Report: Cox, Rohrabacher have poor voting habits
Alex Coolman
Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach) and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher
(R-Huntington Beach) are among the legislators from California with the
worst voting records on issues of “public interest,” according to a
report released by a nonprofit advocacy group.
The report, a “congressional scorecard” of votes cast during the 106th
Congress, was prepared by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group and
released late last week.
The organization compared the voting habits of representatives on 20
pieces of legislation -- ranging from environmental issues to health care
to consumer protection -- it considered matters of “public interest,”
said Kim Delfino, legislative director for the California branch of the
group.
“We just want to inform members of the public as to the voting record on
public interest issues,” she said. “We’re trying to inform the
electorate.”
Both Cox and Rohrabacher strongly disagree with the group’s
interpretation of their votes.
The study showed that Cox supported legislation the group considered to
be of public interest only 5% of the time. Rohrabacher’s numbers were
slightly better, with 10% of his votes meeting the group’s approval.
Of the state’s 52 representatives, only four had worse voting records
than Cox, according to the study. Only nine had worse voting records than
Rohrabacher.
In order to satisfy the group that a vote was in “the public interest,”
it had to produce a result that “was going to be the greatest benefit for
the greatest number of people,” Delfino said.
“For example, if there’s a vote for logging in our national forests, we
tend to take the broader view that it’s better to preserve public lands
as opposed to [supporting the interest of] one company that might be
making money off it,” she said.
In one case analyzed in the study, the group tallied the votes on a
proposal to cut a government subsidy for the timber industry. In that
instance, both Cox and Rohrabacher voted to slash the subsidy and
received good marks in the study.
Cox, however, said he strongly disputed the group’s interpretation of
what constituted a vote for the public interest.
“I would disagree with not only their position on each of the votes, but
also their characterization of what the vote was about,” he said. “What
they have really done is misdescribed the legislation and made it seem as
if it was an easy vote.”
Ricardo Bernal, press secretary for Rohrabacher, said the dispute over
what exactly constitutes public interest comes down to “a difference of
philosophy.”
“We’re not surprised that a liberal organization like U.S. PIRG would
give a conservative member like Mr. Rohrabacher a low score,” he said.
“Most of these votes [analyzed in the study] were for increased
government regulation, and the congressman is a very strong advocate for
limited government.”
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.