Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Senate vote: Wow ... not even close (update)
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, March 15, 2007

Sen Harry Reid, speaking of the Democratic plan to withdraw troops from Iraq had this to say before the vote:
But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid warned that Republicans were playing a dangerous game if they had allowed the debate to go forward feeling completely confident they would be able to stop the measure.

"They may wind up with a surprise," Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told reporters. "More Republicans than they think may wind up being in favour of this."
Well not really. The Senate measure calling for troop withdrawal from Iraq failed 48-50. One Republican voted for it while 3 Democrats voted against it.

Did anything pass in the Senate? Well, yes:

The Gregg Amendment – Congress should not eliminate/reduce funds for troops in the field – has passed 82–16.

And the the Murray Amendment – Congress should provide funds for training, equipment and other support for troops in the field; and health care to those who have served – has passed 96-2.

So all of this:
Anti-war Democrats prevailed on a near-party line vote of 36-28 in the House Appropriations Committee, brushing aside a week-old veto threat from the administration and overcoming unyielding opposition from Republicans.
Doesn't mean a whole lot in the end.

UPDATE: In case you're wondering, and Aldo did ask, the 16 who voted against the Gregg amendment (14 Dems, 1 Republican, 1 "Independent") were:

Dem - Daniel Akaka, Joseph Biden, Jeff Bingaman, Robert Byrd, Christopher Dodd, Russell Feingold, Edward Kennedy, Patrick Leahy, Robert Menéndez, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, Sheldon Whitehouse.

Rep - Bob Corker

Ind - Bernie Sanders

Not casting a vote - John McCain and Tim Johnson
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I need to know who voted against the Gregg and Murray Amendments, so that I can do everything in my power to work for their defeat in the next election.
 
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://
Word from A Secondhand Conjecture’s comments section is that it was Bob Corker and Orrin Hatch voting against the Murray Amendments
 
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
Check it out: Even the MyDD crowd isn’t buying Stoller’s spin on this.
 
Written By: Joe Tobacco
URL: http://www.cadillactight.com
Here’s my favorite Joe:
God, I need a drink.

by BingoL on Thu Mar 15, 2007 at 08:58:09 PM EST
 
Written By: Aldo
URL: http://
So all of this:
Anti-war Democrats prevailed on a near-party line vote of 36-28 in the House Appropriations Committee, brushing aside a week-old veto threat from the administration and overcoming unyielding opposition from Republicans.
Doesn’t mean a whole lot in the end
Not true. It means I get to laugh my head off while the Dems flounder about in their very own Iraq quagmire.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Might the way this vote panned out, explain why Hillary Clinton backed off of her ’90 days’ statement, I wonder?

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://
Aldo:

Nice, indeed. I imagine much of the "progressive" community will be availing themselves of the green beer this weekend :-)
 
Written By: Joe Tobacco
URL: http://www.cadillactight.com
Funny thing is how DailyKos is spinning it.
as 49 Republicans and Lieberman.
With math like that, it is no wonder they have such a difficulty winning elections.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
I’ve gotta feeling that it’s dawning on the Democrats that they’ve baked their last ’tater in the coals of Iraq, with someone in the government finally realizing, at the last possible minute, that this clear and hold thing actually works against insurgencies. This indeed may not be the last "surge," but if there is another it won’t be as a followup to failure but as a followup to success, and opposing it will simply appear truly stupid, nakedly venal, or seditious. The smart ones are already preparing for victory in Iraq, and they will be the only ones left standing after 2008.

yours/
peter.
 
Written By: peter jackson
URL: www.liberalcapitalist.com
So if I understand the Gregg Ammendment correctly, Congress now has almost no authority to eliminate funding for a war or conflict, thus diverting more power into the hands of a single person, the president. Are any other libertarians out there concerned about this? Isn’t this an essential check on executive power?
 
Written By: fatwesley
URL: http://
So if I understand the Gregg Ammendment correctly, Congress now has almost no authority to eliminate funding for a war or conflict, thus diverting more power into the hands of a single person, the president. Are any other libertarians out there concerned about this? Isn’t this an essential check on executive power?
That’s what the Senate just did ... checked it and voted to approve it as such. Now you may not agree with them or their vote, but it certainly falls withing the parameters of ’checking’ executive power.

Nor does it preclude them from changing their mind in the future. And that’s certainly not inconceivable. The power of the purse still remains with Congress, and what has been passed can just as easily be amended or changed.

So no, at the moment, it doesn’t concern me that much.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Why hasn’t McCain been voting on any of these recent measures?
 
Written By: Balding dude
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider