CA-44: What Ken Calvert Doesn’t Want You to Have

Remember when I told you about how our lovely South County (and Riverside) Congresscritter Ken Calvert (R-Hypocrisy) was trying to take credit for economic recovery projects that he voted against? Well, guess what? Now we can actually see for ourselves what Ken Calvert voted to deny his constituents!

Let’s take a look at what Ken Calvert didn’t want for the people in his own district:

City State Program Project Description Funding Required Jobs
Riverside CA Airport North Side Taxiway 5,000,000 17
Riverside CA Energy Retrofit and redesign all Riverside Public Utilities office locations for optimal energy efficiency 250,000 10
Riverside CA Energy Photovoltaic Installation at the Riverside Convention Center 1,000,000 20
Riverside CA Energy Prepare incentive rate structure and deploy technology for air conditioning cycling during summer peak period 2,000,000 20
Riverside CA Energy Thermal energy storage- procure thermal energy storage technology for commercial demand response system to be utilitzed in 18 auto dealerships 4,000,000 205
Riverside CA Housing Indiana 4-Plexes Rehabilitation Project 3,500,000 120
Riverside CA Streets/Roads Van Buren Boulevard Widening – Santa Ana River to Jackson Street 5,000,000 8
Riverside CA Streets/Roads Arterial Streets Rehabilitation 15,000,000 23
Riverside CA Water Recycled Water Distribution System Phase 1 30,622,000 30
Riverside CA Water Techite Pipe Cross Town Feeder Replacement 48,000,000 30
Riverside CA Water The San Bernardino Water Transmission System 23,000,000 30
Riverside CA Water Water Distribution Main Replacement Project 15,000,000 45
Riverside CA Water The Linden and Evans Reservoirs Replacement project 135,000,000 60
Totals: $287,372,000.00 618.00

618 jobs? And over $287 million in funds for needed infrastructure improvements? Why, Mr. Calvert? Oh, why did you vote “NAY“?

  8 comments for “CA-44: What Ken Calvert Doesn’t Want You to Have

  1. Reggie
    February 24, 2009 at 11:06 am

    Good job!

    We need more of this reporting. When info like voting records gets out there, people can be better informed.

    Keep up the good work!

  2. February 24, 2009 at 11:55 am

    Thanks, Reggie! I was thinking the same thing… So perhaps we need to see what programs their own constituents need & support that Reeps John Campbell, Dana Rohrabacher, Ed Royce, & Gary Miller voted against?

  3. Adam
    February 24, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Wow, how could Ken say no to all that free money? Oh wait, because it’s not free. Liberals just like to ignore the costs.

  4. February 24, 2009 at 3:35 pm

    Please cease & desist in posting further exaggerations & rumors. There’s a place for open discussion on this web site, but not outright slander.

  5. Lil Truth
    February 24, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    $464,000 per job? Man I want one of those.
    I guess that might have been one reason, along with the fact that someone has to pay for it all.
    Unless you just want to print fresh money without backing to pay for it, and just inflate our way out. Of course that really screws the little people who have always trailed behind in keeping up with inflation, but I guess that’s ok, since you all seem to like it so much.

  6. Damon
    February 25, 2009 at 1:57 pm

    Actually, that website only lists what projects were submitted by by local governments as examples of what they could use the stimulus for. So none of those were specifically identified for funding in the bill.

  7. February 25, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    Damon-

    You’re correct that they were not specifically identified in the bill. However as state and local governments receive the stimulus money, they’ll be required to spend it on worthy projects that create jobs and improve our infrastructure. If you don’t believe me, you can read all about it here.

    http://www.recovery.gov/

    Lil’-

    Not quite. Not all the money will be going to labor costs. It’s just that some of the money will go toward providing help for people in need of work. And right now, we can “pay for it” by ending the Iraq occupation and rolling back the exoritant Bush tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy. At least our new President prefers that our money be used for us and not just the oligarchs.

  8. Lori
    February 25, 2009 at 5:14 pm

    It’s really comical that the Republican Party is suddenly concerned with fiscal responsibility. Do they honestly believe we all have such short memories that we somehow have forgotten who got us into this mess?

    As for Calvert, he voted with the Bush administration 94.4% of the time. He was a supporter of bank deregulation, he personally authored a bill that loosened the sub-prime market regulations, he voted for every single Bush tax cut for the wealthiest 2%, and he voted for the trillion dollars that’s been sent to Iraq.

    Doesn’t seem very fiscally conservative to me.

    He’s also conveniently forgotten that he voted for the Bush administration’s $700 billion bank bailout which had no oversight whatsoever.

    I always find it ironic that the one who drove the bus into the ditch is the same person complaining about the tow truck needed to pull the truck out.

Comments are closed.