Press Releases

Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) issued the following statement today after voting against the nine-month government spending bill:

“As with all compromises, this bill includes a number of both good and bad items, which I often refer to as ‘candy apples’ and ‘toads,’ respectively.  I understand that action must be taken, and I appreciate the hard work that has gone into this bill.  However, I feel there are myriad reasons to oppose this particular compromise.”

“I strongly believe that in November, the American people voted for change.  Among the more than 400 House-passed bills currently sitting stalled in the Senate are a number of appropriations bills, which authorize funding for certain government activities such as national defense, homeland security, education, and others.  In the normal course of business, there are supposed to be 12 appropriations bills, and these bills require regular (usually annual) authorization.  The House of Representatives passed and sent 7 of these bills to the Senate this year, but Senate Democrats wouldn’t pass any of them, stiff-arming us and impeding regular order.  Leadership in the House of Representatives decided not to have us vote on the remaining 5 because the Senate would not act.”

“Compromise is part of the legislating process, and unfortunately Senate Democrats after the election are coming to the table with unclean hands because of their prior unwillingness to work with us.  Therefore, following the November election, I repeatedly stated my belief that we ought to pass a short-term spending bill.  Doing so would honor the will of the voters that we work out longer-term spending priorities with the newly elected Senate.”

“Further, the process in bringing this bill forward in the House was flawed.  This more than 1,600 page bill was released at approximately 8:15pm on Tuesday with a vote expected Thursday afternoon.  For me, this is too short of a time frame in which to read, investigate, and maturely consider this lengthy spending legislation.  I do not feel I was able to complete the work I normally do before making a decision on a significant piece of legislation.  I wish leadership had given us more time to fully understand a bill of this complexity and enormity.”

“If I do not feel I can adequately explain most aspects of a bill, it is my general policy to vote no.  To reiterate, there are some good ‘candy apples’ in this bill.  But while I know some of the legislation’s ‘candy apples’ and some of its ‘toads,’ there is much that I am unable to comfortably explain at this time.”

“For the reasons enumerated above, I opposed this bill.”

###