Monday, June 23, 2008

Hodes Votes to Endanger America

Hodes puts liberal agenda ahead of national security

(Hillsboro) Hillsboro Republican Grant Bosse today blasted Democrat Paul Hodes for a series of votes that would have left the United States vulnerable. Fortunately, Hodes and his liberal colleagues did not prevail in their efforts to block funding for American military forces and to block a vital terrorist surveillance program.

“Paul Hodes has consistently voted against keeping America safe. He has a pattern of putting liberal fantasies ahead of national security,” Bosse said. “Monitoring overseas terrorist networks is more important than letting trial lawyers file nuisance lawsuits, and Paul Hodes should know it.”

On Friday, Hodes voted against a bipartisan agreement to renew the nation’s terrorist surveillance program (Roll Call #437). He also voted last week against an emergency supplemental funding bill for ongoing military operations (Roll Call #431), which is the second time Hodes has voted against funding troops in the field. Hodes has also pushed a bill to prevent the Department of Defense from communicating military successes to the American people, calling such efforts “propaganda.”

“Paul Hodes is wrong on defense, wrong to vote against our troops, and wrong to put trial lawyers ahead of terrorist surveillance,” Bosse added. “When he ran for Congress, Paul Hodes said he would make funding our troops ‘the top priority.’ Clearly, his priorities have changed.”

Find more about Bosse’s campaign at


Anonymous said...


This is one of the few times I think Hodes got his vote right.

There is this thing called the 4th Amendment that LIMITS government.

Saying it is for security doesn't matter. I mean don't the Democrats say we should not have guns because of security? And rightfully the GOP says no... read the 2nd Amendment.

The GOP would be much better off if it were consistent on the issues.. and of course if they stopped spending money like Democrats.

Grant Bosse said...

I don't usually post anonymous comments, but I'm happy to address this point.

FISA does not sacrifice our civil liberties in the name of security. It enhances our security by allowing intelligence services to monitor communications with foreign terrorist networks. It has helped disrupt these networks, and has saved lives.

The true debate over FISA wasn't about the 4th Amendment, but about the right to sue telecommunications companies for complying with a legal surveillance program.

As someone who worked for John Sununu while he fought to preserve civil liberties, going so far as to filibuster the Patriot Act, I would not support violating our Constitutional rights in the name of security. But I would also never support letting an important and legal anti-terrorist program expire because the trial lobby wanted a black check cashed at the expense of businesses who did nothing wrong.

Thanks for the comment. Please put your name on future comments if you'd like us to post them.