Comments on: Reid Calls Snap Vote on DADT; His Failure Kills the Bill

By: customartist

customartist — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 19:20:24 +0000

In the end, Senators that vote No must know that we will vote against them in the next elections.

Lift a finger. Call your Senators. It costs you nothing!

(202)224-3121

Tell them to “Vote FOR DADT Repeal”

*The Operator will direct you if you do not know your representative

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:43:04 +0000

Time to back Feinstein or Boxer for majority leader in the Senate, I think.

By: Jim Burroway

Jim Burroway — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:38:46 +0000

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: we’ve got a great bunch of readers. Thanks for the correction.

I would however point out that I do believe that Reid recklessly intended this to go down in flames — or at least didn’t care if it passed one way or another. He knew the vote would be close, but he didn’t even bother to find out if all of his potential “yes” votes were even in the chamber. Sen. Blanche Lincoln was in the dentist’s chair when the vote went down, and Sen. Collins wasn’t even in the chamber when he made the snap call for the vote. If he really wanted it to pass, he would have done what any competent politician would have done and made sure his votes were lined up and present. He didn’t bother to even take those minimal fundamental steps, and that omisison was unconscionable.

By: DaveM

DaveM — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:55:54 +0000

Jim:
Your “Update” is wrong on several levels.
Yes, Reid voted yes. That’s about it.
This was the vote to reconsider the vote by which cloture on the motion to proceed to debate was not invoked.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00270

Therefore, Reid switching his vote would have had no effect- you can’t reconsider a vote to reconsider.
However, Reid can simply file another cloture motion on the bill which would require 3 days to ripen, then hold another vote for cloture.
This happened back in May on the financial reform bill, S.3217. Cloture was filed, rejected, and reconsideration failed. Cloture was filed, rejected, and reconsideration was then waived as part of an agreement, and eventually the bill was passed.

tl;dr: You are wrong on the legislative process, and should change your update.

By: Désirée

Désirée — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:54:10 +0000

why are we blaming Reid and not the 60 Repuglicans who voted no? Isn’t that a bit like telling the rape victim she should have fought harder? Blame the people who voted ‘no’ after they accept responsibility for their discrimination, maybe we can pass a little blame around. But this one is entirely on the party of ‘no’

By: jim

jim — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:47:28 +0000

Or: “only an idiot” would think the Republicans would let DADT through prior to November. Perhaps Obama is not responsible for DADT’s defeat-because even when you lose a vote, that doesn’t mean there was a better strategy. Perhaps if Obama tried to pass legislation without doing a serious study of the impact, any such reform would have been quickly as unserious. Perhaps Obama realized that, in an election year, members facing close elections would mostly vote against it; the remainder voting for it but punish Obama with other legislation because he imperiled their re-election chances. Perhaps Obama remembered what happened when Bill Clinton demanded integration as one of his first pieces of legislation (a) he wasted capital rather than building up his credibility as a moderate (b) his credibility being minimal, he had to settle for a ridiculous compromise.

Or we can buy the GOP argument that “someone” (i.e., a Democrat up for reelection) has to be held accountable for Republican obstructionism.

By: Kate

Kate — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 11:58:42 +0000

Let me get this straight…the Senate still has to vote on approving a defense appropriations bill, right? Did they do that and I missed it? Did they separate DADT from the defense budget and pass the rest? If they HAD gotten the 60 votes, would that have meant DADT is dead?…I’m getting really confused, but I think the media is simplifying the focus around one issue – it’s the one most important to us, but I think there is more going on. DADT is NOT the most important issue to the senators, it’s tied up with a whole bunch of other crap they are fighting over. And they are still fighting – almost nothing has been decided for sure.

I’m going to be watching what the DOD is saying and doing in the next week or so before I break out the kleenex, and I’m sure as HELL not breaking out the champagne until I see an unequivocal “DADT IS DEAD – US MILITARY LIFTS GAY BAN” in the newspaper headlines.

Preferably on Fox News….

By: Amicus

Amicus — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 07:33:52 +0000

Would it have made sense to announce the possibility of a stand alone bill in advance of the NDAA re-consideration vote?

By: Lucrece

Lucrece — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 03:43:57 +0000

Everyone seems to love blaming Reid. Giving open amendments would’ve opened the road for Republican foot-dragging.

Guess what? The Democrats answer to many issues with much larger interested and powerful voting blocks than the LGBT vote. Get it out of your head that they would ever risk losing other major legislation negotiation time on a stretched out defense bill debate that basically boils down to sabotaging votes until Republicans get their tax cuts.

But it’s easy to blame Reid, because you’re not the one in his position. As if DADT repeal were a significant campaigning chip– straight people don’t give a damn about it. They’ll show support for repeal, but they won’t lose any sleep if it doesn’t happen, and will gladly have other issues addressed until we die of old age.

Pray that we get a stand-alone bill, but stop with this bullcrap belief that Democrats should ever compromise their whole package just for getting DADT repealed. It’s never going to happen.

By: Curt

Curt — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 03:30:25 +0000

One Republican voted for the repeal and maybe because one Democrat voted against repeal, it is Reid’s fault. Republicans just want to run out the clock on the session and they are just playing a game. They have no intention of letting this pass. Would a leader McConnell even allow a vote? NO!