Sen. Toomey Defends Voting For Cromnibus Bill
PHILADELPHIA (CBS) -- Over the weekend, the Senate passed a $1.1 trillion "Cromnibus" bill that averted a government shutdown.
While the bill had stark criticism from both sides of the aisle, neither of the Pennsylvania Senators voted against it. Senator Pat Toomey defended his decision to WPHT morning host Chris Stigall, citing what he feels to be all of the good things that came out of it.
"This is a very tough vote…I think we got a lot of important policy wins on this thing. For instance, with respect to Obamacare: this bill prevents a taxpayer bailout of the insurance companies. I think that's a big deal. Under current law under Obamacare, taxpayers have to bail out insurance companies if they lose money on the exchanges...It exempts several hundred thousand Americans altogether from Obamacare, which is a big important concession the Democrats are making. The flaw of this bill…The Dodd Frank provision that the lefties were going crazy about, all that provision does is just means that our farmers, airlines, power companies, anybody who's got commodities to hedge is going to be able to hedge it less expensively, so it's going to save some money for consumers also. It forbids transferring of prisoners out of Gitmo…it cuts the IRS budget. It forbids banning incandescent light bulbs and it puts another year moratorium on internet tax actives. Keep in mind, in the alternative, if we had just done a CR (continuing resolution), none of those things would have happened."
Toomey also justified the passing of the bill by crediting how low they have been able to push discretionary spending with it.
"This thing essentially freezes spending…we've got discretionary spending down to the level of 2007, and when you have a Democrat in the white house and a Democrat-controlled Senate, that's better than what we did with complete Republican control back when I was in the house."
Finally, he defends the position that this bill puts him and his Republican colleagues in for their fight against President Obama's executive order on
immigration. He says that it actually puts them in a more favorable situation.
"That thing is alive for nine weeks, and in between now and then, we've got a chance, and I think we're in a much better position to use the power of the purse strings focused in a way that will prevent the President from being able to carry it out. That's what we should be doing. That's what I'm in favor of….How much damage can the president do in nine weeks? I think we're in a much stronger position to fight the President on this when it's not a binary choice: shut the whole government down or run the whole government but rather we can zero in on the offending policy…. I believe what the President is doing is inconsistent with the constitution, but when I saw the actual language, I don't think the bill unconstitutional. "