Jack Reed: “The editorial says that our congressional priorities are skewed, and I agree. As the editorial points out, Members of…”

“The editorial says that our congressional priorities are skewed, and I agree. As the editorial points out, Members of Congress are continuing an unrelenting drive to pass $70 billion in new cuts this fall in taxes, most of them for wealthy investors, and to cut $35 billion in spending, mostly in programs that benefit the poor. The vulnerable people need to keep the heat on to keep from getting sick, becoming homeless, or worse. Because of our budget rules, we are prevented from getting a straight up-or-down majority vote on our amendment to provide assistance to seniors, low-income working families, and disabled individuals. This amendment will ensure that they will be protected from the ravages of the cold this winter: aid that will ensure children will not become ill or malnourished, aid that will ensure families do not resort to hazardous means of heating that can cause fires. Unfortunately and regrettably, every heating season there is a terrible incident where some poor person decides their stove can provide them some heat, and they leave it on, causing a fire with tragic consequences. I hope that will not be the case this year. If we don't provide support for these families, they have very little choice in many cases, other than to improvised heat, and that often leads to tragedy. As the New York Times editorial states: Heating aid for the needy is a matter of common decency.…”