Congressman Joe Heck May Cringe But Still Supports Trump

Donald Trump is wrapping up another week of headline making gaffes in Nevada today. In just the past week, The Donald has made news for“hardening” his stance on immigration, insulting and then asking African Americans “what the hell do you have to lose” by voting for him, and inexplicably calling Hillary Clinton a “bigot.”

Trump’s campaign is barely surviving after another shake-up — going from crisis to crisis instead of pushing out realistic policy agendas. Yet, Congressman Joe Heck is still supporting Donald Trump as Commander-in-Chief.

Heck may cringe at taking questions about Trump, but there is no denying that Heck is standing behind the GOP nominee. And Heck doesn’t just think Trump is the best person to hand the nuclear codes to — he agrees with Trump’s policies on much more. Take a look:

  • Both opposed birthright citizenship
  • Use the term “anchor babies”
  • Denied the existence of climate change
  • Opposed marriage equality, believing marriage was between a man and a woman
  • Supported eliminating the Department of Education
  • Proposed eliminating the federal minimum wage
  • Privatization of social security
  • Supported repealing Dodd-Frank

READ MORE BELOW:

Donald Trump and Joe Heck

Heck And Trump Had Similar Stances On Birthright Citizenship

Politico: Heck’s Stance On Ending Birthright Citizenships Aligned With Trump. According to Politico, “At the same time, Heck stands by his previous calls to consider ending birthright citizenship as any condition of broad immigration reform, a position that largely aligns with Trump’s views. ‘There’s a lot of people in this state and this country that have questioned birthright citizenship,’ Heck said.” [Politico, 6/5/16]

2015: Trump Proposed Reforming Birthright Citizenship

2015: Trump Proposed Immigration Reform Including Ending “Birthright Citizenship.” According to the Donald J. Trump campaign, “America will only be great as long as America remains a nation of laws that lives according to the Constitution. No one is above the law. The following steps will return to the American people the safety of their laws, which politicians have stolen from them: […] End birthright citizenship. This remains the biggest magnet for illegal immigration. By a 2:1 margin, voters say it’s the wrong policy, including Harry Reid who said ‘no sane country’ would give automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.” [Donald J. Trump, Accessed 12/17/15]

  • The 14th Amendment To The Constitution Granted Birthright Citizenship, Which Meant The U.S. Automatically Granted Citizenship To “To Essentially Anybody Born In The United States.” According to Fox News, “Trump’s plan goes after the 14th amendment, which grants citizenship to essentially anybody born in the United States. But he is particularly focused on stopping pregnant women from illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border for the purpose of having a child or an ‘anchor baby,’ which reduces the likelihood of the parents being deported. [Fox News, 8/22/15]
2015: Heck Proposed Reforming Birthright Citizenship

August 2015: Heck Said He Thought That Birthright Citizenship “Needs To Be Part Of The” Immigration Reform Discussion.According to 3 News Las Vegas, “Trump has highlighted birthright citizenship, enshrined in US law, that makes anyone born on US soil a citizen. ‘Anchor babies,’ Trump has said, single-handedly introducing the phrase into the 2016 race. Immigration critics have long-sought its end. And Joe Heck? ‘I think it needs to be part of the discussion,’ Heck told News 3. ‘People want to talk about immigration reform, so if we’re going to talk about immigration reform, then let’s talk about all aspects of immigration reform.’” [3 News Las Vegas, 8/27/15]

August 2015: Heck Said The Debate On “Immigration Reform” Should Include Birthright Citizenship. According to the Twitter account of Steve Tetreault of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, .@RepJoeHeck, via spox:  If we are going to debate immigration reform, should be on every facet, birthright citizenship included. #NVSen [Twitter – Steve Tetreault, 8/21/15]

MundoMax Las Vegas: Heck “Supports” Donald Trump’s Opposition To Birthright Citizenship

Mar Gonzalez, MundoMax Las Vegas: Heck “Supports” Donald Trump’s Opposition To Birthright Citizenship. According to a press release from the Nevada Democratic Party obtained via the States News Service, “For a comprehensive summary of the coverage from this week, see MundoMax, Univison, and MSNBC. Please see English translations below for the Spanish-language segments. MundoMax Las Vegas: Anchor: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trumps recent comments about immigration policy have generated controversy among voters and community activists. Mar Gonzalez attended a protest about it and brings us the details. Reporter: Thats right. Activists arrived at the offices of Congressman Joe Heck to protest his stance against the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, advocating for the repeal of birthright citizenship. This means that magnate [Donald Trump] opposes birthright citizenship, or a right to citizenship for any child born within a countrys borders, regardless of his parents legal status. This is an immigration plan that Congressman Joe Heck supports, causing inconformity among activists given the recent announcement that he will run for Senate. Heck stated that birthright citizenship should be part of the immigration debate.” [Nevada Democratic Party Press Release – States News Service, 9/2/15]

On Birthright Citizenship, Heck “Came Down With A Case Of Trump-It is”

MSNBC: Heck “Came Down With A Case Of Trump-Itis” When He Announced He Was Would “Look At Changing Birthright Citizenship.” According to MSNBC, “Republican Rep. Joe Heck is a prominent U.S. Senate candidate in Nevada, and at first blush, the conservative congressman, running for an open seat, appears to be well positioned. Nevada is a fast-growing swing state with a diverse population, and Heck has previously won with fairly broad support. But it won’t be easy. Heck voted for a far-right budget plan that tried to scrap Medicare; he’s opposed minimum-wage increases; the GOP candidate is a staunch opponent of reproductive rights; and he’s even condemned Social Security as a pyramid scheme. Last week, the Republican congressman even came down with a case of Trump-itis. That’s understandable, though when Heck said he’s willing to take a look at changing birthright citizenship as ‘part of the discussion,’ he necessarily allowed Donald Trump to affect the direction of his Senate campaign.” [MSNBC, 9/2/15]

Patricia Murphy Op-Ed: Heck “Sort Of” Agreed With Trump That “The U.S.-Born Children Of Undocumented Immigrants ‘Have To Go.’” In an Op-Ed in Roll Call, Patricia Murphy wrote, “Even without their party’s nomination, Trump has already put GOP Rep. Joe Heck of Nevada in a tight spot when Trump declared to ABC News that the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants ‘have to go.  They have to go.’  Heck is running for the open Senate seat against a Democrat who would be the first Latina senator in history.  Did Heck agree with Trump, reporters wanted to know?  (Sort of, he said.)” [Op-Ed – Roll Call, 11/28/15]

Heck And Trump Used The Term “Anchor Babies”

2015: National Journal During His Time In The House, Heck Endorsed The Debate Over Revoking Birthright Citizenship Of “Anchor Babies.” According to the National Journal, “And although Heck tried to introduce his own version of the Dream Act—which would make such children eligible for U.S. citizenship if they earned a college degree or served in the military—he has also endorsed a debate over revoking birthright citizenship of ‘anchor babies.’” [National Journal, 7/6/15]

[SPANISH LANGUAGE] September 2015 Telemundo Las Vegas: Heck Believed That The Term “Anchor Baby” Should Be Used Part Of The Conversation On Immigration. According to Telemundo Las Vegas, “El término ‘bebé ancla’ o ‘anchor baby’ ha causado mucha controversia en el país, debido a que unos consideran esta palabra como correcta, aunque otros lo consideran como una falta de respeto, lo que ha convertido a este término en un tema de discusión política.  En Las Vegas muchos han reaccionado al uso de este término que fue inicialmente usado por el empresario Donad Trump; por un lado Joe Heck, representante de Nevada, cree que esto debería ser parte de la discusión debido a que se habla de una reforma migratoria.” [Telemundo Las Vegas, 9/2/15]

2013: Heck Said He Wanted To Assuage Concerns About “Anchor Babies” Receiving Automatic Citizenship Under The 14th Amendment. According to the National Journal, “Regardless, Heck’s speech could clearly be heard from the confines of the country club’s bar, filled with men unwinding from their morning round of golf. He sought to reassure the crowd that the immigration bill would not mean amnesty for 11 million people. Under the Senate version, he said, it could take undocumented workers 13 years to earn citizenship. ‘It’s not like the old days,’ Heck said. He also tried to assuage concerns about ‘anchor babies’ receiving automatic citizenship under the 14th Amendment. ‘If we’re going to have a debate over immigration reform, it should be part of the debate,’ he said.” [National Journal, 6/27/13]

Trump Repeatedly Used The Term “Anchor Babies”

Headline: “Donald Trump: ‘Anchor Babies’ Aren’t American Citizens” [CBS News, 8/19/15]

Cortez Masto: Heck Trusted Trump On National Security And Put Party Politics Ahead Of What’s Right. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “Cortez Masto said she doesn’t trust Trump. ‘Congressman Heck says Donald Trump is the candidate he trusts on national security and changing our economy,’ Cortez Masto said. ‘Well, I don’t know about you but I don’t want Donald Trump anywhere near our nuclear launch codes.’ Cortez Masto accused Heck of putting party politics ahead of what’s best for the U.S. ‘Congressman Heck has even criticized Republicans who stand up to Donald Trump, saying they are hurting the Republican Party,’ Cortez Masto said.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 8/22/16]

Heck And Trump Bad On Climate Change

Heck Did Not Believe Climate Change Was Happening

October 2012: Heck Said Climate Change Was Not Happening “In The Next 12 Months.” According to Public Radio International, “To clarify, I asked Heck if he believes climate change is happening. ‘Well, I think certainly over the millennia, we’ve seen changes in our climate both ways, and I think throughout the future millennia we will continue to see climate change that goes both ways. But the issue for this election is not what’s going to be happening in the next 200 years, it’s going to be what’s happening in the next 12 months.’ Heck answered most all my questions, on a range of topics, directly. But not this one.” [Public Radio International, 10/17/12]

Heck Believed Climate Change Would Continue In “Both Ways”

October 2012: Heck Said Over The Next 200 Years, “We Will Continue To See Climate Change That Goes Both Ways.” According to Public Radio International, “To clarify, I asked Heck if he believes climate change is happening. ‘Well, I think certainly over the millennia, we’ve seen changes in our climate both ways, and I think throughout the future millennia we will continue to see climate change that goes both ways. But the issue for this election is not what’s going to be happening in the next 200 years, it’s going to be what’s happening in the next 12 months.’ Heck answered most all my questions, on a range of topics, directly. But not this one.” [Public Radio International, 10/17/12]

October 2012: Heck Dismissed The Immediacy Of Climate Change, Saying “The Issue For This Election Is Not What’s Going To Be Happening In The Next 200 Years, It’s Going To Be What’s Happening In The Next 12 Months.” According to Public Radio International, “To clarify, I asked Heck if he believes climate change is happening. ‘Well, I think certainly over the millennia, we’ve seen changes in our climate both ways, and I think throughout the future millennia we will continue to see climate change that goes both ways. But the issue for this election is not what’s going to be happening in the next 200 years, it’s going to be what’s happening in the next 12 months.’ Heck answered most all my questions, on a range of topics, directly. But not this one.” [Public Radio International, 10/17/12]

 

Trump Did Not Believe Climate Change Was Real

[Transcript] When Asked If He Believed Climate Change Was A Pressing Problem, Trump Responded “No” And “I Am Not A Believer In Climate Change.” While appearing on CNN New Day, “CAMEROTA: […] Do you agree that climate change is a pressing problem? TRUMP: No. I think that clean air is a pressing problem. You want to have clean air, you want to have clean water, that’s very important to me. And I’ve won many environmental awards. I am not a believer in climate change. It’s gone global warming and climate change, and now they call it actually extreme weather. That’s the new one because weather seems to be a little more extreme. But actually if you look, a lot of the big floods and a lot of the big things — In 1890, they had the greatest flood. In 1904, they had the greatest rainstorm.” [Federal News Service, 9/24/15]

Heck And Trump Bad On Marriage Equality

2011: Trump Opposed Marriage Equality

Trump On Gay Marriage, 2011: “I Just Don’t Feel Good About It. I Don’t Feel Right About It.” According to the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News, “O’REILLY: All right. Gay marriage, favor it? TRUMP: I’m against it. O’REILLY: Why? TRUMP: I just don’t feel good about it. I don’t feel right about it. I’m against it and I take a lot of heat because I come from New York. You know, for New York it’s like, how can you be against gay marriage? But I’m opposed to gay marriage.” [Fox News – The O’Reilly Factor, 3/30/11]

[Video] Trump:  “New York Is A Place With Lots Of Gays, And I Think It Is Great. But I’m Not In Favor Of Gay Marriage.” “I’m just not in favor of gay marriage. I live in New York. New York is a place with lots of gays, and I think it is great. But I’m not in favor of gay marriage.”   [“On the Record,” Fox News, 2/14/11; 110214_JF_1227_A]

[Video] Trump:  “I’m Not” For Gay Marriage.  Howard Stern:  Go on the record.  You’re for gay marriage.  Donald Trump:  Well, I’m not. Stern:  Really?  Trump:  Yeah.  Host:  What does gay marriage do to marriage, Donald?  Trump:  It’s not an argument that I really want to – because it’s never been an argument that’s been discussed with me very much.  People know it’s not my thing one way or the other.”  [Howard Stern Show, 2/6/13; 130206_JF_1269_A]

2000: Trump Said He Believed Marriage Should Be Between A Man And A Woman

Trump, 2000: “I Think The Institution Of Marriage Should Be Between A Man And A Woman.” According to an interview with Donald Trump in The Advocate, “[Q:] What are your thoughts on gay marriage? [A:] I think the institution of marriage should be between a man and a woman. I do favor a very strong domestic-partnership law that guarantees gay people the same legal protection and rights as married people. I think it’s important for gay couples who are committed to each other to not be hassled when it comes to inheritance, insurance benefits, and other simple everyday rights..” [The Advocate, 2/15/2000]

2014: Heck Also Claimed Marriage Should Be Between A Man And A Woman

October 2014: Heck Said He Believed Marriage Was Between A Man And A Woman. According to the Las Vegas Sun, “Joe Heck: He believes marriage is between a man and a woman. During a recent interview on KNPR, he said marriage equality is a state issue for the courts to decide.” [Las Vegas Sun, 10/9/14]

October 2014: Heck Said That Marriage Equality Was A State Issue For The Courts To Decide. According to the Las Vegas Sun, “Joe Heck: He believes marriage is between a man and a woman. During a recent interview on KNPR, he said marriage equality is a state issue for the courts to decide.” [Las Vegas Sun, 10/9/14]

Nevada Progressive Blog: In 2014, Heck Said He “Could Not Support Marriage Equality.” According to the Nevada Progressive Blog, “Yet even as this constituent pointed out the sever difference between domestic partnership and marriage, Rep. Heck said he could not support marriage equality.” [Nevada Progressive Blog, 2/20/14]

Heck And Trump Wanted To Eliminate The Department Of Education

2010: Heck Advocated For “Dismantling The Education Department As A Cabinet-Level Agency”

2010: Heck Supported “Dismantling The Education Department As A Cabinet-Level Agency.” According to the Las Vegas Sun, “Heck and Angle believe education decisions are best made at the local level, and both advocate dismantling the Education Department as a Cabinet-level agency.” [Las Vegas Sun, 8/10/10]

2010: Heck Said He Believed Education Decisions Were “Best Made At The Local Level.” According to the Las Vegas Sun, “Heck and Angle believe education decisions are best made at the local level, and both advocate dismantling the Education Department as a Cabinet-level agency.” [Las Vegas Sun, 8/10/10]

2010 VIDEO: Heck Said He Did Not Think That Nevada Had Seen “Any Increases In Educational Product” Since The “Department Of Education Was Formed.” In the 2010 Nevada 3rd Congressional District Debate, Joe Heck said, “Since the Department of Education was formed, we have not seen any increases in educational product here in Nevada. What we need to do is take the curriculum and the standards and bring it back to the states where principals, teachers, and parents are more involved, and not a bunch of bureaucrats sitting inside the beltway dictating what type of test needs to be taken and what kind of standard needs to be met.” [2010 Nevada 3rd Congressional District Debate, Vegas PBS, 10/14/10]

2015: Trump Announced He May Eliminate The Department Of Education

Trump, 2015: “But I May Cut Department Of Education.” According to Talking Points Memo, “Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Sunday that he would cut government agencies if he were elected President. Among them? The Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency, Trump told ‘Fox News Sunday’ host Chris Wallace. ‘Would you cut serve — would you cut departments?’ Wallace asked Trump. ‘No, I’m not cutting services, but I’m cutting spending. But I may cut Department of Education. I believe Common Core is a very bad thing,’ Trump said. ‘I believe that we should be — you know, educating our children from Iowa, from New Hampshire, from South Carolina, from California, from New York. I think that it should be local education.’” [Talking Points Memo, 10/18/15]

Trump On Department Of Education, 2015: “You Could Cut That Way, Way, Way Down.” According to Politico, “Donald Trump might want to eliminate the Education Department. Chris Wallace challenged the leading GOP candidate on ‘Fox News Sunday,’ on whether he would ‘blow a hole in the deficit.’ Trump first said he would cut waste and abuse. When Wallace asked if he would cut departments, Trump said he’d consider the Education Department. […] Regarding the department, Trump told the South Carolina Tea Party Convention in January that, ‘You could cut that way, way, way down.’” [Politico, 10/19/15]

Heck And Trump Proposed Eliminating The Federal Minimum Wage

2014: Heck Supported Elimination Of The Federal Minimum Wage

VIDEO: During A Town Hall In February 2014, Heck Advocated For Getting Rid Of The Federal Minimum Wage. Heck, at a town hall in Henderson, Nevada, on February 19, 2014, said, “I believe that minimum wage should be set at the state level, because not every jurisdiction has the same cost of living. And a $10 minimum wage in Las Vegas is different than a $10 minimum wage in Manhattan. So I think that’s something that should be left to the states to determine what the minimum wage should be.” [Heck Tracking Footage – Henderson Town Hall, 2/19/14]

Heck Did Not Believe The Federal Government Should “Battle” Over The Minimum Wage

August 2015: Heck Said He Did Not Believe The Federal Government “Should Get Into The Battle Over The Minimum Wage.”According to the Nevada Appeal, “He made it clear he doesn’t think the federal government should get into the battle over the minimum wage. ‘That should be left to localities,’ he said. ‘My goal as Senator is to give them (people)_ opportunities.’” [Nevada Appeal, 8/13/15]

Trump Also Supported Elimination Of The Federal Minimum Wage

PolitiFact: “True” That Donald Trump “Wants To Get Rid Of The Federal Minimum Wage.” According to PolitiFact, “Hillary Clinton said Donald Trump ‘wants to get rid of the federal minimum wage.’ She is right. While Trump has said he personally thinks the minimum wage should be higher, he has also said that it should be up to the states and that the federal government should not set a nation-wide minimum wage at all. We rate this claim True.” [PolitiFact, 7/8/16]

Heck And Trump Supported Some Level Of Social Security Privatization

2000: Trump Advocated For Privatization, Calling Social Security A Ponzi Scheme

Trump On Social Security, 2000: “Privatization Would Be Good For All Of Us.” According to Buzzfeed, “But when Trump first flirted with running for president in 2000, he wanted to privatize the program and raise the retirement age, and called the program a Ponzi scheme.  […] Next, Trump says privatization is the answer. ‘Privatization would be good for all of us. As it stands today, 13.6 percent of women on Social Security live in poverty,’ Trump writes. ‘Harvard University researchers studied almost two thousand American women who retired in 1981 and found that virtually every woman—single, divorced , married , or widowed— would probably be better off financially under a system of fully private investment accounts.’” [Buzzfeed, 9/29/15]

2010: Heck Proposed Partial Social Security Privatization

2010: Heck Proposed A Partial Privatization Of Social Security For New Entrants Into Social Security. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “Heck was adamant that his vision for Social Security, for example, would extend the life and effectiveness of the program. In short, it calls for giving newcomers to the system the option of investing their share of Social Security how they see fit, while continuing to feed employer contributions into the existing system. Heck bristles at the suggestion from Titus that he wants to privatize the program and disputes the logic critics use when they say someone who invested Social Security in the stock market before the recession would have lost much of their savings.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 8/29/10]

2011: Heck Called Social Security A “Pyramid Scheme,” Similar To Trump’s Comments, Where He Called Social Security A “Ponzi Scheme

VIDEO: Heck Said Social Security Was A “Pyramid Scheme” That Was Not Working. According to a video posted by Americans United, Heck said, “The full retirement age is 67 and the lifespan is 80, so when they first conceived up Social Security, they didn’t think they would be paying benefits for 13, 15 years. That’s one of the reasons why this pyramid schemes isn’t working!” [Americans United For Change, 6/2/11]

  • Heck Doubled Down Immediately Afterwards, During The Same Event. According to a video posted by Americans United, Heck said, “Well, it is when people below you are paying for your benefits.” [Americans United For Change, 6/2/11]

Heck And Trump Supported Repealing Dodd-Frank

2011-2015: Heck Voted At Least FIve times To Fully Or Partially Repeal Dodd-Frank Act Regulations

2011: Heck Voted For The FY 2012 Ryan Budget Which Would Have Repealed Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act. In April 2011, Heck voted for revisiting the Dodd-Frank regulations for financial institutions, as part of  House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2012 to 2021. According to the House Budget Committee, the budget  “propose[d]s to end the cycle of future bailouts perpetuated by the financial-regulation law authored last year by Senator Chris Dodd and Representative Barney Frank (Dodd-Frank).” The vote was on passage; the resolution passed by a vote of 235 to 193. [House Vote 277, 4/15/11; House Budget Committee, 4/5/11]

2011: Heck Effectively Voted To Repeal Portions Of The Dodd Frank Financial Reform Act As Part Of The FY 2012 Ryan Budget.In May 2011, Heck effectively voted [for/against] revisiting the Dodd-Frank regulations for financial institutions, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2012 to 2021. According to the House Budget Committee, the budget “propose[d]s to end the cycle of future bailouts perpetuated by the financial-regulation law authored last year by Senator Chris Dodd and Representative Barney Frank (Dodd-Frank).” The vote was on a motion to proceed to consider the House-passed budget resolution, which the Senate rejected by a vote of 40 to 57. [Senate Vote 77, 5/25/11; House Budget Committee, 4/5/11]

2012: Heck Voted To Repeal The Federal Government’s Authority, From The Dodd-Frank Act, To Take Over A Failing Financial Institution. In May 2012, Heck voted for a bill which would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “repeal[ed] Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act, which addresses failing financial institutions; restricts funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB); and eliminates the Office of Financial Research.” The underlying bill pertained to replacing automatic sequester cuts with other discretionary spending cuts, as well as repealing parts of health care reform, cutting food stamps, and increasing federal employee pension contributions.  The vote was on passage of the bill, the House passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 199. The Senate took no substantive action. [House Vote 247, 5/10/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5652; Congressional Quarterly, 5/10/12; Congressional Quarterly, 5/9/12]

2012: Heck Voted To Repeal Portions Of The Dodd Frank Financial Reform Act As Part Of The FY 2013 Ryan Budget. In March 2012, Heck voted to repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act’s regulations for financial institutions, as part of  House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2022. According to the House Budget Committee, “This budget would end the bailout regime enshrined into law by the Dodd-Frank Act. The federal government has a critical role in helping to ensure financial markets are fair and transparent, and in holding accountable those who violate the rules. But even though that role is critical, it is a limited one: Federal bureaucrats should not be empowered to micromanage the financial system, and this budget will review financial regulations to ensure that the costs to the private sector and to the taxpayer do not outweigh their benefits, and that regulations are both essential and not unduly burdensome.” The vote was on passage; the resolution passed by a vote of 228 to 191. The Senate later rejected a motion to proceed to consider the House-passed budget resolution. [House Vote 151, 3/16/12; House Budget Committee, 5/20/12; Congressional Actions, H.Con.Res. 112]

2012: Heck Voted Against Repealing Dodd-Frank Wall Street Regulation. In March, 2012, Heck voted to oppose eliminating the Market Access Program, as part of the Republican Study Committee’s proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2022. According to the Republican Study Committee, “Instead of rewarding corporate failure with taxpayer dollars, this budget calls for an alternative to the FDIC’s too -big-to-fail bailout authority by supporting a policy that places the responsibility of large, failing firms in the hands of the shareholders who own them, the managers who run them, and the creditors who finance them. This would save $32.3 billion over ten years.” The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC’s proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 136 to 285. [House Vote 149,3/29/12; Republican Study Committee, 3/12]

  • Former FDIC Chairwoman Shelia Blair: Dodd-Frank Prohibited Taxpayer Bailouts Of Banks. In an interview with the Washington Post, former FDIC Chairwoman Shelia Blair said, “We worked hard to make sure taxpayer bailouts are completely prohibited. I think the language is very tight on that. One of the things that frustrates me with critics of Title II is that they perpetuate the myth of Too Big To Fail by insisting that the government is still going to do bailouts, notwithstanding clear language in Dodd-Frank to the contrary. And that just continues the moral hazard by reinforcing market perceptions that the big institutions won’t be allowed to fail. [Washington Post, 5/18/13]

2013: Heck Voted Against Repealing Portions Of The Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform Act As Part Of The FY 2014 Ryan Budget. In March 2013, Heck voted against repealing the Dodd-Frank regulations for financial institutions, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the House Budget Committee, “This budget would end the bailout regime enshrined into law by the Dodd-Frank Act. The federal government must ensure financial markets are fair and transparent. And it must hold accountable those who violate the rules. But federal bureaucrats should not micromanage the system or protect Wall Street bankers from the risks they are taking.” The resolution passed the House by a vote of 221 to 207. [House Vote 88, 3/21/13; House Budget Committee, 3/12/13]

2013: Heck Voted Against Repealing Dodd-Frank Wall Street Regulation. In March 2013, Heck voted to oppose revisiting the Dodd-Frank regulations for financial institutions, as part of the Republican Study Committee’s proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the Republican Study Committee, “End Too Big To Fail: […] Instead of rewarding corporate failure with taxpayer dollars, this budget calls for an alternative to the FDIC’s too big to fail bailout authority by supporting a policy that places responsibility of large, failing firms in the hands of shareholders who own them, the managers who run them, and the creditors who finance them.” The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC’s proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 104 to 132 with 171 Democrats voting present. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Repeating a strategy from last year, 171 Democrats voted “present” to push Republicans to vote against the RSC plan to make sure it did not have enough support to replace the Ryan plan.” [House Vote 86, 3/21/13; Republican Study Committee,3/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/13]

2014: Heck Voted To Repeal Key Part Of Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act That Gave The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation The Power To Take Over And Shut Down A Failing Financial Firm, As Part Of Rep. Paul Ryan’s Budget Proposal. In April 2014, Heck voted for repealing the expanded resolution authority that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act gave to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2015 to 2024. According to the Hill, “The proposal from the House Budget Committee chairman would repeal a top provision of the law. Proponents say the tool, which gives the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation the power to step in and wind down a failing financial firm, bars future bailouts.” The House adopted the budget resolution by a vote of 219 to 205. [House Vote 177, 4/10/14; The Hill, 4/1/14]

2014: Heck Voted For Repealing The Part Of Dodd-Frank That Required Private Equity Fund Advisors To Register With The Securities And Exchange Commission. In September 2014, Heck voted for repealing a portion of Dodd-Frank that requires certain private equity fund advisors from registering with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). According to House Financial Services Committee, “The bill corrects an overreach of the Dodd-Frank Act that diverts job-creating capital from small- and medium-sized businesses to unnecessary regulatory compliance costs. The bill exempts advisers to private equity funds from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registration so long as the funds under management have not borrowed and do not have outstanding principal amount in excess of twice their funded capital commitments.” This provision was part of a larger bill called the Jobs for America Act. The bill passed the House by a vote of 253-163. The bill died in the Senate. [House Vote 513, 9/18/14; House Financial Services Committee, 9/19/14; GOP.gov, Accessed 9/15/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4]

  • SEC Registration Exemption Applies To Advisors To Funds That Are Not Leveraged And Do Not Have “Outstanding A Principal Amount In Excess Of Twice Their Funded Capital Commitments.” According to the House Financial Services Committee, “Provides an exemption from SEC registration for advisers to private equity funds that are not leveraged and that do not have outstanding a principal amount in excess of twice their funded capital commitments [and] [m]aintains the SEC’s authority under the Dodd-Frank Act to require all private fund advisers to keep records and make them available to the appropriate regulators.” [House Financial Services Committee, 9/19/14]

2015: Heck Voted For The FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Recommends Repealing Portions Of Dodd-Frank. In March 2015, Heck voted for the FY 2016 budget resolution which recommended repealing portions of Dodd-Frank. According to Congressional Quarterly, the resolution called for “rolling back provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (PL 111-203) that, it says, could allow for ‘bailouts’ of large, systemically significant financial institutions. It also urges Congress to repeal the mechanism under which the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection receives funding directly from the Federal Reserve’s direct funding mechanism, saying that those Federal Reserve funds should be used for deficit reduction.” The vote was on the budget resolution. The House passed the resolution 228 to 199. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H.Con.Res. 27]

2015: Heck Voted For A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Recommends Repealing Portions Of Dodd-Frank. In March 2015, Heck voted for a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which recommended repealing portions of Dodd-Frank. According to Congressional Quarterly, the resolution called for “rolling back provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (PL 111-203) that, it says, could allow for ‘bailouts’ of large, systemically significant financial institutions. It also urges Congress to repeal the mechanism under which the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection receives funding directly from the Federal Reserve’s direct funding mechanism, saying that those Federal Reserve funds should be used for deficit reduction.” The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House passed the amendment 219 to 208 and later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 141, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 86; Congressional Actions, H.Con.Res. 27]

2016: Trump Proposed Eliminating Or “Greatly Changing” Dodd-Frank

Trump: “I Think Absolutely, Dodd-Frank Has To Be […] Either Eliminated Or Changed Greatly.” Interview. Doll: Do you think regulatory reform can give us kind of a half a point of growth and maybe some smart tax reform another half and we’d find ourselves growing 2.5 to 3 instead of 1.5 to 2? Trump: Well, I do. And you know, we — basically GDP was essentially zero, OK? And it’s been that way. It’s been very, very low for years now. And if China ever had that, they would go into a massive depression. All right? China, where they go down to 7 percent, and I watch your show all the time and I am seeing 7 percent and it’s like everyone is going crazy, how could this be possible and other countries the same thing. And here we have almost zero, slightly more than zero, but basically I am sure — it could even be less, you know, because how are they coming up with these numbers, you know, these massive numbers? How are they doing it? So we have no growth. I think absolutely, Dodd-Frank has to be — has to be either eliminated or changed greatly. [CNBC, Squawk Box: 160505_MM_86161_B.mp4, 5/5/16]