Join American Crossroads:

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Brown’s On The Wrong Side On Energy Issues

June 5, 2012 by

A recently published article in The Washington Post asserted that Brown “consistently votes on the wrong side on energy interests and in favor of the Obama agenda.” One such vote from the irresponsible Brown-Obama energy agenda was his enthusiastic support to begin debate on cap-and-trade legislation in 2008.

Under the reckless cap-and-trade energy tax agenda that Brown supported, the average Ohio family would incur a cost of more than $1,700, or an equivalent of facing a 15% tax increase. Not only would cap-and-trade increase taxes, but it also threatens to make Ohio’s precarious employment situation significantly worse. One non-partisan think tank found that under cap-and-trade, Ohio could stand to lose over 195,000 much-needed jobs. Brown’s vote to support Obama’s reckless cap-and-trade program is just one more reason his 95% voting record with President Obama is wrong for Ohio.

According An Article Published By The Washington Post, Brown “Consistently Votes On The Wrong Side On Energy Interests And In Favor Of The Obama Agenda.” “The good news for Josh Mandel, the Republican challenger to Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) is that he is running against a career politician at a time when career politicians are greatly out of favor. Brown, for that matter, consistently votes on the wrong side on energy interests and in favor of the Obama agenda.” (Jennifer Rubin, Op-Ed, “Josh Mandel Thinks He Can Win This,” The Washington Post, 6/5/12)

In 2008, Brown Voted For The Cloture Motion On The Lieberman-Warner Cap-And-Trade Bill. “Motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the motion to proceed to the bill that would cap greenhouse gas emissions nationwide and set up a trading system for companies to buy and sell emissions allowances.” (S. 3036, CQ Vote #141: Adopted 74-14: R 32-13; D 40-1; I 2-0, 6/2/08, Brown Voted Yea)

  • The Lieberman-Warner Climate Bill Marked The First Time Cap-And-Trade Legislation Made It To Senate Floor For Consideration. “Senators voted 74-14 to proceed to debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 3036), which aims to control global warming through the establishment of a federal cap-and-trade scheme. The debate marks the first times such legislation has come to the floor in either chamber after passing through a committee.” (Geof Koss, “Senate Launched Historic Climate Change Debate,” CongressNow, 6/2/08)
  • After The Vote, Brown Said That Climate Change Is “The Defining Issue Of A Generation” And Argued For “An Immediate Mandatory, Cap-And-Trade Policy.” “We have an opportunity to address the defining issue of a generation, and to do that in a way that is economically responsible. Done right, this legislation can stem the tide of destructive climate change and create new green jobs in Ohio. Done wrong, this bill could accelerate already devastating job loss in Ohio and in manufacturing states across the nation. We need an immediate mandatory, cap-and-trade policy to solve the problem of climate change. We also need to invest in alternative energy development and manufacturing in Ohio. It is not a matter of ‘if’ a climate change bill passes, but ‘when.’ Ohio’s interest must be represented in any final climate change bill.” (Sen. Sherrod Brown, “Brown Votes To Begin Debate On Climate Change Bill,” Press Release, 6/2/08)

An Obama Administration Study Concluded That Cap-And-Trade Would Be The Equivalent Of A 15 Percent Tax Increase, Or $1,761 On Average Per Family. “The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent. A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration’s estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year.” (Declan McCullagh, “Obama Admin: Cap And Trade Could Cost Families $1,761 A Year,” The Associated Press, 9/15/09)

A Report By The Economic Policy Institute Estimates That 195,200 Jobs In Ohio Could Be In Jeopardy Under Proposed Climate-Change Legislation. “The report, produced by the Economic Policy Institute, a Washington-based think tank, estimated that 4.1 million jobs nationally could be at risk under proposed climate-change legislation. The institute focuses its research on how policies affect low- and middle-income families. The report estimates that 3.6 percent of Ohio’s workforce, or 195,200 jobs, could be in jeopardy. That means Ohio ranks No. 3 out of 51, including the District of Columbia, in the number of jobs supported by energy-intensive manufacturing industries. Ranked by share of state employment, Ohio is ninth.” (Emily Mullin, “Report Claims ‘Cap-And-Trade’ Endangers Thousands Of Ohio Jobs,” The Athens News, 10/8/09)

  • The Economic Policy Institute In A Non-Profit, Non-Partisan Think Tank. “The Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a non-profit, non-partisan think tank, was created in 1986 to broaden discussions about economic policy to include the needs of low- and middle-income workers.” (Economic Policy Institute Website, www.epi.org, Accessed 6/5/12)

Brown Has Supported Obama An Average Of 95 Percent Of The Time:

In 2011, Brown Supported Obama 92 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.media.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

In 2010, Brown Supported Obama 98 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.innovation.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

In 2009, Brown Supported Obama 96 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.innovation.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

Filed Under: Energy, Ohio

Brown’s Anti-Free Trade Rhetoric Hurts Ohio’s Economy

May 22, 2012 by

Career politician U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown has made trade one of his signature issues in Congress over the last 19 years. Brown has argued that he would fix Ohio’s economy by overhauling U.S. free trade policies, yet he completely ignores the reality that Ohio benefits from increased free trade opportunities. According to the Ohio Department of Development, Ohio’s free trade exports were valued at over $41 billion in 2010. In fact, more than 650 Ohio companies and over 120,000 Ohioans benefited from free trade in 2010 alone.

But don’t just take our word for it. During Brown’s 2006 campaign, several Ohio newspapers criticized Brown’s trade policy and endorsed the other candidate. The Dayton Daily News said Brown “is wrong on his biggest issue.” The Cincinnati Enquirer complained that “most troubling about Brown is how he exploits Ohio workers’ fears with his faux-populist, anti-free trade rhetoric.” It’s clear that Brown’s anti-free trade position could significantly obstruct Ohio’s economic recovery and Ohioans deserve far more from their senior Senator in Washington.

Brown Said He Would Fix Ohio’s Economy By Overhauling U.S. Free Trade Policies. “Ask Brown how he would fix Ohio’s economy, and the answer is similar: One of the first things he would do is overhaul U.S. trade policies.” (Elizabeth Austere, “Brown Puts Hopes On Trade Issue,” Plain Dealer, 5/21/06)

According To The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce, 120,963 Total Jobs In Ohio Were Directly Supported By Exports In 2010. (U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Website, www.tradesupportsjobs.com, Accessed 9/28/11)

According To The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce, There Were 657 Ohio Companies That Exported Their Products In 2010. (U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Website, www.tradesupportsjobs.com, Accessed 9/28/11)

According To The Ohio Department Of Development, Ohio Merchandise Exports Were Valued At $41.4 Billion In 2010, An Increase Of 21.5 Percent From 2009. (“Ohio Exports 2010 Origin Of Movement Series,” Ohio Department Of Development Policy Research And Strategic Planning Office, March 2011)

The Dayton Daily News Said Brown “Is Wrong On His Biggest Issue.” “Rep. Brown’s signature issue has been trade. He has written a book about how American workers are victimized by the government’s support of free trade. He has voted against the big trade treaties, insisting they should be renegotiated to put more pressure on foreign countries to increase wages, improve working conditions and protect the environment. He believes that these reforms and commitments – which cost money – would reduce the advantage that foreign companies have over U.S. companies and would help slow the movement of jobs overseas. In truth, however, renegotiation would be more likely to result in no treaties or in cosmetic changes. Trying to change thing dramatically in Mexico or China from Washington would be like trying to change Iraq from Washington – without troops. So he is wrong on his biggest issue.” (Editorial, “Mike DeWine Still Best For Ohio,” Dayton Daily News, 10/15/06)

The Cincinnati Enquirer Complained That “Most Troubling About Brown Is How He Exploits Ohio Workers’ Fears With His Faux-Populist, Anti-Free Trade Rhetoric.” “Most troubling about Brown is how he exploits Ohio workers’ fears with his faux-populist, anti-free-trade rhetoric. He posits cause and effect where such relationships are not clear. He says he’s very pro-trade yet opposes efforts to free up tariff structures that often have disadvantages American firms more than those of other nations.” (Editorial, “We Endorse DeWine For Senate,” The Cincinnati Enquirer, 10/22/06)

Filed Under: Ohio

Brown Stand With Obama 95% Of The Time

May 1, 2012 by

As Senator Brown continues to campaign around Ohio he has complained that partisan politicians have tried to deceive the public by talking narrowly about his record. So let’s talk generally about his record in Washington. For 2011, The National Journal ranked Brown the 5th most liberal Senator. In fact, Brown has voted on a partisan basis his entire Congressional career. Not only has Brown voted with the Democratic party an average of 96 percent of the time, but he has also voted to support President Obama’s liberal agenda 95 percent of the time!

Is it really deceiving to point out the fact that Brown provided key votes for some of Obama’s most far-reaching priorities including the $2.6 trillion ObamaCare bill and the $1.18 trillion failed stimulus bill? Despite his election year gimmicks to distort his record, it is clear that Brown’s loyal support of Obama’s policies have done little to protect Ohio families while burdening future generations with reckless spending.

Brown Complained That “Partisan Politicians” Deceive The Public By Narrowly Talking About His Record.  “Partisan politicians, says Brown, who of course cites Republicans, ‘so often will say something about me or about progressives or about the president that in a narrow sense may be true, but it is really deceiving the public about the bigger picture.” (Stephen Koff, “Politifact Ohio At One,” Plain Dealer, 7/24/11)

For 2011, The National Journal Ranked Sherrod Brown The 5Th Most Liberal Senator.(The National Journal Website, www.nationaljournal.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

From 1993-2011, Brown Has Supported The Democratic Party An Average Of 96.3 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.media.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

Brown Has Supported Obama An Average Of 95 Percent Of The Time:

In 2011, Brown Supported Obama 92 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.media.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

In 2010, Brown Supported Obama 98 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.innovation.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

In 2009, Brown Supported Obama 96 Percent Of The Time. (CQ Voting Studies, www.innovation.cq.com, Accessed 3/21/12)

Obama-Brown Reckless Spending Agenda:

Brown Was The 60th Vote For The Senate Version Of The Health Care Overhaul Bill. (H.R. 3590, CQ Vote #396: Passed 60-39: R 0-39; D 58-0; I 2-0, 12/24/09, Brown Voted Yea; H.R. 4872, CQ Vote #105: Passed 56-43: R 0-40; D 54-3; I 2-0, 3/25/10, Brown Voted Yea)

  • The True Cost Of ObamaCare Once It Is Fully Implemented Will Be $2.6 Trillion. (Office Of The Speaker Of The U.S. House Of Representatives, Report, 1/6/11)

Brown Voted To Approve The $1.18 Trillion Stimulus Bill. H.R. 1, CQ Vote #64: Adopted 60-38: R 3-38; D 55-0; I 2-0, 2/13/09, Brown Voted Yea)

The Total Cost Of The Stimulus With Interest Is $1.18 Trillion:

  • In February 2012, The Non-Partisan Congressional Budget Office Revised Their Estimated Cost Of The Stimulus Up To $831 Billion. “When ARRA was being considered, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that it would increase budget deficits by $787 billion between fiscal years 2009 and 2019. CBO now estimates that the total impact over the 2009-2019 period will amount to about $831 billion.” (Douglas Elmendorf, “Estimated Impact Of The American Recovery And Reinvestment Act On Employment And Economic Output From October 2011 Through December 2011,” Congressional Budget Office, February 2012)
  • CBO Estimated The Government’s Interest Costs From The Stimulus Would Total $347 Billion Between 2009-2019. “Under CBO’s current economic assumptions and assuming that none of the direct budgetary effects of H.R. 1 are offset by future legislation, CBO estimates that the government’s interest costs would increase by $0.7 billion in fiscal year 2009 and by a total of $347 billion over the 2009-2019 period (see enclosed table).” (Congressional Budget Office Website, www.cbo.gov, 1/27/09)
Filed Under: Healthcare, Ohio