U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof was one of 24 House Republicans to switch their votes on Tuesday’s vote that will postpone cuts in Medicare payments to doctors.

When the bill was voted on in the House on June 24, Hulshof voted against it. A no vote would mean that doctor’s Medicare reimbursement rates would be cut by about 10 percent starting this month. But Tuesday, after the bill was vetoed by President George W. Bush, Hulshof and 23 other Republicans voted to override the veto, in effect changing their no votes to yes.

Hulshof, of course, is engaged in a primary race for governor in Missouri, and his opponents seized the opportunity to label the Congressman as a flip-flopper.

“Let me get this straight,” said Oren Shur, spokesman for Democratic Attorney General Jay Nixon, who is running for governor. “First Congressman Hulshof voted against a health care bill and then a couple weeks later he says ‘never mind, I actually support it?’  That’s the type of Washington double-talk that everyone is sick of, and it’s why Missourians can’t trust a Washington politician to fix our state’s broken health care system.”

But Hulshof’s Congressional office spokesman, Erik Rasmussen, defended the switch in votes and said it wasn’t a flip-flop.

“He voted against it the first time on procedural grounds only,” Rasmussen said. Rasmussen, who is also Hulshof’s adviser on health care matters, said Congressional Democrats tried to “pound the bill through with no real debate. It’s not the way to do things in Congress.”

Rasmussen pointed to Hulshof’s other votes on Medicare issues to indicate that the congressman has consistently voted in favor of higher reimbursement fees to physicians. Last year, Hulshof inserted language into a budget resolution urging a better fix to the broken Medicare doctor reimbursement program.

But it’s worth noting, that in the time from Hulshof’s no vote on June 24, to the day of his yes vote on the veto override, Hulshof’s gubernatorial campaign took in about $20,000 from entities that would benefit by the Medicare payments.

Hulshof’s primary opponent, Treasurer Sarah Steelman, suggests Hulshof changed his vote purely for campaign donations:

“You cannot trust Congressman Hulshof,” said Steelman spokesperson Spence Jackson. “He changed his vote explicitly for campaign contributions at Dr. Steve Reintjes house in Kansas City just a few days ago. Missourians can’t afford a government that’s for sale.”

Rasmussen said campaign contributions would have had no effect on Hulshof’s vote.

“I don’t even know what goes on in his campaign in terms of contributions,” Rasmussen said. “Did it impact his vote? Not at all.”

Hulshof campaign spokesman Scott Baker said that Hulshof did have a fund-raiser at Reintjes house but denied it had anything to do with the vote to override Bush’s veto.

“This is a desperate grasp at straws,” Baker said. “Even a cursory look at Kenny’s record would show that his vote to override is consistent with votes he has cast for many years on this issue.”

The other irony in the vote is that it happened on the day that Hulshof was scheduled to appear at a news conference with Associated Industries of Missouri. At the news conference, AIM endorsed Hulshof, but he wasn’t there because he returned to Washington, D.C., to cast his veto override vote. Hulshof’s opponents have criticized him during the campaign for missing votes.