House Republicans Who Voted Against Aid for Ukraine Were Mostly from Open Primary States

On Saturday, April 20, the House voted in favor of providing financial assistance to Ukraine. All Democrats voted for the bill. Republicans were split, but most Republicans (112) voted against the bill. The bill was H.R. 8035.

States in which independent voters were able to vote in 2022 Republican primaries elected 84 of the Republicans who voted “no.” States in which independents couldn’t vote in 2022 Republican primaries elected only 28 of the Republicans who voted “no.”


Comments

House Republicans Who Voted Against Aid for Ukraine Were Mostly from Open Primary States — 34 Comments

  1. I guess that’s an argument for open primaries.

  2. What does this have to do with ballot access? This is more of a “Republicans who didn’t vote to send Ukraine money are evil” type of post.

  3. HOW MANY OF THE NOV 2022 WINNING USA REPS GOT A MAJORITY IN THEIR EXTREMIST PRIMARIES ???

    FEC 2022 ELECTION REPORT STILL MISSING IN ACTION – MERE 18 MONTHS AFTER 2022 ELECTION

  4. Fred, I’m not so sure about that. Free J6 offers an alternate explanation.

  5. Which States have open primaries by Richard Winger’s reckoning? Which have closed primaries?

  6. High time to hand over to Russia every treacherous bastard who voted to finance and arm the nazis.

  7. USA REGIME DEBT NEAR $$$ 35 TRILLION ???

    $$$ X PER LEGAL RESIDENT IN USA ??? SOLVE FOR X.

    WILL ILLEGAL INVADERS PAY OFF SUCH DEBT ???

    WILL BIDEN/TRUMP VOTE FOR TRUMP/BIDEN ???

  8. Q on April 24, 2024 at 4:40 pm said: Libertarians oppose foreign aid, right?

    No, libertarians do not oppose foreign aid. Libertarians oppose the involuntary confiscation of funds from which foreign aid is given by the government. Libertarians have no objection to freely given foreign aid. If the government asked for donations for foreign aid, there would be no objection on libertarian grounds.

  9. The foreign aid that’s being sent to the genocidal gangster Kiev regime is obviously from extorted tax money, not voluntary contributions.

  10. Yes, and it’s especially ridiculous when we have many problems at home, a government deeply in debt, and sinking further into debt which is being passed on to future generations with each and every day.

    Imagine if your house was falling into disrepair because you don’t have money to fix it, your elderly grandparents at risk of eviction from the nursing home because you’re behind on making payments for it, your car is about to be repossessed, you’re maxing out credit cards and taking other high interest credit cards to make the monthly minimum payments…So naturally, you take out a second mortgage and raid your kids college fund and piggy bank…to give money to the street gang that’s fighting a turf war with another street gang on the other side of town.

    That’s our congress, giving money to foreign wars.

  11. HOW MUCH FOREIGN AID TO FOREIGN ANTI-DEMOCRACY MONARCHS/OLIGARCHS — ESP TO $$$ OIL PRODUCING REGIMES ???

    ONE FATAL CASE – OLDE IRAN SHAH REGIME 1941-1979

    NOW MAJOR KILLER REGIME IN CURRENT MIDDLE EAST

  12. I think Richard Winger’s analysis is flawed.

    Open Primaries (AL, AR, GA, IL, IN, IA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, ND, OH, SC, TN, TX, VA, WI): 43 A, 67 N
    Semi-Closed (AZ, CO, ID, KS, NE, NJ, NC, WV): 17 A, 10 N
    Non-Partisan, no party nominations: (CA, LA, WA): 13 A, 5 N

    Total for “Open” 73 A, 82 N

    Closed (FL, KY, MD, NY, OK, OR, PA, SD, UT, WY): 27 A, 28 N

    Aye: 73 Open, 27 Closed
    Nay: 82 Open, 28 Closed

    There is not even correlation, let alone the causality that RW’s comments imply.

  13. The fundamental mistake is that a Y vote is desirable, if that is indeed the implication being made.

  14. Jim,

    Why would we need a government to take and disburse voluntary contributions? The only role government should have in such a thing is none. If the desire to contribute to such a cause exists, government only needs to stay out of the way. The whole point of government involving itself is to extort money from taxpayers under threat of abduction and confinement (or death if they resist) and spending it in ways our supposedly enlightened leaders know better than the taxpayers themselves.

  15. @PF,

    47% of Republicans from “Open” primary states voted Aye.
    49% of Republicans from “Closed” primary states voted Aye.

    Would this lead to a conclusion that the type of primary causes a Republican representative to vote a certain way? Absolutely NOT, since there is negligible difference in how representatives vote based on their state’s primary.

  16. @PF,

    HR 8035 provide military assistance to Ukraine, Israel, and the Republic of China. Votes against were likely because of what it did not include in terms of USA defense of its borders, or failure to chop the 87,000 IRS Agents.

  17. HOW MANY PRIMARY/GENL EXTREMIST CANDIDATES WILL BRING UP THE FOREIGN AID ISSUE

    AND/OR

    ILLEGAL INVADER ISSUE

    AND/OR

    GOVT DEFICITS / DEBT ISSUES

    AND/OR
    THE MINORITY RULE ELECTION SYSTEMS IN THE USA ???

  18. I’m aware what was in the bill. At least some of the votes were against interference in Russia/Ukraine.

  19. @ Trump Donor

    Government would be better for coordinating aid in some instances when the aid something other than money or readily available commercial goods, but the aid required is goods which the government has stockpiled. Things like military equipment other than the basics, like small arms, ammunition, and clothing, for example. In the absences of government there would not be a ready supply of tanks available for shipping to Ukraine, nor the logistical capacity to move them in a timely manner. The military is also capable of distributing things like food aid more rapidly than could be coordinated in the absence of government, since it already has stockpiles of MREs. Aid also comes more rapidly from military hospital ships because the free market doesn’t keep a surplus of trained healthcare professionals on standby.

    Note that I said government is better at coordinating these things, not that it should be involuntarily taxing people to fund them. Ideally it would be asking for donations, and at least it should be providing the option of directed taxation so that, even if people are involuntarily taxed, at least they would have some control over how their tax money is spent.

    Libertarian government is not necessarily small. Libertarian government is necessarily voluntary.

  20. Can we agree that nothing remotely like that applies to this bill? It’s all money extorted under duress for priorities other than the ones most taxpayers have for their money.

  21. A majority of Americans in recent polling supported sending aid to Ukraine, including 77% of Democrats and 45% of Republicans. And 66% of Democrats to 35% of Republicans support sending humanitarian aid to Gaza. But, 50% of Republicans to 25% of Democrats support sending military aid to Israel. The result is that both sides are only so-so supportive of the bill. But, if it were broken up, both sides would more strongly support the part they want.

    But, that’s talk. We don’t have any way of knowing how people would allocate their money, if they had been given the option. Many might very well put their money where their mouth is. Others would find they have better uses for it. We don’t know.

    That said, given the reality we are dealt – that the money has already been confiscated and won’t be returned even if this bill did not pass – there are worse things the government could be spending our money on than helping Ukraine defend itself from a murderous dictator and his army of brainwashed slaves.

  22. Such polls don’t balance this spending against all the other things government could do with the money, or taxpayers could do with it if they got to keep it. It’s unlikely that they put it in the context of higher annual interest payments on mounting debt, either.

    It would indeed be interesting to what extent supporters of foreign aid would put their money where their mouth is if it really was up to them. My guess, and admittedly it’s only a guess, is that it would be to an extent those clamoring for it the loudest would consider shamefully low.

    We’ll have to disagree about the facts in Russia/Ukraine, and I don’t care to spend a bunch of time pointlessly going back and forth about them. In a saner world, you’d be free to donate to Ukraine’s ruling gang, and I’d be free to donate to defending our own border instead.

    I can’t think of many worse uses for my money than using it to help stoke the fires of an incipient third world war’s European theater (while simultaneously also stoking similar fires in the Levant and South Pacific), but my objection doesn’t rise to the level of going to prison for refusing to fund it, being killed for refusing to be taken to prison for such refusal, or even risking future garnishments, interest, penalties, etc for being caught trying to evade said involuntary funding.

    It would likewise be equally fruitless for me to spend effort in trying to convince you of my position on the matter. Even if I succeeded, we’d both still have to pony up or face such unpleasant consequences.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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