So uhm, what was that thing back in 2006?

[MKSheppard]

You know, where the democrats were supposedly winning big?

link

Senate Shelves Measure to Require Troop Withdrawal Timetable
Vote Is Latest in Defeats for Democratic-Sponsored Provisions on War

By William Branigin and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, September 21, 2007; 1:12 PM


The Senate today shelved a measure that would have required the withdrawal of most U.S. troops from Iraq within nine months, the latest in a series of defeats this week for Democratic-sponsored provisions that sought to restrict the Bush administration's Iraq war policy.

The vote on the measure, an amendment to the 2008 defense authorization bill, was 47 to 47. That was 13 votes short of the 60-vote threshold the amendment needed because of the inherent threat of a Republican filibuster.

"Under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of the amendment, the amendment is withdrawn," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) in announcing the defeat of the measure sponsored by Sens. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.).

The provision would have required the withdrawal of most U.S. troops from Iraq beginning within 120 days of enactment. It would have removed most troops in nine months, shifting the remaining forces to support roles.

"We didn't make it today, but we're going to keep trying," Levin said after his amendment failed. "The stakes are simply too high to stop."

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) expressed frustration that the efforts of several groups to craft bipartisan plans on Iraq have so far failed to show results, and he blamed Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) for the impasse.

"Harry Reid has called up the same amendments for the same votes and gotten the same results -- more gridlock on Iraq," Alexander said.

Today's vote continued a losing streak this week for antiwar Senate Democrats, who were unable to attract enough Republican votes for a filibuster-proof majority on previous measures as well.

On Wednesday, Senate Republicans blocked an amendment sponsored by Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) that would have guaranteed troops at least as much time at home between deployments as they spend on combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. The vote on that provision was 56 to 44 -- four votes short of the 60 needed for adoption under a Senate accord.

On Thursday, a provision that would have cut off funding for combat in Iraq in June 2008 went down to defeat by a 70-28 vote. That amendment was sponsored by Reid and Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.).

Reid blasted Republicans over the votes, saying the war in Iraq now belongs to them. He vowed that they would be held accountable for repeatedly siding with President Bush on a war policy that most Americans oppose.

In a floor speech before today's vote, the Senate Democratic leader said that if the Levin-Reed amendment were rejected, "this war will rage on with no end in sight." Adopting it, he said, would mean that "today can be known as the first day of the end of the war -- the first day Congress fulfills its constitutional duty to have a plan to bring our soldiers and Marines home."

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) charged in the debate: "The administration's policy has put our troops in an untenable and unwinnable situation. They are being held hostage to Iraqi politics, in which sectarian leaders are unable or unwilling to make the tough judgments needed to lift Iraq out of its downward spiral."

Warning that the U.S. military "is stretched to its limits and is nearing its breaking point," Kennedy said Americans have "lost confidence in the current direction of the war" and are tired of Bush's promises of success. "They want to know when the nightmare of Iraq will end," he said. "It's time to stop this madness."

Helping to rally GOP opposition to the amendment was Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a leading supporter of the administration's war strategy.

"If we leave, we will be back -- in Iraq and elsewhere -- in many more desperate fights to protect our security and at an even greater cost in American lives and treasure," he said.

Siding with most Democrats on the Levin-Reed amendment were three Republicans: Gordon Smith (Ore.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Olympia J. Snowe (Maine). Voting against it were three Democrats -- Ben Nelson (Neb.), Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.) and Mark Pryor (Ark.) -- as well as independent Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.). Six senators -- three Republicans, two Democrats and an independent -- did not vote.

Dodd, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, said he opposed the Levin-Reed amendment because he felt it did not go far enough toward ending the Iraq war.

"While a firm deadline is necessary, it is not sufficient without it also being enforceable through the power of the purse," Dodd said in a statement. "Given this president's loyalty to his own failed policy, it is clear to me that anything short of a firm, enforceable deadline that forces his hand will only serve to perpetuate our involvement in this civil war. I will only vote to fully fund the complete redeployment of our troops out of Iraq."

After the vote, senators launched into debate on an amendment sponsored by Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) and Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) that would promote a political settlement in Iraq based on a federalist system of semi-autonomous regions.

A vote on that amendment is scheduled for Tuesday, and senators said they hope to be able to get through a slew of other amendments after that, allowing them to vote on the underlying defense authorization bill.

"At some point next week we're going to have to find a way to end this," said Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

[Sriad]

The Democratic party made major gains in 2006, overwhelmingly winning the election and extremely narrow majorities in both houses.

The Senate "majority" in fact is one zombie-DINO, right of Arlen Spector: Joseph Lieberman. (The other independent is Bernie Sanders, who can be reasonably considered Democrat-ish) The House is a bit better; 53.6% D to 46.4% R, but votes still swing on the 16 rightmost Democratic representatives, and they can't do much legislation without the Senate.

The Senatorial "majority" is not enough to beat a filibuster, which the Republicans have used to successfully block over 60% of all proposed legislation this session.

[Covenant]

It's hard to get anything done with nearly an equally powerful half of your membership attempts to grind all business to a standstill. It's ridiculous that nothing has gotten done, but it's absolutely shameful that many Republicans are being so destructive to the process.

[SirNitram]

Hey, when the GOP insists on filibustering restoring Habaes Corpus, and somehow finds 43 people who hate the Constitution.. Things get bad.

The ridiculous part is that Shep probably finds that good.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Shep just thinks he'll continue to be part of the privileged group as a white male indefinitely. Well, when things get bad, we'll see how his rich white brothers will help his deaf electrician ass. I am part of the privileged class. My parents vote Republican for the plutocratic policies. I was taken to fund-raising and speaking events for Colin Powell and other Republican politicians when I was in my teens. The real ruling class doesn't give a fuck and will flush his class down the fucking toilet if push comes to shove. I'm as worried about sustainability issues as I am because I feel bad for the inevitable allocation of resources by class that will ensue when it becomes crunch time that will leave many hung out to dry. Its simply tragic that they've gotten the working class whites like Shep to really think they're their men, and buy every convenient bullshit excuse about their flat wages, declining benefits, and stormy future. Its amazing so many would vote against their own interests.

[Sidewinder]

I voted Democrat in the 2006 elections. Sounds like I should do the same again in 2008, and pray a Democratic president has the balls to say, "The troops are coming home," and enforce that. (I have friends who were or are deployed on Operation Iraqi Freedom, and I am concerned for their safety.)