Republican lawmakers have repeatedly blasted Obama with blatantly ignoring the United States Constitution with his socialist healthcare legislation and other affronts at the freedom of Americans. Unfortunately, many of these same Republicans repeatedly blatantly ignore the Constitution on a regular basis. Cathy McMorris Rogers, Washington's Fifth Congressional District Representative is one of these Republicans and this article is dedicated to exposing her actual voting record for people voting in the polls on August 17^th and November 2^nd.

Cathy is Washington's is widely considered to be Washington's best Congressional representative (however, after looking at the record, Doc Hastings appears to be slightly more conservative, not voting with Cathy on three of the bills in this article), voting against TARP, the Obama Stimulus Plan, Cap and Trade, and Obamacare. However, I would argue that over 50%-70% of Americans would easily have voted against these plans. You really test the integrity of the representative by the votes they make when no one is looking. Many of these votes you might never have heard about, have given Obama's administration massive powers to suppress the rights of the American people directly against protections existing in the Bill of Rights. These votes matter! I urge you to go through these votes below with prayerful consideration. Most people I tell privately about them are shocked, which is the reason I am writing this for a wider distribution. These represent only a small sample of what I found when going through her voting record from 2005 – 2010. I have also included some votes that are just plain bad public policy.

Remember, you have a choice in August in the top-two primary. Given four weak Democratic candidates this year, a conservative will easily make it to the general election, and perhaps even two could. It is important that the candidate who most upholds the value of the Constitution goes forward. I personally am supporting Randall Yearout because he teaches the Constitution, the way the founders meant it to be interpreted, and I know he is much more likely to uphold the principles of limited government ensconced in that document than Cathy, who has proven by her voting record that either she has not read or understood the Constitution, or just does not care about preserving the government restraints outlined therein.

McMorris Votes That Help Expand Obama's Police State:

H.R. 4614 - Enhanced DNA Collection Act

H.R. 418 - READ ID Act

H.R. 1955 - Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act

H.R. 3199 and S. 2271 - Reauthorizations of Patriot Act

H.R. 5122 - John Warner National Defense Authorization Act

H.R. 5825 - Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act

S. 3930 - Military Commission Act of 2006

Votes Implementing More Government Regulations Which Hurt the Free Market

S. 2120 - Milk Regulatory Equity Act of 2005

H.R. 5121 - Expanding American Homeownership Act of 2006

H.R. 1256 - Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act

H.R. 3963 - SCHIP expansion - Welfare to Middle Class!

H.R. 6867 - Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2008

Votes on More Unconstitutional Uses of Taxpayer Monies

H.R. 1377 - Obama's Give Act

H.R. 2284 - Targeted Aid to Native Americans

Votes that Destroy United States Sovereignty

H.J. Res. 27 - Withdrawing from World Trade Organization (voted against)

H.R. 3045 - CAFTA Implementation Act

Votes on Unconstitutional Environmental Actions

H.R. 5059 - New Hampshire Wilderness Act of 2006

H.R. 509 - Marine Turtle Conservation Reauthorization Act

Vote on Illegal Foreign Aid (see also Marine Turtle Conservation Act Above)

H.R. 1886 - Foreign Aid to Pakistan

Vote on Unconstitutional Foreign Policy

H. Res. 1146 - Regarding War in Afghanistan (voted against)

Cathy Praises Carbon Taxer

Votes of Other Washington Congress Critters

H.R. 4614 - Enhanced DNA Collection Act

H.R. 4614: Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010. This one in particular really steams me because it is an Orwellian expansion of the modern police state that violates at least three separate provisions of the the Bill of Rights:

4^th amendment – The bill requires the collection of DNA samples to be included in a national database if someone is “arrested for or charged” with certain crimes. In many crimes there is no DNA evidence to match. If there is no DNA evidence to match, there is no reason nor probable cause for the collection of the sample. This is a blatant violation of the unreasonable search and seizures clause in the fourth amendment.

5^th amendment – The bill confiscates a person's DNA to be databased in a national registry prior to application of due process of law. The wording of the bill was not “convicted” but “arrested for or charged.” Because someone is charged or arrested does not mean they have been found guilty by a jury of their peers. Thus, this bill requires citizens to give up rights to their personal information prior to due process. Does anyone have any doubts that certain law enforcement officers might have additional incentive to arrest people just to expand their DNA database with this law in effect? After all, Tea Party supporters are now declared by definition to be lawless enemies of the state according to documents like the MIAC report.

10^th amendment – The bill coerces the states into giving up their rights as far as legislation extending to the criminal justice system by giving the states money to implement the “Minimum DNA Collection Process” and even more money for implementing the “Enhanced DNA Collection Process.” Under the general welfare clause all taxes should benefit all states, with none excluded on the basis of one or more of them not implementing a federal guideline. Financial bribery such as this is often used to coerce states into adopting policies that they otherwise would not, most of which end up trampling over the rights of their citizens.

I would also argue that this violates the ninth amendment, as people have an inherent right to keep their DNA records private. I will remind people that this is very sensitive information which can be used to determine susceptibility to various medical conditions. Insurance companies would pay good money to have access to this data on all citizens. Does anyone have any doubt that the government with nationalized healthcare might sell this data to insurance companies at a later date? What about breaches in security of the records? Remember the government's original promise that social security numbers would not be used as identification? This bill is just a further expansion of the individual tracking and surveillance grid which the fabian socialists have been building the last 50 years in order to emulate George Orwell's vision in 1984. And yes, Cathy went along with it along with every other Congress critter from Washington state.

H.R. 418 - READ ID Act

H.R. 418: REAL ID Act of 2005. Another police state tracking program which unlawfully tramples on states' tenth amendment rights, so much so, the states rebelled in mass, which has largely ground implementation to a halt. The legislation in Title II described “minimum document requirements” for state drivers' licenses, essentially creating a national ID system. “Papers Please!!!” The Soviet style citizen tracking grid is closer than you think . . . and Cathy went along with it. What I find really intriguing about this, and a lot of other votes, is the party of “states rights” went blindly along with this federal mandate, while the Democrats correctly overwhelmingly rejected it.

It is ironic that that communism requires the sort of tracking grid technologies that the Republicans are all so eager to give us. This is the reason for the false left/right paradigm – fabian socialism is enacted by restricting economic freedoms using Democrats and restricting personal freedoms using Republicans. Which ever side controls Congress, the socialist agenda moves forward nonetheless. This is not surprising since the large multinational corporations pushing it donate to both sides (it is a myth that large corporations do not like socialism—it destroys their small business competition as they cannot compete with increasing regulations due to lack of economies of scale. Remember large corporations funded Lenin, Hitler, and Chairman Mao) That is the reason it is important which Republican gets elected.

H.R. 1955 - Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act

H.R. 1955 [110th]: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This is a bill that the Obama administration could have used against the Tea Parties if it had been adopted. The bill in Section 899A defines “violent radicalization” as “the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.” It defines “homegrown terrorism” as “the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” Please note the vague definitions regarding force and violence. Who determines who has a “purpose of facilitating” violence? Facilitating is a particularly troublesome word since just pointing out abuses of power could be argued to facilitate a popular uprising against the government, whether that was the real purpose or not (the government would always claim it was). In fact under the definitions in this section the civil rights movement of the 1960s would have easily been considered “homegrown terrorism” since they were using civil disobedience (which I am sure the government classified as “violence”) to facilitate social change. There is no doubt in my mind that the founding fathers would be considered “homegrown terrorists” in the process of “violent radicalization” under these definitions.

If you consider adhering to the Constitution as an “extremist belief system” as most RINOs and progressives do, then Tea Party members who are trying to “advance political...change” would be involved in “violent radicalization” under this bill. This bill establishes a commission to study violent radicalization (i.e. including Tea Parties?) and to come up with better methods to prevent it. The presence of members asking tough questions to their Congress critters on health care seemed to be considered by the mainstream media as “intimidating” and “coercive” in an attempt to “further a political objective.” They have even been implying that protestors have violent intents despite no evidence to that effect. If you read between the lines, this commission would essentially be set up to study and define thought crimes based on the way violent radicalization is defined – George Orwell would be pleased. If you liked the MIAC report, you probably would love the reports generated with this legislation! And yes, Cathy and most of the criminal Congress voted for it!

If Congress wants to study why people might be upset with them, maybe they should actually consider listening to voters for a change and stop trying to targ

H.R. 3199 and S. 2271 - Reauthorizations of Patriot Act

H.R. 3199 [109th]: USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and

S. 2271 [109th]: USA PATRIOT Act Additional Reauthorizing Amendments Act. These were the reauthorizations of the infamous USA Patriot act originally passed in Congress in the midst of fear tactics used subsequent to the 9/11 attacks. Most of Congress was never even given a chance to read the original bill! The reauthorization did make a view minor improvements, but much of the domestic surveillance legislation was left in place. The bill should be better known as “USA Patriots rolling over in their graves act,” as it would be inimical to the values of our founding fathers. According to Benjamin Franklin, “They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.”

The Patriot Act was an utter assault on fourth amendment protections giving us “sneak and peak” warrants and roving wiretaps. While Cathy might not realize such violated the Constitution, the sneak and peak provisions were ruled Constitutional on September 26, 2007, more than a year after her vote on the law in the case of Brandon Mayfield who improperly incarcerated because of the illegal searches (only reversed on appeal because of Mayfield's substantial settlement agreement with the government prior to the case). In fact I recommend anyone review the Mayfield case to see the dangers of what happens when the government is given broad powers to hold someone without charging him and violate their privacy without probable cause.

Sneak and peak warrants allow officers to enter into someone's house, breaking and entering, without first presenting the warrant to the individual. As such, there is little opportunity to even challenge the warrant through due process, and a person might never even know their personal privacy has been violated. The roving wiretap provisions allow authorities to wiretap any device a person uses instead of a specific device, violating the particularity requirement of the fourth amendment and inadvertently allowing innocent law-abiding citizens to potentially be targeted if they happen to use the same phone or device a person under surveillance might use (think payphone etc.).

New burdensome business regulations were also included to make businesses (previously it was just financial institutions) report to Big Brother any cash that exceeded $10,000. The most nonsensical part of this regulation is that it made complying with it through “structuring” a crime – if one made multiple payments that just happened to add up to $10,000 that was a crime as well! In fact, many people could be considered to be violating the law just going through the normal course of business without even knowing it (same goes for the pre-existing financial institutions legislation)! The government cannot have people privately paying for goods with cash anymore, I guess . . . then it would not be under the all seeing eye of the Communist in Chief. This was one of numerous police state red tape requirements put on businesses.

I could write an entire book on all that is wrong with USA PATRIOT ACT. I wonder if any Congress critter would read it any more than they read the original bill.

H.R. 5122 - John Warner National Defense Authorization Act

H.R. 5122: John Warner National Defense Authorization Act. Basically, this bill was an authorization to expand the powers of the president (the current one I will call the Communist in Chief) to unilaterally declare martial law. It states in Sec. 333 “

(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--

`(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--

`(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

`(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

`(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2)”

This bill essentially destroyed the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 which kept the standing military from policing U.S. Citizens. Do you realize according to this wording, if another Katrina happened on Obama's watch and this law were in effect, he could just declare martial law and take over over the objection of even the local authorities or governors? There is a word for this – dictatorship.

Senator Leahy put it best when he stated, “we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central tenets of our democracy. One can easily envision governors and mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over their shoulders while someone who has never visited their communities gives the orders.” Luckily Congress later repealed these provisions. However, the fact that Cathy ever voted for them in the first place is quite disturbing.

H.R. 5825 - Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act

H.R. 5825: Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act. This bill allows for surveillance of U.S. Persons without a court order for up to 60 days or more based on certain circumstances. Why it would take that long to get a court order if there were legitimate probable cause, as required by the fourth amendment, I have no idea. By the way, I remember when Cathy was asked about this bill at a Campaign for Liberty Forum two years ago that she stated it did not authorize surveillance of U.S. Citizens. I would state that is blatantly false. Please read Sec. 102B(i), Sec. 112(e), and Sec. 113(e) which specifically talk about when the surveillance of U.S. Persons are allowed. I wonder if she read the bill. Even though there are some prohibitions on the use of the information gathered from U.S. persons itself, the monitoring of U.S. persons, in fact, is still allowed by the law, without a court order. This is a blatant violation of a U.S. citizen's privacy pursuant to the fourth amendment.