This bill would amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to permit discrimination claims against employers well outside of the current statute of 180 days. This presents a radical departure from current anti-discrimination laws. Doing away with any practical statute of limitations, which has been considered a just practice in courts for centuries, opens the flood gates to a river of frivolous lawsuits.

The $700 billion in Wall Street bailout funds authorized by TARP was a bad policy in its own right, and the actual use of those funds has been even more troubling. The "TARP Reform and Accountability Act" fails to adequately protect these taxpayer funds or safeguard how they are being used. This motion to recommit would have stopped the unused $350 billion in TARP funding from being spent at all, and would have forced the Treasury Department to submit a repayment plan for those bailout funds which have already been spent.

This legislation calls for spending an additional $33 billion over the next five years to expand coverage under the S-CHIP program. At a time when our nation is facing record-breaking deficits in the trillions of dollars, expanding autopilot spending programs should not be on the agenda.

This bill would create $787 billion in new government spending on projects designed to stimulate an economic recovery. It is neither the government's role, nor is it within its ability, to spend the economy into prosperity. This stimulus package merely spends a fortune in taxpayers' hard-earned money to give away to whatever special interests are best able to claim that they can "create jobs".

This bill to fund the federal government contains a whopping 80 percent spending increase and is packed with earmarks and sweeping policy changes. Altogether, this omnibus bill increases government spending at more than double the rate of inflation and almost triple the rate of median growth in household incomes. With budget deficits already running at record highs, this bill just accelerates Washington's already out-of-control spending.

This legislation allows bankruptcy judges to modify home mortgages - including reducing principal - rather than leaving those business decisions in the hands of the banks and lenders who own the homes. The act modifies the Hope for Homeowners program by removing the taxpayer protections in place, making it easier for those who took mortgages they could not afford to receive a taxpayer-funded bailout.

This amendment sought to remove all Davis-Bacon prevailing wage provisions from the 2009 water resources bill. Davis-Bacon is a leftover from the New Deal era which costs taxpayers billions of dollars each year because it requires government contractors to pay "local prevailing wages" for every project, which really means letting expensive union labor receive the contracts regardless of other competition.

Their budget taxes too much, spends too much, and borrows too much. And, potentially worst of all, it would open the door for socialized medicine and a massive energy tax to be enacted later this year without substantial debate through the reconciliation process.

The bill includes a $100 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout. The bill contains funding for other projects that should not be used as a vehicle to ram IMF funding through Congress. Using this method to get the IMF funding passed is dirty Washington politics and law makers should reject it.

This legislation marks a radical increase in power for the Food and Drug Administration over the tobacco industry, and another attempt by a parental government to make citizens' health choices for them.

The bill includes a $100 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout. The bill contains funding for other projects that should not be used as a vehicle to ram IMF funding through Congress. Using this method to get the IMF funding passed is dirty Washington politics and law makers should reject it.

The Waxman-Markey energy bill calls for a “cap-and-trade” system for the regulation of greenhouse gases, and is, in essence, a massive tax on all energy use. The resulting spike in energy costs would devastate the economy across the board, and would particularly harm lower-income individuals, who would have even less money to spend on steadily rising electric and heating bills.

This bill introduces federal control of employee compensation to a degree that is both constitutionally questionable and has no place in a market economy. Perhaps most startling about this bill is that the new mandates it establishes on the private sector are so broad and ill-defined that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is unable to determine just how much these rules will cost the economy, making it impossible to conduct a cost-benefit analysis.

The bill would essentially provide an endless line of credit to college students, as well as greatly increasing the amount given out through Pell Grants. Guaranteeing students access to free, easy loans on grants will encourage them to take on more debt that they cannot afford, while colleges will continue to raise their tuition to match the flow of government money. This bill further expands the massive student loan debt bubble, which - like the housing bubble before it - will eventually burst.

(Note: this was the original version of ObamaCare, later passed as H.R. 3590.) This comprehensive government takeover of health care saddles hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes upon the American people. The bill contains an unconstitutional individual mandate forcing people to buy health insurance simply because they exist. Instead of making health care more affordable, this bill's mandates and regulations will massively increase the cost of everyone's health insurance and reduce the quality of care over time.

This bill contains the "doc fix" that Congress passes annually in order to keep Medicare payments to doctors from sharply decreasing. While the doc fix may be necessary in order to keep doctors from opting out of seeing Medicare patients, this bill would cost $200 billion over ten years, with no spending reforms to offset its huge expense. Separating this bill from the main comprehensive health care reform bill is thus a fundamentally dishonest attempt to hide the true costs of the massive health care takeover being discussed in Congress, and to kick the problem of Medicare reform down the road yet again.

While this bill claims to enact "permanent estate tax relief", the legislation puts in place a permanent 45 percent tax on estates over $3.5 million. A 45 percent tax is a dramatic tax increase over the zero percent death tax that will be in place in 2010, when death is scheduled to no longer be a taxable event.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010, or so-called “minibus” would combine six of the seven remaining appropriations bills to fund nine Cabinet departments to the tune of $447 billion and $600 billion in funding for Medicare and Medicaid for a total of $1.1 trillion; a 13% increase over FY 2009 and a 25% increase over FY 2008.

This motion to recommit would have amended the Dodd-Frank bill to fully repeal the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), and to reduce the national debt limit by an amount corresponding to the hundreds of billions that would be saved by TARP's repeal.

The "Dodd-Frank" bill not only fails in its stated goal of reining in the risky lending that led to the current fiscal crisis, it actually institutionalizes the practice of bailing out banks deemed to be "too big to fail". By telling Wall Street banks that irresponsible lending will be rewarded by government bailouts, this bill almost guarantees another financial bubble and collapse in the future.

This bill would increase regulations on energy and subsidize renewable energy. This would raise the cost of energy production, causing home energy bills and the price of gas at the pump to rise.

This motion, by Speaker Pelosi, would kill the Columbia Free Trade Agreement. Free trade encourages both imports and exports between countries, and creates wealth and jobs on both sides of the agreement.

The bill, which provides $15 billion in loans and grants to states and cities to buy foreclosed properties, is a prime example of out-of-control government spending that would do little to address the underlying problems in the housing sector.

This amendment would impose a so-called "Patriot Tax" on upper income brackets. Raising taxes upon these high income brackets does great harm to the small business owners who are the engine for growth in America's economy.

This is the budget resolution for fiscal year 2009 that will skyrocket the national debt.

The bill, a shallow attempt to rein in gas prices, is eerily reminiscent of the very policies that led to shortages and gas lines in the 1970s and early 1980s. It would over-regulate energy prices and prevent free market allocation.

This spending bill would raise taxes and increase the national debt.

This bill's real purpose, while purporting to protect wildlife and natural scenery, is to prevent the installation of an efficient and environmentally beneficial natural gas terminal. This bill only hinders energy production and economic progress.

This bill creates more government interference in energy markets, essentially imposing a "use it or lose it" rule upon oil lands. This rule would make it nearly impossible for many oil-rich areas to be developed, which merely harms consumers and prevents the creation of jobs.

This is the final vote on the bill that provided a massive (up to $300 billion) bailout to the "Government Sponsored Entities" Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These two GSEs were in danger of bankruptcy because of their irresponsibly loose lending practices, and they should have been allowed to go bankrupt instead of putting taxpayers on the hook for their misbehavior. In addition, the bill contains an $800 billion increase in the debt ceiling.

The House bill includes language that allows the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to impose new "user fees" to cover the costs of its expanded regulatory program. The user fee would no longer be a "fee for service' that covers the agency’s costs—it would be a new tax.

H.R. 6604 is a premature action by Congress to pin the current energy problem on commodities future traders rather than address the real problem of supply. The consequences of the legislation are greater intervention in markets and an expansion of government into the reach of private contracts.

This bill is a vehicle for the massive government bank bailout, including the Troubled Assets Relief Program (T.A.R.P.). Bailing out banks that have made bad investments distorts the free market by creating a 'moral hazard'. If banks know that the government will bail them out of their bad decisions just because they are "too big to fail", they have no incentive to make wise investment decisions. FreedomWorks has double-weighted votes against this bill.

This bill would provide a $700 billion bailout for the financial industry. FreedomWorks strongly opposes this bill because it rewards those institutions which caused the financial collapse in the first place by making reckless loans. Bailing them out creates the moral hazard that these banks and lenders will recognize that they can continue to make risky loans without fear of consequences as long as they are "too big to fail".

This legislation would provide $14 billion in taxpayer loans to eligible U.S. automakers. Like T.A.R.P., this bailout would create moral hazard for the failing car companies. This bill picks winners and losers, while the market should be allowed to adjust to changes.

This is the "Card Check Bill," which will make it easier for unions to unionize workers in the private sector. It will eliminate most of the secrecy in union balloting, allowing union intimidation of workers.

This bill would amend the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to force shareholder review of executive compensation, which would open the door for increased federal intrusion into the private sector. Although transparency in executive compensation is necessary, many shareholders already have this privilege under their company’s bylaws.

This legislation would make it a federal crime to sell crude oil, gas, natural gas or petroleum at a price that is “unconscionably excessive” or “takes unfair advantage” of unordinary market conditions. This legislation mandates severe fines for any violations including market manipulation, false price reporting and unconscionable prices.

This $607 million spending bill will end up costing $152 million in 2008 thus exceeding the president’s budget by more than $10 million. In addition, it would spend $7 million more than the current levels and more than $2.3 million more than the Senate version. In addition to exceeding the budget, this bill is also loaded with pork projects and represents the out of control spending going on in Congress.

Funded by a $0.45 increase in the federal cigarette excise tax and a nearly 200% raise in taxes on cigars, the SCHIP reauthorization proposal calls for up to $50 billion in new funds for the program, dwarfing the President’s current request of $5 billion over 5 years. In addition to greatly expanding a program that was originally designed to be a limited contribution to State health services, this bill would be a giant step toward government controlled health care.

This bill would authorize over $43 billion over 3 years to fund at least 40 new federal programs for various agencies including the National Science Foundation, National Institute of Science and Technology, and the Departments of Commerce, Education and Energy. The size and scope of the funding that emerged from the conference report drastically exceeds the original House version where $23 billion was allocated for 20 new programs. It not only represents the reckless spending that has come to characterize Congress, but also is a drastic and irresponsible expansion of the size of government.

This amendment to the “New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act” would create a mandate requiring the use of renewable portfolio standard for generating electricity starting in 2010 with the goal of forcing electric utilities to produce 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources by 2020. Energy providers who did not comply would be penalized by being forced to purchase renewable energy from other generators in the form of utility credits or pay the difference to the federal government.

The bill would hit our energy suppliers with billions of dollars in new taxes. New taxes on oil and its providers will only lead to increased cost of production which will be passed onto consumers in the form of higher prices on gas, natural gas and electric utilities. Even though alternative energy holds promise for the future, federal mandates and taxes will not make the technology viable any faster. All that this bill will do is increase taxes and the price of fuel for the consumer.

This legislation calls for spending $33 billion over the next five years to expand coverage of the S-CHIP program. S-CHIP would be a massive increase in health care entitlements, and only exacerbates the underlying problem of increasing health care costs and reliance upon third-party payers in health care. It will also cost tens of billions of dollars at a time when the government is already incurring massive, unsustainable deficits. The bill, as passed, would vastly expand government controlled health care coverage to cover individuals up to 300% above the poverty line.

This legislation would add layers of bureaucracy to a situation already bogged down in government regulations and mismanagement. Not only does the act duplicate the efforts of the existing HUD department, at the same time the trust would compete with HUD for already limited funds. Whereas the government needs to be streamlining and modernizing a department, H.R. 2895 creates an increasingly complex web of uncertain funding and extraneous administration, making this act, in essence, the appendix of the housing conundrum.

This bill calls for $50 billion in new funding for the program that far exceeds the $5 billion requested by the President. In addition to greatly expanding a program that was originally designed to be a limited contribution to State health services, this bill would be a giant step toward government controlled health care.

This bill would provide a process for the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian governing body and reaffirm the “special political and legal relationship between the United States” and the governing body. According to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 2000 case of Rice v. Cayetano, any preferential treatment that the native Hawaiian population enjoys runs contrary to the 15th Amendment’s protection against racial discrimination.

This bill calls for $50 billion in new funding for the program that far exceeds the $5 billion requested by the President. In addition to greatly expanding a program that was originally designed to be a limited contribution to State health services, this bill would be a giant step toward government controlled health care.

This bill would permanently ban taxation of the Internet, which would encourage the free dissemination of technology and information. If the Internet were allowed to be taxed, then it could also be regulated. This would result not only in an additional tax on consumers, businesses, and schools, but also could open the door to censorship.

This water projects bill is bloated with over 900 special-interest earmarks, which far exceeds the $4.9 billion requested by the Army Corps of Engineers. The bill does not set any priorities and would result in funding for truly essential projects, like protections in Louisiana against future hurricanes, being drowned out in a sea of pork.

This amendment would reduce tariffs for 80% of U.S. consumer and industrial exports to Peru and would phase out the remaining tariffs over the next ten years. Free trade not only drives the efficiency of the global economy, but is also essential to the freedom of American citizens to buy and sell legal goods without government interference.

While providing tax relief for some, this bill contains a tax increase on carried interest and private equity, expatriates, and deferred compensation. Additionally, H.R. 3996 would delay another tax cut for 8 years, which essentially amounts to a tax increase.

This bill imposes unnecessary regulations and exposes lenders to increased liability, which will have the net effect of making mortgage loans harder to get for many Americans. Although mortgage reform is necessary, H.R. 3915 fails to set clear guidelines for lending companies and opens the door for lawsuit abuse.

This bill contains more than 8,000 earmarks for special-interest projects. In addition to the large amount of earmarks, the bill also contains several budget gimmicks designed to hide the addition $14 billion in unnecessary Congressional spending.

This amendment prohibits any of the funds made available in the Act from being used to fund dairy education in Iowa. There is no reason that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize dairy education.

An amendment to prohibit use of funds in the bill for the National Grape and Wine Initiative. This project is unnecessary should not require taxpayer funds.

The American Made Energy and Good Jobs Act would privately develop domestic oil reserves. This is a critical step in the long term strategy of reducing American dependence on foreign sources of energy and of developing low-cost energy in this country.

Amendment sought to add a new section to Title VII of the Communication Act of 1934 entitled "Network Neutrality". Network neutrality would hurt Internet innovation.

An amendment to prohibit the use of funds from being used to renovate a city-owned pool in Banning, California. This is an unnecessary overreach of federal spending.

An amendment to prohibit any of the funds in the bill from being used for the Institute for Exploration at Mystic Aquarium in New London, Connecticut. This is an unnecessary program that the federal government should not be involved in.

H.R. 4890 would give the President the authority to isolate unnecessary or wasteful spending provisions in bills that have passed Congress and send these specific line items back to Congress for a timely up-or-down vote. This would allow for greater control over spending.

H.R. 4761 would increase oil exploration in the United States through reducing overbearing regulations.

This legislation moves the United States closer to the goal of creating a region-wide Middle East free trade area by 2013. An agreement with Oman would mark the fifth such nation in the Middle East with open trade ties to the United States. Free trade agreements allow Americans to buy and sell goods in more markets.

This resolution would make it more difficult to pass earmarks, a necessary step in controlling spending.

This would allow greater and fairer access to Federal courts by those who assert Federal property rights claims under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. Protecting private property allows for greater economic development.

This is a $295 billion transportation bill which is more than $11 billion larger than the agreed upon allotment for transportation. In addition, it contains literally thousands of wasteful earmarks.

The amendment would reduces spending by 2% compared to last year's level (the Budget Committee calls for a .7% reduction), which is over $5.1 billion more in first-year savings than the Committee's bill. It includes reconciliation instructions reducing the rate of growth of mandatory spending from 6.4% to 6.1%.

This bill would make the repeal of the death tax permanent. The death tax is a massive double tax on business capital vital to increased productivity and job creation.

This resolution would have rejected American membership in the World Trade Organization, threatening international free trade. Free trade is beneficial to the productivity of all nations.

This bill fails to bring the market discipline the postal system needs and acts as yet another taxpayer bailout of the Postal Service. The US Postal Service desperately needs reform, but H.R. 22 is not reform.

This would ratify the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement. Free trade opens the economy to new and cheaper goods.

This is a $295 billion transportation bill which is more than $11 billion larger than the agreed upon allotment for transportation. In addition, it contains literally thousands of wasteful earmarks.

This would grant further Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Hurricane Katrina relief. This spending would add to the national debt.

The bill addresses many of the problems of government overreach in the Endangered Species Act and strengthens the protection of private property rights.

This bill would expedite the construction of new refining capacity in the United States and reduce many burdensome environmental regulations.

This bill prevents frivolous lawsuits against food and soft drink distributors, a step forward in reforming America’s dysfunctional tort system.

This bill would improve attorney accountability and reduce frivolous lawsuits. This would promote a more stable legal environment.

H.R. 1606 would amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to exclude Internet communications from the Act’s definition of “public communication.” The bill is commonly regarded as the “blogger protection” bill since it addresses concerns that bloggers who regularly engage in mass public communications will become subject to federal campaign finance regulations—- especially if they reference a federal candidate 30 days before a primary election or 60 days before a general election. Of course, all restrictions on speech content offend the Constitution, but protecting bloggers will be a good first step.

This bill would curb eminent domain abuse by withholding federal economic development funds from states and localities that engage in eminent domain abuse. Limiting the government's ability to enforce eminent domain will protect private property from government overreach.

This bill would save taxpayers $50 billion over the next five years. This is not an enormous cut but a good first step to long-term debt reduction.

This legislation would extend the pro-growth reductions to capital gains and dividend tax rates that have helped to grow the economy.