Two questions for Republicans who said No

New York’s entire Republican delegation (okay, that’s a small team) said No to the stimulus package backed by President Barack Obama and Democratic lawmakers.

Congressional candidate Jim Tedisco has also said that he would have voted against the bill.

So far, their arguments have been unconvincing. Here are two questions they should prepare to answer.

First, Republican lawmakers have long made it their mission to bring as much pork as possible home to their districts. (All politicians do this.)

During the last month, many of these same lawmakers have filled my in-box at NCPR with announcements of new taxpayer funding for projects in their districts.

On the campaign trail, these are the “successes” that they trumpet.

But now, at a time when many economists say the country needs an immediate stimulus — and possibly a much-larger economic stimulus than this package — they vote No. Why?

Second, some of these same lawmakers have talked about the fact that this bill will expand the federal deficit. Or, as Rep. McHugh puts it, the bill will borrow money from our grandchildren.

But Republicans have already presided over the largest expansion of the Federal deficit in our nation’s history, from 2000 through 2006, a period when they held total sway over spending in Washington.

In his book, former Republican Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill wrote that former Vice President Dick Cheney said, “You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.”

What’s more, the tax cuts that Republicans are proposing for their stimulus would blow just as large a hole in the national debt as Democratic spending.

So what gives?

If Republican lawmakers voted against this stimulus based on their convictions, then they’ve done the right thing.

But if, as Republican Sen. Arlen Specter suggested, they did it out of lockstep loyalty to their party’s leadership, then they’re in trouble.

Here’s what Sen. Specter told Huffingtonpost.

“I think there are a lot of people in the Republican caucus who are glad to see this action taken without their fingerprints, without their participation,” he said.

Specter was asked, How many of your colleagues?

“I think a sizable number,” he said. “I think a good part of the caucus agrees with the person I quoted, but I wouldn’t want to begin to speculate on numbers.”