How LDS Members Of The U.S. House Of Representatives Voted On H.R. 2454, The American Clean Energy And Security Act Of 2009 (Cap-And-Trade)

One additional function I will take on is to track and report how LDS members of Congress vote on high-profile issues. It's not really rocket science, since most LDS members of Congress are Republican, and tend to vote the party line. Even Democrat Jim Matheson occasionally crosses over and votes the Republican way.

And on June 25th, 2009, H.R. 2454, entitled "The American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009", came up for a vote. You can read a summary of its provisions HERE. After some last minute arm-twisting by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama, the bill passed 219-212.

The results of the roll call vote are published HERE. Here's how LDS members of the House voted:

-- Jeff Flake (R-AZ): Abstained
-- Wally Herger (R-CA): No
-- Howard McKeon (R-CA): No
-- Mike Simpson (R-ID): No
-- Dean Heller (R-NV): No
-- Rob Bishop (R-UT): No
-- Jason Chaffetz (R-UT): No
-- Jim Matheson (D-UT): No
-- Eni Faleomavaega (non-voting delegate from American Samoa): Not entitled to vote

Rep. Flake was one of only three House members to abstain, so if all had voted No, it would not have changed the final outcome. Rep. Flake had a family obligation precluding his presence for the vote, but confirms he would have voted against it.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act calls for the U.S. to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. It would establish a limited number of pollution permits, more than 70 percent of which would initially be given away free to utilities, manufacturers, state governments and others, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The permits could then be traded or sold. But this cap-and-trade idea is considered a scam by many, because of the possibility that speculators could inflate and drain a "bubble" just like they did with the dot-com bubble and the housing bubble.

House Democratic leaders say the bill would create 1.7 million new jobs and save 240 million barrels of oil by 2020. It would require in most cases that states get 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources such as wind and the sun by then.

But instead of celebrating their victory, the Sierra Club reacted in a very spiteful fashion. “This should be a huge wake-up call,” Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope said in an interview. “We should not have had to have a bill this weak to pass by this narrow a margin.” Perhaps they should learn some magnaminity.

But opponents remained critical. Republicans and many business groups, including American Farm Bureau, sought to drum up opposition to the bill by saying it would impose a “national energy tax” that would eliminate jobs, not create them. “This is the biggest job-killing bill that has ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives,” said Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio, who spoke against the measure for about an hour. He said the U.S. should increase drilling of oil and gas while working to create alternative sources of energy.

Anadarko Petroleum Corp. Chief Executive Officer Jim Hackett described the bill as “hugely flawed” before the vote. A tax on carbon dioxide would be more straightforward than the bill’s so-called cap-and-trade plan, which seeks to “hide the ball” and targets production instead of consumption, Hackett said. The legislation would lead to higher energy prices, he said.

The next stop for this legislation is the U.S. Senate, where it will be taken up this fall and where it is expected to be watered down further to facilitate the possibility of passage. It would not likely pass in the Senate in its present form.

How Latter-Day Saints (LDS) In Congress Voted On Barack Obama's $787 Billion Stimulus Package, The American Recovery And Reinvestment Act Of 2009

Barack Obama's highly-ballyhooed $787 billion stimulus package, known officially as the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009", has been passed and will be signed by President Obama on Tuesday February 17th, 2009. Also visit the ReadTheStimulus website for more information on the bill's particulars.

The House voted 246-183 in favor of the package, with one voting Present and three others not voting. A total of 246 Democrats voted Yes, while all 176 Republicans, joined by seven crossover Demorats, voted No. Afterwards, the Senate voted 60-38 to pass it, with one Senator (Ted Kennedy) not present, and Minnesota's seat still unfilled. Three Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine, and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, crossed over to join with the Democrats.

Click HERE to find out how all House members voted.

Click HERE to find out how all Senate members voted.

Because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a legacy of self-reliance, and promotes it to this day through their welfare program, which is actually a workfare program offering a hand up rather than a handout, I though it would be of interest to highlight how LDS members of Congress voted on this bill. And here is the list of LDS members of Congress (10 Republicans, 3 Democrats, 1 non-specified). Click on their names to go directly to their official Congressional websites. Their votes are listed to the right of their names:

(1). U.S. Senate:
-- Michael Crapo (R-ID): No
-- Harry Reid (D-NV): Yes
-- Tom Udall (D-NM): Yes
-- Bob Bennett (R-UT): No
-- Orrin Hatch (R-UT): No

(2). U.S. House:
-- Jeff Flake (R-AZ): No
-- Wally Herger (R-CA): No
-- Howard McKeon (R-CA): No
-- Mike Simpson (R-ID): No
-- Dean Heller (R-NV): No
-- Rob Bishop (R-UT): No
-- Jason Chaffetz (R-UT): No
-- Jim Matheson (D-UT): Yes
-- Eni Faleomavaega (non-voting delegate from American Samoa): Did not vote

As you can see, it was straight down along party lines, with the Republican Mormons voting No and the Democratic Mormons voting Yes.

Utah's freshman Third District Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz was particularly outspoken in his opposition. Chaffetz told KTVX Channel 4 in Salt Lake, "The process was so flawed. This is a bill that was over 1000 pages it was given to us at midnight. There's not one congressman, not one that read that bill. It was the single largest spending bill in the history of the US, and not one person in that House read it. How can you vote for a bill that you haven't even read? I voted no, nobody even read it. It's sad really because you see people hurting and you know we got to help them. But, instead of helping everybody through tax relief this thing is loaded with pork that's not going to make a difference. We need a game changer in this country”. Chaffetz says we cannot spend our way to economic salvation.

However, fellow Utah Congressman Jim Matheson, a Democrat representing the Second District, explained his support of the bill to the Deseret News. "Everyone agrees our economy faces a crisis and that action is needed to pump up the economy. Utah stands to gain 30,000 jobs from the projects that will be funded and families will see more money in their paychecks every week. Doing nothing would be to risk a deep and prolonged downward spiral for Utah communities. And while this bill isn't perfect, I support its main goals", said Matheson.

The LDS Church has not taken a position on the stimulus package.

Exploring The Controversy Surrounding The LDS Church's "Handbook Of Instructions"; It's Nothing More Than A Procedural Manual For Church Leaders

One of the issues generating significant grist for the propaganda mills of anti-Mormons is the "Handbook of Instructions", periodically published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Because physical distribution of this resource is limited to Latter-day Saints in leadership positions, and because the LDS Church has suppressed its indiscriminate online publication due to copyright issues, anti-Mormons seize upon this as an excuse to maliciously portray the Church as secretive and abusive. Anti-Mormon sites exploiting this issue included the LDSFreedom website, the ExMormon website, and the Utah Lighthouse Ministry.

The most recent mainstream media coverage of this issue was posted in May 2008 by the Mormon Times.

Just what is the Handbook of Instructions? Wikipedia provides an explanation. The Church's Handbook of Instructions is actually divided into two volumes. The church only distributes copies of the handbook to individuals that fill certain leadership callings within the church hierarchy.

Click HERE to view a 198-page truncated version of Part 1 of the 1999 Handbook of Instructions in PDF format. Perhaps the Church allows Wikileaks to continue hosting this version is that it is NOT the most current version (2006), and that all charts have been removed from it. Despite the limitations, it will still provide the reader with a good idea as to what this book is really all about - and there's nothing sinister, underhanded, or secretive about it.

Book 1 is subtitled "Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics". It's provided to stake presidencies, bishoprics, mission presidencies, district presidencies, and branch presidencies (presidencies/bishoprics are defined as the principal and his two counselors). Other officials receiving copies include members of a stake high council, temple presidents and their counselors, general authorities, area seventies, and church clerks and executive secretaries.

Topics addressed include guidelines involving general, area, and regional administration; stake administration; ward administration; interviewing and counseling; performance of ordinances; callings and releases; church meetings and worship services; temples and marriage; missionary service; church discipline; single adults and students; the Church Educational System; Perpetual Education Fund; military relations; records and reports; church finances; physical church facilities; creating and changing church congregations and other units; and general church policies on administrative, health, and moral issues.

Book 2 is subtitled "Priesthood and Auxiliary Leaders". It's provided to every quorum president and auxiliary organization leader at stake, ward, district, and branch levels, as well as most of the individuals who receive Book 1. Counselors to quorum or auxiliary presidencies and other members receive smaller booklets that excerpt only those portions of Book 2 relevant to their specific church position.

Topics addressed include guidelines involving the Melchizedek priesthood; the Aaronic priesthood and Young Men Organization; Relief Society; Young Women Organization; Primary; Sunday School; member missionary work; spiritual and temporal welfare; temple and family history work; church activities; church curriculum; printed church materials; meetinghouse libraries; music; and teaching in the church. Book 2 also contains some of the general church policites on administrative, health, and moral issues that are contained in Book 1.

In scanning through the Handbook, I found absolutely nothing than can be construed as sinister, underhanded, or secretive. It is exactly as advertised - a procedural manual for Church leaders - nothing more, and nothing less. However, I did learn a very interesting fact; namely, that the Church has more than one type of temple recommend. In addition to the standard Full Recommend, the LDS Church also offers Limited-Use Recommends. These are provided to "unendowed" Mormons (those who have not undergone the full endowment ceremony), allowing them to access a temple solely to perform proxy baptisms and confirmations for deceased individuals.

The significance of this discovery is in its potential further application. The LDS Church is experiencing a growing public relations problem by its refusal to allow non-Mormon guests and even "Jack Mormon" guests to witness the temple weddings of devout Mormons. The concept of the Limited-Use Recommend gives me an idea on how the Church can consider resolving this issue, which I will discuss at greater length in a future post.

Yet the LDS Church has pursued litigation against those who have published or who have hosted copies of the Handbook in the past. The most notable targets include the Utah Lighthouse Ministry, LDSFreedom, and Wikimedia. It appears, though, that copyright issues are not the only concern. Some are concerned that the Handbook could be exploited by anti-Mormons (which is already occurring). But one other concern expressed in a comment on Jeff Lindsay's Mormanity blog is the possibility that LDS members could use the Handbook to promote second-guessing of the leadership. Bishops probably don't want to deal with a constant bombardment of "you didn't do this quite right" or "that's not what the handbook says" when, in fact, they have the keys to tailor the policies to the situation and need.

These are valid concerns, and technically, the LDS Church should be held accountable to the same standard as other denominations in regards to the distribution of procedural manuals. However, the LDS Church has been preferentially targeted over its participation in the Yes On 8 campaign in California, and this has been used as a springboard by anti-Mormons for further misrepresentation and defamation of the Latter-day Saints. Consequently, some extra transparency may be in order to effectively combat the upsurge in anti-Mormon bigotry.

If the LDS Church doesn't want to post the latest version of the Handbook of Instructions online, that's defensible. But at the very least, the LDS Church should allow Wikileaks to keep hosting their dated copy of the Handbook of Instructions as "historical" reference material the public can use to combat anti-Mormon bigotry.

Why Does The LDS Church Object To Referring To FLDS As "Mormons"?

The Mormon Times has published a good article by Edwin Slack of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR). Entitled "Why is it OK for the LDS to call themselves "Christian" and not ok for the FLDS to call themselves "Mormon"?", the article offers an explanation of why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints objects to the use of the term "Mormon" to describe the Fundamentalist Latter-day Saints (FLDS) denomination. The FLDS prefer to identify themselves as "Mormon fundamentalists. There are two primary reasons for LDS objection:

(1). Trademark Protection: In many nations, the term "Mormon" is a registered trademark of the LDS Church. To protect that trademark, the Church, like any other entity using a trademark, is required to actively discourage its use elsewhere. This is similar to using the term "Scotch tape" to refer to any brand of cellophane tape or Xerox to refer to copying something. Those companies must actively discourage such use of their name or they may lose the right to protect their name.

(2). Avoid Confusion: During the Texas FLDS crisis, many confused the FLDS with the LDS. Individual mainstream Latter-day Saints would be criticized for belonging to a church which practices plural marriage, although the mainstream LDS indefinitely suspended the practice as a result of the Manifesto of 1890 issued by President Wilford Woodruff. This manifesto is incorporated into the Doctrine and Covenants as "Official Declaration 1". Once critics were informed of the difference between the two denominations, criticism abated.

Because the practice of plural marriage was indefinitely suspended by revelation in 1890, marriage to more than one spouse, consider bigamy under criminal law, is considered adultery by the LDS Church and results in excommunication. Therefore, the FLDS Church is officially considered "apostate" by the LDS Church. However, withholding the designation of "Mormon" from the FLDS is not intended to be considered perjorative; the LDS neither hate the FLDS nor are taught to do so.

Read an official LDS news release entitled "Proportion and Perspective on Polygamy Reporting", dated July 10th, 2008, for more official LDS prespective on this question.

The LDS Word Of Wisdom Wasn't Just A Warning Against Harmful Substances, But Also Against Deceptive Advertising

Many of you are familiar with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints health code, known as the Word of Wisdom. It was revealed to the first president of the Church, Joseph Smith in 1833, and subsequently incorporated into the Doctrine and Covenants as Section 89.

But while the health aspects of the Word of Wisdom are well-known, what's less publicized is the fact that Joseph Smith actually warned us against the deceptive and persuasive advertising which would be used to make these substances attractive to people. Here's the applicable part of Section 89 below:

1 A Word Of Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—
3 Given for a principle with apromise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.
4 Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation—
5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
7 And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
8 And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.
9 And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome herbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—
11 Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving.
12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.

First, let's look at verse 2. It states that the Word of Wisdom is sent by greeting rather than by commandment or restraint. What does that really mean? When Mormons sit for worthiness interviews from their priesthood chain of command, whether it be for a temple recommend, for mission service, or to accept a higher office within the Priesthood, they are asked if they observe the Word of Wisdom. If the answer is No, then the person will be denied the desired opportunity until he is in compliance. However, the individual will NOT be subject to formal Church discipline.

And therein lies the difference. If you break an actual commandment, such as adultery, you can be subject to Church discipline, which can result in probation, disfellowshipment, or excommunication. However, breaking the Word of Wisdom, since it's not a commandment, merely results in denial of a particular privilege, such as a temple recommend.

Now look at verse 4. This is where the warning against advertising is delivered. And it's definitely come to pass. Advertisers motivated by pure amoral profit show macho men and demure women consuming alcohol and tobacco in an effort to make these substances appear more desirable. Remember the "Marlboro Man"? A macho cowboy. What they didn't show were career smokers hospitalized with lung cancer or hacking their lungs out with COPD. They don't look very macho. Joseph Smith apparently foresaw this, and incorporated this into Section 89.

And finally, the health code itself. Remember, Joseph Smith received and delivered the revelation in 1833, and it is worded in context with the references of the time. As references changed and new substances were invented and marketed, various General Authorities issued subsequent supplemental guidance to keep the Word of Wisdom contemporary. Consequently, the harmful substances identified in Section 89 have been further defined as follows:

(1). Strong drink - any alcoholic beverage. This includes alcopops and 3.2 beer.

(2). Tobacco - any form of tobacco, smokable, chewable, or sniffable.

(3). Hot drinks - formally defined to mean coffee and tea. Decaffinated coffee and tea is O.K.

In addition, the General Authorities have since declared that the consumption of caffeinated soda and recreational drug usage also constitute violations of the Word of Wisdom. LightPlanet.com provides some more guidance. You can also read more authoritative Church guidance HERE.

The consumption of meat is authorized by the Word of Wisdom. However, Mormons are directed to use meat sparingly, since it requires that we take an animal's life. A diet rich in meat actually contributes towards obesity and other health problems. Those who really want to go the extra mile would consume meat only during times of cold weather or scarcity of grains and fruit. Don't forget, the Lord provided the ancient Israelites with BOTH manna AND quail. But Mormons aren't asked about meat consumption during a worthiness interview.

Compliance with the Word of Wisdom is required to be accepted for membership in the LDS Church in the first place, and to retain full membership privileges once in the system.

Introduction To "Mormonism Unveiled"

As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I find that, 178 years after the official establishment of the LDS Church, there remains an astonishing amount of misunderstanding regarding the Church. This misunderstanding may have hindered Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign and contributed to what I still consider his premature exit from the race. Another example presents itself in the Anchorage Daily News' Church Visits blog, edited by Chris Thompson. He somehow got the idea that he would be restricted to visiting a particular LDS ward before becoming a member, although visitors are welcome at any LDS ward.

At best, this misunderstanding frustrates honest skeptics who are not necessarily ill-disposed towards the Church, but who fail to understand what it's all about because frequently we have differing definitions for the same terms.

At worst, this misunderstanding provides undeserved opportunities for hard core anti-Mormons to deliberately defame Mormonism and mislead the general public. The most prominent hard core anti-Mormons are generally former LDS who either left of their own accord under hostile circumstances, or were excommunicated for cause. Instead of accepting the decision like a responsible adult and finding an alternative better serving the dictates of their own consciences, they seek to wage war against the Church because they feel they have a "duty" to "expose" Mormonism. These are the only true enemies of the Church, not the honest skeptic who has legitimate doubts.

However, in reading a certain amount of "anti-Mormon" literature, I find that the antis occasionally bring forth points which need to be addressed. Many antis complain that they were "hustled" into the Church with the doctrines of faith, repentance, baptism, and laying on of hands, but didn't find out about the Church's more uncommon doctrines, such as plurality of Gods and temple ceremonies, until after they were brought into the system. This is a legitimate gripe which needs to be addressed.

In short, I, as a Latter-day Saint, want YOU, the prospective convert to know what you are buying into BEFORE you plunge into the waters of baptism. Mormonism is not for everybody, but it may be for YOU. But I believe you should know as much as possible before accepting it. It is worthwhile, if your mind and spirit are right before you make the decision.

The LDS Church operates two primary websites. Mormon.org is primarily an informational website, focusing on doctrines and practices. LDS.org is the official Church website, where decisions are announced and news releases posted.