.–Tom Reed

The bill is H. R. 3301. It is a bad bill–political theater. It has little to do with “securing our energy future” and much to do with GOP power struggles. President Obama has promised a veto. Congress wastes our time with such stuff.


Tom Reed continued the fight for jobs when the House reauthorized the charter for the Export-Import Bank. “I care about ensuring we have quality, family-sustaining jobs throughout our region.–Tom Reed.

There is little reason to think that reauthorizing the Export Import Bank, however desirable, ensures enough quality, family sustaining jobs here or anywhere.




About whungerford

* Contributor at NewNY23rd.com where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in Congress, Political, President, Reed's Views, Shutdown, Terrorism, Treaties, War and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to When Rep. Reed says he cares …

  1. Deb Meeker says:

    I agree.
    “It’s only fair that…” is another of Rep Tom Reed’s pet phrases. What does Tom Reed know or care about fair wages for American workers, fair relief for students’ debt, fair distribution of tax burden (corporate vs. personal), fair creation of sensible gun legislation, fair treatment of women’s issues, fair treatment of refugees; the list could go on and on.
    What Tom Reed “cares” about most is the false persona he fools constituents with, while they rarely check on his voting record – which belies his caring.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. pystew says:

    From the December 2 “Reed Fights For Students” Press Release,Reed said,“I care about making sure every student can get the best education possible. The way we can help make that happen is by allowing parents, teachers and administrators the flexibility they need to appropriately teach our kids rather than forcing big government Washington policies on our local school districts.”


  3. Deb Meeker says:

    ” I care about the future of our students and was happy when we were able to come together to avoid an interest rate spike and pass the Smarter Solutions for Students Act that strengthened federal student loan programs. However, in the last decade, the cost of higher education has doubled while stagnant employment numbers across the country are signaling a tough economy for recent graduates, made tougher by the looming debt that follows graduation. Monthly payments are more affordable if you are employed.”

    “Rep. Tom Reed has the wrong priorities when it comes to the student loan crisis. He actually voted to start charging students interest on their loans while they are still in school. He has failed to protect Pell grants–which are often the only affordable loans available to students–from cuts. Reed’s policies do not make college accessible to more student or encourage young people to follow their dreams.
    These are the wrong priorities.
    In 2013, faced with a doubling of student loan rates, Reed voted to tie federal loan rates to Treasury bills, pushing a bill that subjected students to the whims of the marketplace over the life of each loan. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported that the bill Reed voted for could more than double loan rates. I believe that working families and the middle class deserve the lowest interest rates available, with rates locked in in over the life of a loan, rather than fluctuating rates that Reed voted for.”


  4. whungerford says:

    Here is a more recent statement:

    I care about making sure every student can get the best education possible. The way we can help make that happen is by allowing parents, teachers and administrators the flexibility they need to appropriately teach our kids rather than forcing big government Washington policies on our local school districts.

    Reed’s reference to ” forcing big government Washington policies on our local school districts” is particularly offensive. Reed refers to No Child Left Behind, a Republican initiative intended to improve education rather than to force big government policies on local school districts.

    I see no reason to believe that allowing parents, teachers and administrators the flexibility they need to appropriately teach our kids makes sure that every student can get the best education possible.


    Liked by 1 person

  5. pystew says:

    For teachers who were teaching with No Child Left Behind also found its requirements burdensome. The Middle School i taught in had Special Education Classes that would have a small number of students. These students’ low abilities (most worked on number recognition and basic addition) barred them from being Main-Streamed into regular classes even with an 1-on-1 aide. Their classes had to have teachers who were certified in their specific subject areas (Math-English-Social Studies-Science) in the classroom with the Special Ed teacher and a teacher’s assistant. That meant that the math teacher could teach only 5 regular math classes instead of 6, since one class needs to be with the Special Education students. That made the regular classes larger. The teacher had to have a common planning time with the Special Education teacher.

    Maybe No Child Left Behind didn’t have the prepared lesson plans that NYS’s Common Core has, but Big Government had their hands in the local school districts.


  6. whungerford says:

    Rep. Capuano on the education bill:

    The House this week also considered the Conference Report for S. 1177, the Student Success Act. This legislation reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act for four years and essentially replaces No Child Left Behind. You may recall I voted against No Child Left Behind because of the emphasis on testing and because I did not believe there would be enough federal funding to support the requirements the law placed on states and school districts. This conference report is a bipartisan compromise that increases funding for education. The legislation specifically directs resources to some important priorities such as STEM education, teacher quality and after school programming. It eliminates the overly broad “adequate yearly progress” federal measurement and replaces it with a system that gives states the flexibility to design accountability systems that best reflect the needs of their school districts. It also gives states the ability to consider more than just test scores when measuring progress, such as the degree of difficulty of a student’s coursework. I voted YES. The Conference Report for S. 1177 passed.

    All Democrats who voted and all but 64 Republicans voted AYE.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.