Key vote on DADT repeal fails

[General Zod]

Oh joy.

Carrie Dann writes: *** UPDATE *** 4:45 PM ET: In a press conference after the vote, Sens. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins announced that they will introduce a stand-alone bill to repeal "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and that Senate Majority Leader Reid has promised to support it. Reid told Lieberman that he will bring the legislation up for a vote before the end of the lame duck session, the Connecticut lawmaker said.

"We're not going to give up," Lieberman said. "We're going to keep fighting until the last possible minute in the session."

Collins said that she was "very disappointed" that Reid "walked away from negotiations" and brought the bill up for a vote before an agreement on the process of the debate had been reached and the 60 votes needed to move forward were assured.

If the Senate approves the standalone measure, the House would have to approve it as well.

4:08 pm ET: A key procedural vote on the bill containing a repeal of the military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy failed Thursday, likely dealing a final blow to advocates who hoped to overturn the 17-year old ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military during this session of Congress.

Democrats needed 60 votes to advance the Defense Authorization bill for debate on the floor. The vote failed, 57-40.

Ultimately, Majority Leader Harry Reid called for the vote without having reached a procedural agreement with moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who supports repeal but wanted greater openness for the process of amending and passing the bill. Collins voted aye on the measure, but other Republicans who support repeal but had voiced similar procedural concerns -- Sens. Scott Brown and Lisa Murkowski -- voted no.

One Democrat, newly-elected Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, broke with his party to vote no.

The result means that repeal of the ban, enacted in 1993, is unlikely to be changed by Congress anytime soon. The policy is also currently being considered in court proceedings.

Supporters of repeal, including Adm. Mike Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, have warned that a failure of congressional action could mean a hasty and disorderly implementation of a change if the courts overturn the policy first.

Opponents of repeal say that a change in policy during wartime could disrupt the effectiveness and safety of troops in combat. A recent survey showed that troops serving in combat and members of the Marine Corps were more likely than other servicemembers to voice concerns about the consequences of repeal.

In remarks shortly before the vote, Reid blamed Republicans – but not Collins – for blocking the massive defense measure from coming to the floor.

"It's quite clear that they're trying to run out the clock," Reid said of GOP opponents before calling for the vote.

Reid went out of his way to praise Collins for trying to reach an arrangement that would have paved the way for Democrats to win the 60 votes they need to advance the measure containing the DADT language. "She's tried," Reid said.

Collins said on the Senate floor that she was "perplexed and frustrated" that the bill would fall victim to "politics."

"I just do not understand why we can't proceed on a path... that will allow us to get the 60 votes to proceed," she said.

Well this certainly isn't turning out good, and a hearty "fuck-you" to WV.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

It's not quite over yet.

Btw, a hearty fuck you to Senator Reid for killing negotiations and knowingly bringing up a vote before guaranteeing votes from a few GOP members.

[Thanas]

It's not quite over yet.

Btw, a hearty fuck you to Senator Reid for killing negotiations and knowingly bringing up a vote before guaranteeing votes from a few GOP members.

Given that the only way the GOP members were to vote for this was in exchange for Democrat votes on the tax bill, I doubt Reid can be blamed for this.

EDIT:

In a bitter floor speech, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pointed to dire warnings from Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) that time was running out for approval of the defense bill, and blamed Republican for sidetracking it because of the repeal provision.

“We tried every possible way to move forward on this,” a frustrated Reid said just before the vote. “I bent over backwards to find a way to get this bill done. But it’s clear that Republicans, led by a few of them, don’t want to have vote on repealing ‘don’t ask don’t tell.’ ... They want to block a vote on this at all costs, even if it means we don’t pass a defense authorization bill for the first time in 48 years.”

“It doesn’t matter what I do before we get to the end of it, they change the rules again,” Reid said. “My colleagues on that side of the aisle are demanding more each time. ... It’s illogical, unreasonable.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46208.html

[Losonti Tokash]

It's not quite over yet.

Btw, a hearty fuck you to Senator Reid for killing negotiations and knowingly bringing up a vote before guaranteeing votes from a few GOP members.

Yeah, cause it's not like the last couple years have been filled with Republicans promising to vote for something in exchange for some compromise or another, then voting against the bill anyway.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

It's not quite over yet.

Btw, a hearty fuck you to Senator Reid for killing negotiations and knowingly bringing up a vote before guaranteeing votes from a few GOP members.

Yeah, cause it's not like the last couple years have been filled with Republicans promising to vote for something in exchange for some compromise or another, then voting against the bill anyway.

The GOP senators didn't go against their word this time. They did not voice explicit support for the motion to proceed. Even Collins did not, which makes her aye vote somewhat surprising (or maybe she did it to show good faith knowing it would fail anyways). Lieberman has said he is confident in getting 60 votes and was in the works in getting them but Reid jumped the gun and surprised everyone by calling a vote prematurely today.

With the tax bill still unresolved, the GOP aren't going to budget on ANYTHING. Time is on their side, not ours. The way I see it, we can hope that the GOP makes good on their word to move forward on other legislation if we pass the tax bill or everything good that could've been accomplished - unemployment extensions, DADT, Dream Act, 911 bill - will be lost for a long time to come.

[Thanas]

That is funny, because it looks like the people who are sayign that are the Republicans. Reid says he tried plenty of negotiating, but the GOP wants more.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

That is funny, because it looks like the people who are sayign that are the Republicans. Reid says he tried plenty of negotiating, but the GOP wants more.

How is his "negotiating" going to move the tax bill forward, which is what the GOP wants?

[Thanas]

So you are saying the Democrats should completely surrender on the tax issue, which will most likely ensure the budget is never going to be balanced at all, for the sake of the DADT repeal?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

So you are saying the Democrats should completely surrender on the tax issue, which will most likely ensure the budget is never going to be balanced at all, for the sake of the DADT repeal?

This was a disaster in the making. The Democrats have pussy-footed all these bills over the past couple years (especially with HCR languishing in Congress for an entire fucking year) and not moving these bills up for a vote in fear of electoral losses. They lost the House anyways and all these bills they wanted to pass - it's not just DADT repeal, it's also Dream Act, 911 responders, unemployment - and they've put them off to the end. Now that time is running out, they've cornered themselves in giving the GOP the ability to pull shit like demanding tax cuts for the rich.

What else do you propose they do? Hold their ground and let millions of unemployed Americans lose their benefits and starve? And at the same time, let every piece of legislation reform die for the next few years with Rep Boner as the House Speaker?

[Thanas]

So again, you are demanding they sacrifice the most important fight for what is essentially a side issue (important one, but still a side issue). That is not an option.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

So again, you are demanding they sacrifice the most important fight for what is essentially a side issue (important one, but still a side issue). That is not an option.

I'd hardly call unemployment a side issue.

[Knife]

So again, you are demanding they sacrifice the most important fight for what is essentially a side issue (important one, but still a side issue). That is not an option.

I'd hardly call unemployment a side issue.

You hang it around their neck the closer it gets to Christmas and no action on it. The GOP has the House next year, not the Senate. Hang that bitch around their neck and keep reminding them and the public how the GOP got it there. Unemployment is an important issue, but not 700 billion worth. Hang that fucking albertrose around the GOPs neck and make em wear it.

[Flagg]

That's real great for all the people who lose unemployment though isn't it? Like my mother for instance whose unemployment ran out a week ago. I'd rather see rich cunts get a tax break for 2 years than be evicted.

[D.Turtle]

Except that Republicans have caved every single time unemployment insurance extension has come up. They always bleat about it in the beginning, but after some time they cave in, as if they completely block it, then it is the Republicans fault that millions lose their unemployment insurance.

Even the Republicans know that that is bad for their reelection.

Edit: Or to make it clearer: Why the hell should the Democrats get the blame for Republicans blocking something that was given as granted in the past (extend unemployment insurance during Recessions)? Extending unemployment isn't something you offer concessions for to get. It is something you blast your opponents for if they are stupid enough to block it.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Except that Republicans have caved every single time unemployment insurance extension has come up. They always bleat about it in the beginning, but after some time they cave in, as if they completely block it, then it is the Republicans fault that millions lose their unemployment insurance.

Even the Republicans know that that is bad for their reelection.

Edit: Or to make it clearer: Why the hell should the Democrats get the blame for Republicans blocking something that was given as granted in the past (extend unemployment insurance during Recessions)? Extending unemployment isn't something you offer concessions for to get. It is something you blast your opponents for if they are stupid enough to block it.

Because the Democrats, from the sitting President on down, are that incompetent. If this tax bill doesn't get passed, guess what the GOP line will be?

"You see, those Democrats didn't want to compromise. They just wanted to play partisan politics-as-usual, and chose to reveal their true colors as 'tax-and-spenders.' Our deal with the White House was a shining example of bipartisan politics, but the House Democrats decided to take revenge on the American People by allowing the biggest tax increase in American history, strangling our nation's ability to create jobs when it was needed most!"

And, of course, the right wing echo-chamber that makes up the American press will un-hesitatingly parrot this line like the good beaten wives they are.

And the sitting President is stupid enough to offer concessions to get unemployment extensions. He conceded giving tax cuts to rich white assholes, and dead rich white assholes. He completely shut his own party out of the negotiations. Not extending unemployment would've been bad for the GOP, if the sitting President hadn't just given them the opportunity to turn around and sodomize him up the ass with the apparent intransigence of his own party by reaching for his ankles. Like he always does.

[D.Turtle]

I'm respoinding to the accusation that UI is dead if the President's deal doesn't go through.

It isn't.

So far, every single time Republicans caved on the issue of extending UI. They will again.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

I'm respoinding to the accusation that UI is dead if the President's deal doesn't go through.

It isn't.

So far, every single time Republicans caved on the issue of extending UI. They will again.

Every time unemployment benefits have been extended, the number of Republicans on-board has steadily shrunk. And now the current sitting President has given them a way to not extend them and come out looking like the Good Guys in the process . . . since now, it will be up to the House Democrats to decide whether they want to cave on extending tax cuts for rich white dudes, and cutting taxes on dead rich white dudes.

[Flagg]

These are people with enough cognitive dissonance to bitch about how UI ($18 billion) is not paid for while demanding tax cuts ($700 billion over 10 years) that aren't paid for. I wouldn't count on them voting for unemployment insurance at all. We have a deal on the table, as tasteless as it may be, that will extend UI and only adds 1/5 of that $700 billion to the deficit. It's not great, but I'm desperate and I'll take it.

[Bakustra]

These are people with enough cognitive dissonance to bitch about how UI ($18 billion) is not paid for while demanding tax cuts ($700 billion over 10 years) that aren't paid for. I wouldn't count on them voting for unemployment insurance at all. We have a deal on the table, as tasteless as it may be, that will extend UI and only adds 1/5 of that $700 billion to the deficit. It's not great, but I'm desperate and I'll take it.

They'll vote for UI. They'd commit political suicide if they didn't, much like how they committed near-suicide in 1995 when they shut down the government. The leadership is not going to risk that again. But they (or at least the leadership; Bachmann and some of the other crazies might be sincere) know that they can threaten not to, and calling their bluff has a decent chance of backfiring on the Democrats. So they can extort things like this out of the Democrats. But there is still a chance that the repeal will pass. The independent legislation has a chance of picking up Brown and Murkowski, Collins is assured, and maybe an earmark will buy off Manchin. But if it doesn't do so before the end of the session, then it probably won't and the courts will rule on it.

[Knife]

These are people with enough cognitive dissonance to bitch about how UI ($18 billion) is not paid for while demanding tax cuts ($700 billion over 10 years) that aren't paid for. I wouldn't count on them voting for unemployment insurance at all. We have a deal on the table, as tasteless as it may be, that will extend UI and only adds 1/5 of that $700 billion to the deficit. It's not great, but I'm desperate and I'll take it.

Of course your desperate and people need it, and I have lots of sympathy. But the whole reason we're here at the end of a lame duck session and it's still not done is because these spineless fucks won't stand up and fight. If anything, it should have been the Dems to say 'We won't bring anything up, no tax cuts no nothing, until the unemployment issue is resolved.' and we wouldn't be talking about it. If they cave and let this abortion go through, you got 13 months until we go through it again, with a weaker position.

[Uraniun235]

That's real great for all the people who lose unemployment though isn't it? Like my mother for instance whose unemployment ran out a week ago. I'd rather see rich cunts get a tax break for 2 years than be evicted.

It's not just two years though, there's no way in hell it is just two years. Who would be terminally retarded enough to argue for RAISING ARE TAXES during a presidential election campaign?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

That's real great for all the people who lose unemployment though isn't it? Like my mother for instance whose unemployment ran out a week ago. I'd rather see rich cunts get a tax break for 2 years than be evicted.

It's not just two years though, there's no way in hell it is just two years. Who would be terminally retarded enough to argue for RAISING ARE TAXES during a presidential election campaign?

To be fair, Obama campaigned in 2008 that he was going to let the tax cuts for the rich expire while continually emphasizing that he was going to keep tax cuts for 98% of Americans. Remember, this is when Joe the Plumber came to the scene to bash him for that and Obama still won the election. Of course, he was a lot more popular then than he is now or probably will be in 2012.

[ShadowDragon8685]

What I want to know, is why the bollocks aren't the democrats making hay - hell, fucking alfalfa - out of this?

Why aren't they stumping 24/7 about how their plans won't cost the average American a dime, and will stick it to the rich and mighty and use their money to pay for the things that Joe Mainstreet needs, like cops and paved roads and firemen and stuff, while the Republican party wants to give a big old circle-jerk to the high and mighty and take Joe Mainstreet's money to pay for the things that James Mansion's thirteen shell companies want, like the ability to rape Joe Mainstreet's mom and pop corner store.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Also, the vote was 57-40. It would have been 58-40 had Reid waited three more minutes allowing Senator Lincoln to show up in time. She didn't vote because she showed up three minutes too late due to being stuck at the dentist having a root canal done. Seriously, couldn't have Reid at least made sure the entire caucus was here first? His ineptitude is showing and is frankly quite frustrating.

[Alphawolf55]

It's moments like this that I wish a group of ultra wealthy billionaires like the Gate/Buffet group would come out and agree to payfor the Unemployment Insurance themselves, so the Democrats could grow a spine and challenge the Republicans.