Fact Checker: Patty Judge on Chuck Grassley’s Zika votes

Introduction

'Today @ChuckGrassley voted against multiple bipartisan bills to fight the Zika virus.”

Source of claim

Albia Democrat Patty Judge, running for U.S. Senate against Grassley, a longtime Republican incumbent, posted the claim on Twitter May 17.

Analysis

The U.S. House and Senate have been wrangling over how much supplemental money to allocate to fight the Zika virus, a mosquito-borne disease linked to serious birth defects in babies born to infected mothers.

There were more than 3,600 reported Zika cases in the United States and U.S. territories as of Wednesday, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported.

In the Twitter dig, the Judge campaign keyed in on two May 17 Grassley votes on proposed amendments to the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.

The first was Senate Amendment 3898, proposed by Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida, which would have provided $1.9 billion to battle Zika. On May 17, Grassley was among 47 U.S. senators who voted against cloture, which meant the amendment could not come up for a vote.

Grassley also blocked Amendment 3900, a compromise between Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, to allocate $1.1 billion to battle Zika.

Grassley did vote for cloture on a third proposal, Senate Amendment 3899 sponsored by Sen. John Cornyn, D-Texas, to authorize $1.1 billion in Zika funding only if there were $1.2 billion in budget cuts linked to the Affordable Care Act. That amendment failed to advance and was withdrawn May 19.

Blunt-Murray reached cloture without Grassley and, on May 19, he agreed to support it. The compromise plan was approved 68 to 30, with Grassley among Republicans who joined Democrats to pass the amendment.

The funding package stalled again June 28 when Senate Democrats wouldn't let the full bill come to a vote because of what they described as 'poison pill” provisions that had been added.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service described the new provisions in a June 30 brief.

'The conference agreement provides that Social Services Block Grant funds may only be used for health services ‘provided by public health departments, hospitals, or reimbursed through public health plans,' which some have argued could prevent these funds from going to other entities that offer family planning and women's health services,” the Research Service wrote.

Democrats told the New York Times Republicans had required a $540 million cut for the Affordable Care Act and removed a House provision to ban the flying of the Confederate battle flag in federal cemeteries.

'With only two legislative weeks remaining in the chambers' summer calendars, the prospects for supplemental Zika response funds this summer are uncertain,” the Research Service said in the brief.

Conclusion

There's plenty of blame to go around for why Congress hasn't allowed supplemental funding to flow to Zika prevention, education and research. Judge isn't in the Senate and hasn't cast votes, so she can stand outside the fray.

She's correct Grassley twice blocked Zika funding legislation May 17. But he voted for cloture on a third amendment that would have provided $1.1 billion for Zika while cutting $1.2 billion from other programs. Judge is cherry picking votes that happened on the same day. We give her a B.

Criteria

The Fact Checker team checks statements made by an Iowa political candidate/office holder or a national candidate/office holder about Iowa, or in advertisements that appear in our market. Claims must be independently verifiable. We give statements grades from A to F based on accuracy and context.

If you spot a claim you think needs checking, email us at factchecker@thegazette.com.

This Fact Checker was researched and written by Erin Jordan.