TPMDC

Who Is Joseph Cao?

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA)

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

So who is Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA), the one Republican who voted yes on the House Democrats' health care bill?

Cao was first elected to Congress in 2008 from the solidly-Democratic New Orleans district, winning a shocking victory against Democratic Rep. William Jefferson, who was then under indictment (and was later convicted) on corruption charges. Over the course of his life, he was a child refugee from Vietnam, a former Jesuit seminarian, and an attorney.

Cao's district voted 75%-23% for Barack Obama in 2008, but Cao was able to beat Jefferson in a December election (held at that time because of the rescheduling of some Louisiana Congressional elections, due to a hurricane). Cao had held out on voting for this bill -- he is strongly pro-life and wanted full assurances that abortion would not be funded -- but his vote for final passage, after the passage of the Stupak Amendment, could give him a positive card to play with his Democratic constituents.

Ironically, right after Cao was elected, the House GOP boasted of his upset win as a sign of the GOP's comeback, and that he presented a path to future victories. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) declared: "The Future Is Cao."

Join the Conversation!

49 comments

Recommend Recommend (1)

November 8, 2009 12:12 AM   

Face the wrath of his constituents or the wrath of the GOP?

Ya done good, Mr. Cao!

And never mind that trash talkin' Michael Steele.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:30 AM    in reply to VivaAmerica!

I sure hope he's done. He's another right wing tool and needs to go.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

user-pic

November 8, 2009 3:19 PM    in reply to VivaAmerica!

Mr. Cao, as a fellow Republican although a moderate one, I thank you for your vote. This group mind-control that Mr. Steele is trying to pawn off onto party legislators is truly stupid. I credit someone who votes their conscience whatever their reason that prompted them to do so. I trust the Republican Party has not come to the mind-numbing group think but alas, sometimes I wonder and then along comes someone of your integrity and votes their conscience. Thank you for your courageous and thoughtful vote. After all, you are a representative of the thinking of your district. Just ignore Mr. Steele because most other Republicans do exactly that. He may have the problem of talking before he thinks an issue through. Again, thanks Mr. Cao!!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 4:15 PM    in reply to mJJ

Pardon me, but one Cao does not mean the repubs vote their conscience nor is this indicative that other republicans will soon start doing so. Also, most republicans do NOT ignore the call for groupthink. They are in fact the dictionary definition of groupthink and lockstep, fear-controlled and mind numbing solidarity. And lest you think solidarity is a good thing, not when it is in the name of inhumane and unamerican, anti-constituent actions.

I agree with your plaudits for Cao. And I wish you well and I wish for more like Cao in your party. However, Corporate America is never going to show a soft side, a human side and start being smart and decent. They are going to keep yanking the leash on their bought and paid for legislators, who are much more afraid of their corporate cashmasters than they are afraid of their constituents.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:16 AM   

Hats off to Congressman Cao for making the health care bill bipartisan!;)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:22 AM    in reply to pv2k

ao was certainly not a hero. I'd hate for people like him to get any credit over 219 dems, many who spend days and long hours to see this happen.

If his were the deciding vote, Cao would have voted No.

Who is Joseph Cao?

The teabaggers next big enemy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:24 AM    in reply to kash79

true -he was one of only two Republicans who refrained from voting until the Democrats got to 218 votes, and only then voted in favor of passage.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 4:47 PM    in reply to kash79

all his waiting did was give pelosi one less 'get out of vote free' cards to hand out to moderate dems.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:04 AM    in reply to pv2k

I wish people would stop patting this guy on the back! He's a right-wing tool who has voted with the Republicans on every single bill except this one.

He is not in favor or healthcare reform. He's in favor of being reelected. He knows he had to vote for this to have any chance.

In a district that voted 75% for Obama, we can get a real democrat instead of settling for this asshole!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:25 AM   

You should the comments by the teabaggers on Cao's Facebook page. Some are even calling him a Vietcong spy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:26 AM    in reply to Micheline

But it's not about racism. They're just patriots and they love freedom.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:47 PM    in reply to Micheline

Figgered that was comin'. They'll hate on anyone who doesn't follow the pack mentality. I'm sure he sees the need for affordable universal coverage for the people of his district.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:43 AM   

BTW I think Cao should and may be he will convert party ID ASAP. His only chance of a political future.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:45 AM    in reply to kash79

Wait until after the final bill vote - we could use his bi-partisan vote again...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:44 AM   

He'll likely run as a Democrat in 2010 and beyond.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:04 AM   

Only a complete wingnut representing LA-2 would vote against this. Cao may have to switch parties to win again...and he may well do that. Yeah, he won as a GOPer, but any GOPer running in LA-2, even against the extremely flawed Jefferson, had to be pretty darned progressive from the start. He could likely win as a GOPer because of this vote but he'd never win the primary. So Joe Cao may be the newest member of the Democratic House caucus in the very near future. And given the bravery he showed in this vote, he'd probably be able to run vitually unopposed. Have to think that he received this reassurance from folks in the Dem leadership and the WH, although, again, even a true GOPer who wasn't an insane wingnut representing LA-2 would have voted "no" on this. But a true wingnut never would have won the district in the first place. And I'm sure Cao is still ticked off at how they intimidated him into voting against the stimulus bill. (I heard they had members of the whip's staff standing next to him as he vote nay. That may work on moderate folks representing wingnut districts...but Cao doesn't represent a wingnut district.)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:06 AM    in reply to ogliberal

Correction..."would have vote "YEA" on this."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:33 AM    in reply to ogliberal

Have to think that he received this reassurance from folks in the Dem leadership and the WH

Thought the same. Apparently, Rahm was pushing hard to get this guy's vote.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 2:13 AM   

Stupak Amendment is shameful. Democrats betrayed women's rights tonight.

A conservative PO, a conservative bill. This guys just acting like a conservative.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 2:17 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

“This amendment would violate the spirit of health care reform, which is meant to guarantee quality, affordable health care coverage for all, by creating a two-tiered system that would punish women, particularly those with low and modest incomes,” said Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America in a late-night release. “Women won’t stand for legislation that takes away their current benefits and leaves them worse off after health care reform than they are today.


read more here:
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/11/07/flooor-stupak/

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 2:18 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

seems the "change" is the democratic party becoming more conservative.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 2:24 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

and not to get the bill passed, but for a single vote. Disgusting.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 6:00 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

It wasn't for Cao, it was for Stupak himself and some of the other dogmatic (no pun intended) Blue Dogs. It's pretty clear that they've taken the role of the opposition camp that has to be negotiated and compromised with, since the Republicans are off living on another planet. Some progressives voted against it, but probably not only because of the amendment.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 8:31 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

You've made your point.

Has it occured to you they couldn't get 218 votes with a compromise that inflicts some pain, and without this "disgusting" maneuver, we wouldn't have had a health care vote yesterday?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:02 AM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

It doesn't matter if this was Pelosi/Clyburn's maneuvering and not Obama's, and it doesn't matter that Stupak reportedly had 60 Democratic "nays" lined up if he didn't get an up or down vote on his amendment. If you're a fanatical Obama hater, all that matters is that you get to make a couple of self-satisfied cheap shots.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:56 AM    in reply to Stroszek

Word.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 10:57 PM    in reply to Stroszek

I'm not a fanatical Obama hater as you so desperately want to paint me.

Liberals won almost nothing in their bowing before leadership.

This bill is a big winner for conservatives.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 11:47 PM    in reply to Indie Pro

The conservatives who wanted to kill the bill which passed, you mean?

If that was unfair as to you before, okay, sorry.

And there are two parties in the legislature and it isn't all about what the one party wants, and that's our system. You need to deal with this. They have tried to pass health care for seven decades; this year they will succeed. You need a whole lot more perspective than you are bringing to the table here.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 9, 2009 12:03 AM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

again, let me explain this to you, Liberals and progressives won nothing, and the conservatives won what they wanted because they held out. Correct? Couldn't pass it, because they wouldnt vote for it, correct?

Liberals and progrssives caved. They won nothing. They lost ground.

Conservatives, democratic conservtives are the big winners here. They were even allowed to offer ammendments. Progressives were not allowed ammendments.

The democratic party is no friend to liberals adn progressives. Hell, look at how I am attacked on this site for espousing liberal and progressive views!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 11:27 PM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

what I'm pointing out is that liberals lost. They won nothing. They laid down. This is a conservative bill because consevatives held out to win what they wanted.

Leadership screwed the liberals and progressives Stiking some ammendments won, and denying them the ability to bring ammensments), and gave the conservatives what they wanted.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 11:51 PM    in reply to Indie Pro

Yeah, it's true, although you mean the conservatives who are Democrats. And in your world, we can just ignore the other conservatives, the ones who want to make certain that Obama fails an no health care is passed.

And you can't do that, not even close, and thus your'e not being rational.

I'd love to be able to respect your arguments more and have a better conversation. Help us out and bring some reality into it, okay?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 9, 2009 12:07 AM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

Yeah, it's true, although you mean the conservatives who are Democrats.

yes I do

And in your world, we can just ignore the other conservatives

I don't know where you are infering this? Those are nearly automatic negative votes, so far. Most of the arguments are between the liberals and conservtives within the democratic party. One side is told to be quiet and just go along, while the other side is giving what they want. That is the world we both live in.


and thus your'e not being rational.

I'd love to be able to respect your arguments more and have a better conversation. Help us out and bring some reality into it, okay?

Simple, Don't argue with me. Call me unreasonable. What do I care?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 9, 2009 12:41 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

Cao's wasn't automatic.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 9, 2009 9:41 AM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

no. it was an honest conservative vote for a bill that favored his views.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 10:23 AM    in reply to Indie Pro

Betrayed women's rights indeed, and yes, I know it was necessary for the greater good. But dammit, one of these days, probably after my daughters and I are all dead and gone, women will no longer be the obvious and easy sacrifice every time one is required.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 10:45 AM    in reply to junkmailqueen

In a war, you often have to give ground to gain ground. The fight to strip Stupak will go on, and last night, we did make significant gains in the war for women's equality: namely, we ended rate discrimination on the basis of gender and we guaranteed maternity care to virtually every woman in America. Those are not small victories by any means.

It's also important to keep in mind that the abortion issue is going to be problematic regardless of your approach to health care. In fact, its implications would have been far more dire if it had been attached to a single-payer bill.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

WCG

user-pic

November 8, 2009 10:30 AM   

Cao's election was a "shocking victory against Democratic Rep. William Jefferson"? How was that shocking? When the Democrats run a complete crook, how could it possibly be shocking that his constituents chose the other candidate?

I certainly hope we don't get to the point where Democrats will vote for such a corrupt candidate, just because he's a Democrat. And I hope that the Democratic Party learns from this and stops cutting incumbents so much slack. We are all better off losing an election than supporting corrupt politicians (let's leave that to the Republicans).

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 10:58 PM    in reply to WCG

believe it or not, nobody gave cao a chance. nobody thought he could win. the republicans did not support him until gingrich realized that they could win two weeks before the election.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 12:12 PM   

Voting 'Yes' On Health Reform, GOP Rep. Joseph Cao Gives GOP a 'Cow'
http://satiricalpolitical.com/2009/11/08/voting-yes-on-health-reform-gop-rep-joseph-cao-gives-gop-a-cow/

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:09 PM   

Hey Eric Kleefeld, Josh Marshall, et al - I would like to echo another commenter on a recent thread and request that TPM reject the use of the right-wing term "pro-life" in TPM-written articles. "Pro-life" is an Orwellian doublespeak red herring bullshit term propagated by the anti-abortion forces. The honest and accurate term is "anti-abortion".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:26 PM    in reply to ttarleton

More accurately, anti-abortion rights.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 1:28 PM    in reply to jdb316

"Anti-choice" would work too.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 4:46 PM   

dude remember when michael steele was all like "i'm the cow on the tracks" then this Cao dude was totally like "psych!" thank you representative Cao for support this legislation and making my inane punnery possible.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 6:01 PM   

I watched the vote last night and this guy waited to be sure if the vote would pass before he committed. If it came down to it I'm sure he would have voted with the rest of the GOP.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:17 PM   

oh, so it was one of those opportunist votes? f that noise. if that's really the case then he can eat my gr-ass. stupid cow.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:32 PM   

Don't be so quick to dismiss Cao just because his vote came late in the process. Watch some of his townhall stuff (look it up on YouTube). He is a human being, not a GOPbot.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 8, 2009 9:33 PM   

It's open season for RINO.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 9, 2009 2:12 AM   

I know little to nothing about Rep. Cao, and therefore cannot speak as to any motive other than the one he gave us for crossing the aisle (as some suggest).

I WILL say this for him: if he is one in support of the pro-life cause, and understands that being pro-life means being pro "LIFE", then his vote in support of H.R. 3962 makes perfect sense to me. He appears to embrace the notion that the "right to life" is not limited to the unborn.

Though I may not agree with whatever he may or may not do in future, on this issue I will gladly extend him the credit he deserves. Bravo to you, Congressman Cao!

For the record, I am pro-choice. One other thing: the anti-abortion clause in the bill did not diminish the rights of women in the slightest, it merely upheld the laws already in place prohibiting the use of federal funding for abortions. It has always been thus. Certain factions of Congress wanted to turn the health care debate into yet another knock-down-drag-out over abortion and it had no place in this legislation. That is a seperate issue and another fight entirely. Losing votes for health care reform over this issue would have been beyond stupid. Pelosi did what she had to do.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

PollTracker

More polls »

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on