Funny I just got through writing how his vote was only virtue signaling, he could have stopped this deficit bomb in committee and chose not to.
-
-
-
I don't think that's fair. A no vote is a no vote. Voting to send it to the full Senate is voting to allow everyone to offer amendments. But after that process, the final bill did not address Corker's concerns, so he voted against it.
-
The deficit projections were still awful in committee and nothing they did made it better, stalling it would have allowed for a hearing on the trigger, he also could have sent it back to committee with the D's on their ~8 attempts. But he wasn't going to do that.
-
I do agree that he is closest on brand though, the other deficit Hawks just played make believe. Really makes me feel like there was a racial component to their hawkish behavior.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.