Remember she ABSTAINED in the vote for a 60+% payraise for legislators. How can you abstain unless the Democrat powers that be were trying to give her a free ride? Remember to abstain from voting for her on Nov. 02, 2010
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Tammy Irons will get my vote.
She abstained just so she could say she didn’t vote for the pay raise. A dirty democrat trick. Don’t forget they voted themselves an automatic raise every year so that don’t have to vote on the pay raise issue again. She will be elected just because she’s a democrat and most people in this area don’t know any better. She won’t get my vote.
quote:She will be elected just because she’s a democrat and most people in this area don’t know any better. She won’t get my vote.
I do know better. Thats why she gets my vote.
quote:Originally posted by bamacarl:quote:She will be elected just because she’s a democrat and most people in this area don’t know any better. She won’t get my vote.
I do know better.
Obviously you don’t.
Do any of you anti-Tammy folks know anything about her opponent that would make you think he is any better?
Well it would seem to me that nobody has bothered to ask her why she abstained. It looks like an assumption to me. I'm sure every voter is EXTREMELY frustrated right now with the economy and with state and federal legislators getting raises. I know it is something on my mind as well. But it isn't the single issue that would make or break my vote at this point. I would recommend somebody simply ask and see how she responds.
Correst Jobe. Until the electorate begins to think for themselves we are stuck with poor excuses for elected officials like Tammy Irons.
beternU & AlabamaSon: If she dosen't have the integrity to vote on such a controversial bill, how can anyone be worse? She gets paid (handsomely now) for a part time job and wants to abstain beacuse she might get some flack? I want someone with integrity and backbone that will make the difficult votes regardless. There is no legitimate answer for abstention on a vote other than conflict, which was not the case on this vote.
beternU & AlabamaSon: If she dosen't have the integrity to vote on such a controversial bill, how can anyone be worse? She gets paid (handsomely now) for a part time job and wants to abstain beacuse she might get some flack? I want someone with integrity and backbone that will make the difficult votes regardless. There is no legitimate answer for abstention on a vote other than conflict, which was not the case on this vote.
AlabamaSon: So you think it is alright to intentionally not do your job? That is exacctly what she did. How long would you last at your job intentionally refusing to perform necessary tasks of the job? Fortunately you apparently live in Tennessee and cannot make a difference in Alabama. You fit right in with the not thinking for yourself crowd.
Do legislators deserve raises?
The legislators had not received a pay increase since 1991, so just to keep up with inflation would require about a 60% increase, which is where that number came form. Irons, IIRC, thought an increase was justified, but not that large of an amount, so she abstained. Vote against her because she is a Dem, not because of the pay raise so you can remain pure in the eyes of the Tea Party.
The legislators had not received a pay increase since 1991, so just to keep up with inflation would require about a 60% increase, which is where that number came form. Irons, IIRC, thought an increase was justified, but not that large of an amount, so she abstained. Vote against her because she is a Dem, not because of the pay raise so you can remain pure in the eyes of the Tea Party.
I will vote against her as she has no integrity, no backbone to make the votes she was sent to Montgomery to make. If she thought the amount was excessive, she should have voted against it. Anyone who thinks a 90 day per year part time job is worth $50,000 plus liberal expense account should vote for her regardless of party affiliation. If you don't think this is right, you should vote your conviction and vote against her. By the way, nice to hear from you Tammy or Curly, whichever you are.
quote:Originally posted by Families First:
I will vote against her as she has no integrity, no backbone to make the votes she was sent to Montgomery to make. If she thought the amount was excessive, she should have voted against it. Anyone who thinks a 90 day per year part time job is worth $50,000 plus liberal expense account should vote for her regardless of party affiliation. If you don't think this is right, you should vote your conviction and vote against her. By the way, nice to hear from you Tammy or Curly, whichever you are.
So your complaint is that the legislature was overpaid in 1991, since the most recent raise is merely a cost of living adjustment. What is the correct amount of pay and how did you calculate that number? Dont forget the associated cost of being a legislator, which as you noted are only required to be in Montgomery 3 months per year, but are on call 365 days per year, to answer to their constituents.
Tammy or Curly whichever you are, that was an artful dodge of the question at hand; Why did you not vote your conviction? If you thought it was excessive, why not vote against it? Because the Democrat leadership gave you a free pass. So in the future if taxes are submitted to be raised 60+% and you think it is excesive, you will abstain? Legislators are paid to vote for their consituients, not abstain. Take a stand, do not stradle the fence.
Regarding adequate pay, on the state legislature level down (not to include full time statewide elected officials, who should receive the average wage of a typical Alabama citizen), I personally believe PUBLIC SERVANTS pay should cover expenses only. These politicians have day jobs including you.
Regarding adequate pay, on the state legislature level down (not to include full time statewide elected officials, who should receive the average wage of a typical Alabama citizen), I personally believe PUBLIC SERVANTS pay should cover expenses only. These politicians have day jobs including you.
Her voting record is here:
https://www.votesmart.org/voti...ory.php?can_id=57440
https://www.votesmart.org/voti...ory.php?can_id=57440
You'll note that the NV was to override the veto, not a vote on the pay issue. You should vote against the incumbents as that is the instructions from the Tea Party. Dont even examine the issues, just vote against the Dems and for Reps, even at the state level as no one expects anymore thoughtful consideration from the flyover voters.
After the Reps are in charge, all will be well. After having control of the Congress from 94 to 2006, they were able increase spending 50%, which will be how they attempt to fix the economy again. Huntsville needs the fedgov dollars more than ever. I think if was Jefferson that first said the US government needs to put manned permanent habitats on the Moon...
Did you notice WHEN this group was started?
Vote Out Incumbents.org - A nonpartisan project started in 2003 that promotes voting out all incumbents in the House and Senate and replacing them with Progressive and Independent candidates.
Vote Out Incumbents.org - A nonpartisan project started in 2003 that promotes voting out all incumbents in the House and Senate and replacing them with Progressive and Independent candidates.
Voting out incumbents for no other reason then they are incumbents is useless. And it does nto work as displayed by the guaranteed reelection of Shelby, the grandfather of Pork Spending. ALObamians love their pork, whether its barbecued or building funds.
quote:Obviously you don’t.
I DO. I'am a former republican. Already been there and done that. NEVER AGAIN!!!!!!
I did not vote to re-elect Shelby.
And Juan/Tammy, why was your only recorded vote an abstention against the override of the veto. Another distortion, as there was a voice vote only, hence no record, to pass the payraise. Your bud Jim Folsom, Jr. refused to acknowledge the request of 4 legislators who requested a roll call vote. No straight talk from the left, only lies and distortions.
Juan/Tammy Why do you refuse to answer the question at hand as previously put?
Tammy or Curly whichever you are, that was an artful dodge of the question at hand; Why did you not vote your conviction? If you thought it was excessive, why not vote against it? Because the Democrat leadership gave you a free pass. So in the future if taxes are submitted to be raised 60+% and you think it is excesive, you will abstain? Legislators are paid to vote for their consituients, not abstain. Take a stand, do not stradle the fence.
ANSWER: Because liberals NEVER answer questions. Liberals NEVER have an honest answer.
Tammy or Curly whichever you are, that was an artful dodge of the question at hand; Why did you not vote your conviction? If you thought it was excessive, why not vote against it? Because the Democrat leadership gave you a free pass. So in the future if taxes are submitted to be raised 60+% and you think it is excesive, you will abstain? Legislators are paid to vote for their consituients, not abstain. Take a stand, do not stradle the fence.
ANSWER: Because liberals NEVER answer questions. Liberals NEVER have an honest answer.
quote:Originally posted by beternU:
Do any of you anti-Tammy folks know anything about her opponent that would make you think he is any better?
Dr. Jerry Freeman is a good man and will be a good leadder. Here is his site Freeman for Senate
And here is his FB page
quote:Originally posted by Families First:
Juan/Tammy Why do you refuse to answer the question at hand as previously put?
Tammy or Curly whichever you are, that was an artful dodge of the question at hand; Why did you not vote your conviction? If you thought it was excessive, why not vote against it? Because the Democrat leadership gave you a free pass. So in the future if taxes are submitted to be raised 60+% and you think it is excesive, you will abstain? Legislators are paid to vote for their consituients, not abstain. Take a stand, do not stradle the fence.
ANSWER: Because liberals NEVER answer questions. Liberals NEVER have an honest answer.
Who do you think you're talking to??? The voices in your head???
Raising taxes is obviously not the same as raising the salary of legislators, so your comparison is only valid for ignorant Tea Party lemmings.
I see. STILL NO ANSWER!!!!!!!!!!!
Typical liberal response, do not answer the question.
Typical liberal response, do not answer the question.
quote:Originally posted by Families First:
I see. STILL NO ANSWER!!!!!!!!!!!
Typical liberal response, do not answer the question.
I voted against the pay raise, the NV was for the veto override. I will always NV instead of voting against my party.
There is no recorded vote for the original pay raise vote as Jim Folsom, Jr refused to acknowledge the request for a roll call. So anyone who alleges they voted against the payraise and then voted to override the veto has some splainin' to do. Glad to see that you place party above the well being of the state. And before you ask I voted a split ballot on statewide positions appx 65% Republican and 35% Democrat.
I belive Tammy Irons will do her best for all the people in her district, She is respectful of people who are older, those who have disabilities and all others. She knows the ropes and earned her way in. I cannot see her bowing down to any special interest group. I could be wrong of course. I will not/never vote for anyone who tries to gain my vote by posturing about religion, guns, gays.
OkieDokie: She is part of the old "Boy" Democrat network. She is beholden to the Democrat machine and will do whatever they want her to do
But isn't that the case on both sides. I have seen that happen in state and federal government. Look what happened to Jeffords/Vermont. Doesn't seem like much of an environment is created for individualized thinking.
That is why the thought of some Church suggesting a vote one way or another sends chills down my spine. We do not want people to really think, do we? And if we can influence people by saying those trigger words/ gays/guts/God then alas that is all some people ever hear. If I see ANY politician touting their faith it is a red flag to me.
That is why the thought of some Church suggesting a vote one way or another sends chills down my spine. We do not want people to really think, do we? And if we can influence people by saying those trigger words/ gays/guts/God then alas that is all some people ever hear. If I see ANY politician touting their faith it is a red flag to me.
quote:Originally posted by AlabamaSon:
Well it would seem to me that nobody has bothered to ask her why she abstained. It looks like an assumption to me. I'm sure every voter is EXTREMELY frustrated right now with the economy and with state and federal legislators getting raises. I know it is something on my mind as well. But it isn't the single issue that would make or break my vote at this point. I would recommend somebody simply ask and see how she responds.
Think somebody tried to. JJ Ray said he was going to interview her and then she couldn't find time. She did find time to tell him she didn't know why she was on a list as most likely to vote for gay marriage, but now she's too busy for a full interview.
Again, there are the trigger words, gay marriage.
OkieDokie: But the liebral ole democrat boy network has been in power for over 125 years in Alabama and look at every thing it has done for us with its widespread corruption. It couldn't be worse if we did away with 100% of the legislators in office now. Betwen Paul Hubbard, Lowell Baron and (ther are probably 2-4 more but I can't call their names including the retiring senator who Irons wanst to replace) Roger Bedford it don't happen unless this group allows it. I can asure you that anytime Irons wants to do anything it must go through the power brokers.
Okay, just read this post today. Interesting. Lots of radical ideas on here. I submit that the person screaming about liberals never being honest is probably just as extreme on the opposite end of the spectrum. Both extreme liberals and extreme conservatives are dangerous to our country. It's time for moderate, independent minded Americans to take charge. The gridlock in Montgomery and Washington is hurting us all.
As per public servants only receiving enough money to cover expenses...that is ridiculous. We want the best and brightest to lead our local, state, and national governments. Granted we don't get the best and brightest, but we get who we elect. It is important that the salaries for public officials be attractive enough for those who are most capable. It may be a sad truth that people expect to get paid for working (sarcasm), but I don't mind if our public officials are paid well for what they do and what they endure. I don't want their salaries to be enormously high like in the California city recently in the news, but our legislators were due a raise. Whether or not it should have been 62% is up for debate, but the legislative salary needed to be increased. Believe it or not, some were losing money by serving in the legislature.
As per public servants only receiving enough money to cover expenses...that is ridiculous. We want the best and brightest to lead our local, state, and national governments. Granted we don't get the best and brightest, but we get who we elect. It is important that the salaries for public officials be attractive enough for those who are most capable. It may be a sad truth that people expect to get paid for working (sarcasm), but I don't mind if our public officials are paid well for what they do and what they endure. I don't want their salaries to be enormously high like in the California city recently in the news, but our legislators were due a raise. Whether or not it should have been 62% is up for debate, but the legislative salary needed to be increased. Believe it or not, some were losing money by serving in the legislature.
Jelb87: How can you suggest that a state legislator lost money with lobbyist paying them up to $200 per day with no questions, an expense account and $20,000 per annum (old salary) for 90 days. You lose any credibility you might have tried to secure with dumb satements like that. that comes up to over $600 per day available for each day including the weekends. Lose money, I don't think so.
My words:
Regarding adequate pay, on the state legislature level down (not to include full time statewide elected officials, who should receive the average wage of a typical Alabama citizen), I personally believe PUBLIC SERVANTS pay should cover expenses only. These politicians have day jobs including you.
If they truly want to serve, they should work for a minimum salary. The old need more money to attract better people line is a fallacy. How many of the elected officials return their pay? Recall John Kennedy returned all of his pay. How many politicians rely on their gov't salary for their sole income, more specifically the part timers like legislators? How many are like the Clintons who came into the presidency with a net worth of less than $250,000 and by the time they left office had a net value of over $2,000,000 and now have a net value of over $10,000,000. Look at how much it costs to campaign for office now. It is not uncommon to spend 10 - 1,000 times the salary of a gov't position in a campaign. No, a salary is not required to attract the best. I say to the contrary, the less they are paid, the more dedicated they will be. It appears many, if not most are in it for the money.
My words:
Regarding adequate pay, on the state legislature level down (not to include full time statewide elected officials, who should receive the average wage of a typical Alabama citizen), I personally believe PUBLIC SERVANTS pay should cover expenses only. These politicians have day jobs including you.
If they truly want to serve, they should work for a minimum salary. The old need more money to attract better people line is a fallacy. How many of the elected officials return their pay? Recall John Kennedy returned all of his pay. How many politicians rely on their gov't salary for their sole income, more specifically the part timers like legislators? How many are like the Clintons who came into the presidency with a net worth of less than $250,000 and by the time they left office had a net value of over $2,000,000 and now have a net value of over $10,000,000. Look at how much it costs to campaign for office now. It is not uncommon to spend 10 - 1,000 times the salary of a gov't position in a campaign. No, a salary is not required to attract the best. I say to the contrary, the less they are paid, the more dedicated they will be. It appears many, if not most are in it for the money.
So only wealthy/rich will be able to hold political office??? That is redonkulous, which another way of saying stunningly stoopid.
Juan, I have news for you. Look at what it costs to run a campaign. Its only the rich who run now.
quote:Originally posted by Families First:
Jelb87: How can you suggest that a state legislator lost money with lobbyist paying them up to $200 per day with no questions, an expense account and $20,000 per annum (old salary) for 90 days. You lose any credibility you might have tried to secure with dumb satements like that. that comes up to over $600 per day available for each day including the weekends. Lose money, I don't think so.
My words:
Regarding adequate pay, on the state legislature level down (not to include full time statewide elected officials, who should receive the average wage of a typical Alabama citizen), I personally believe PUBLIC SERVANTS pay should cover expenses only. These politicians have day jobs including you.
If they truly want to serve, they should work for a minimum salary. The old need more money to attract better people line is a fallacy. How many of the elected officials return their pay? Recall John Kennedy returned all of his pay. How many politicians rely on their gov't salary for their sole income, more specifically the part timers like legislators? How many are like the Clintons who came into the presidency with a net worth of less than $250,000 and by the time they left office had a net value of over $2,000,000 and now have a net value of over $10,000,000. Look at how much it costs to campaign for office now. It is not uncommon to spend 10 - 1,000 times the salary of a gov't position in a campaign. No, a salary is not required to attract the best. I say to the contrary, the less they are paid, the more dedicated they will be. It appears many, if not most are in it for the money.
Families first, it seems you don't give credibility to anyone who disagrees with you. You dismiss any opinion other than your own, so it really doesn't matter to me whether you think I'm dumb or not. I and everyone else here knows the truth about you just by reading your posts.
Also your words: "If they truly want to serve, they should work for a minimum salary." I bet your beloved Tea Baggers will volunteer to work for free or maybe at even do it for minimum wage. What do you do? Maybe your boss will send out a memo tomorrow that if you truly want to work, you will do it for a minimum salary.
I appreciate those who are willing to run for the state legislature and, if elected, serve. It's more than a 90 day per year job. It's a 24/7, 365 day responsibility. The decisions you have to make as a legislator are of utmost importance to every Alabamian. I want the best and brightest serving in these positions, and I want these folks to be compensated for their time, energy, and effort to make our state better. After all, the campaigning and the service costs these folks a lot more than just money. It costs them time - away from their families especially. Some drive very long distances to serve in Montgomery. I am glad our state pays legislators well. They do a good work - a work that results in both praise but mostly unfair, dishonest criticism from people like FF. The blanket characterizations of "politicians" (used in a negative context) is just plain mean-spirited.