Hayes Cloture Vote--Where Were Three Key Democrats?
As I reported below, Senate Republicans have blocked, for now, the confirmation of David Hayes as Undersecretary for the Interior. The vote was 57-39, with Reid voting with the minority for procedural reasons. Here's the roll call. Sixty votes were required to move the nomination forward.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) voted for cloture. Presumably for procedural reasons, so did Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the Senate Minority Whip. But Sens. Kerry (D-MA), Kennedy (D-MA), and Mikulski (D-MD) didn't vote at all. If they'd been around this morning, the Democrats might have had the votes. Kennedy has missed a number of votes for health reasons, but where were Kerry and Mikulski?
Late update: Kerry is apparently in Massachusetts at the funeral of a soldier killed in Iraq.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Better question: why was this brought up for a vote when they weren't there?
May 13, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
To put Republicans on record for allowing minority of Senators having veto power over the will of the majority -- in other words, petty obstructionism.
May 13, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't Kennedy paired with someone on the other side when he misses votes or does that not work on cloture votes? But its actually kind of encouraging to see that it wasn't the so-called "moderstes."
May 13, 2009 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kerry was attending a soldier's funeral in Massachusetts.
May 13, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
THE CORE OF THEIR TORTURE ARGUMENT: That if we perform these acts on our soldiers during training, therefore, these acts are not torture. Is the same as saying that if you perform acts(sexual acts) with your wife, then it is okay if you perform those acts on a 13 year old. Since they are both sexual acts, therefore they are both okay. One is a loving act, the other is sexual molestation. Just because an act is okay under condition A, doesnt mean that same act is okay under condition B. This goes to the SERE vs Torture framing that cheney is using as defense.
So, if it is okay for you to perform an act(a killing act) on enemy soldiers, you cannot claim that this makes it okay for you to do the same to 12 of your neighbours. One is serving your country, the other is murder. You cannot claim that since they are both the same act of killing, therefore killing 12 of your neighbours is somehow justified. The same way these torture apologist are using SERE training to justify torture. Like i said, Just because an act is okay under condition A, doesnt mean that same act is okay under condition B.
If you are to follow the cheney logic of: this is done to our soldiers, therefore it is okay. One can use that strain of reasoning to justify practically anything. Think of it. I can always find a condition where something is bound to be legal or even moral, then turn around and say, since it is moral/legal in this situation( A), therefore it is moral/legal under new situation( B) that suits me. I can use that reasoning to justify anything i want to do. Including cheating, stealing, physical assault, killing, harassment, infanticide, genocide, even holocaust.
Otherwise, since boxing or martial arts is okay, therefore is it moral/legal for me to start kicking you around?!?! That is the SERE argument that cheney is advancing. It is ridiculous, offensive, dangerous, and even abominable. Since you can use it to justify any acts on this planet.
May 13, 2009 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
great post and explained in a very logical way. Excellent!
May 13, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
entro,
here's how I explained Cheney's daughter Liz's opinion that we waterboard our soldiers.
Liz, if you wanted to experience waterboarding to see what it was like would you choose to have your dear friend Mona waterboard you or would you travel to Afghanistan and have the Taliban waterboard you?
May 13, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where do I send my contribution toward Liz's trip to, say, the Swat Valley for a month-long meet-up with the Taliban for a little *"fact finding."
Maybe there're some 2-for-One deals so Dad could go too.
*waterboarding will be for educational/demonstration purposes only, not to exceed 183 sessions, return airfare not included.
May 13, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
If anyone besides me wondered why Hayes was opposed, check out this link.
Knowing the process is great, but there is usually a reason for this stuff, albeit not always a valid one.
May 13, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah. Reason mentioned in previous post. What I get for reading off the top and not scrolling down.
May 13, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the link. I found this portion particularly illuminating:
Who's playing politics, Senator Bennett?
May 13, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remind me why 60 is worth anything again
May 13, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Point well taken, although they think it's worth something or they wouldn't be stalling so in Minnesota. They must really hate Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, I reckon, now that they ain't got Arlen to kick around.
May 13, 2009 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
63 is the new 60, then we have to account for BlueDogs then we have to..............
Repubs are just fighting that one to fight. If we were at 65 now they'd still fight that one tooth and nail.
As long as we have weak/stupid leadership 60 won't mean much. I thought the whole point of effective leadership was coordinating votes and making sure people were there to vote. New President + New Majorities + same old weak dem leadership in the House and Senate = same old sh!*
May 13, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ask me when we get there.
But I do find it at least mildly encouraging that the Nelson-Bayh Axis of WTF took off their asshats for this one.
May 13, 2009 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is Ted Kennedy expected to eventually be able to return to full health?
If not, at what point does it become reasonable to start asking how long he intends to stay in Congress?
May 13, 2009 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to agree.
The Ted Kennedy situation is getting a bit silly. It's become kind of pointless to say that we have/will have sixty Dems when one of them is never there to actually vote.
It's sad that he's sick and it's sad that he's dying just at a time when his life goals look like they are right on the precipice of becoming a reality, but it just might be time for him to go.
May 13, 2009 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Salad,
actually we're losing two votes, Kennedy and Franken.
May 13, 2009 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mikulski is an absolute toad. It's not surprising she wasn't there. Take a look at her voting record. Unfortunately she's a member of the Incumbents' Club and is unlikely to be replaced, despite the fact that there are many much better Dems in MD.
May 13, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remind me also why I keep getting e-mails from the DCCC, DSCC and Obama about how I should "support the Administration's efforts on health care reform" -- like, they think I'm gonna help THEM when they've been such total wimps on a long list of issues: releasing torture photos, failing to support limits on credit card interest, in their own way taking torture prosecution "off the table," failing to manage & lobby for a number of nominees, failing to shitcan "don't ask, don't tell."
Yeah, I'm just going to take a vacation from being pissed at them & fire off a bunch of e-mails as requested. The effectiveness of my correspondence on all of the above issues has been SO effective, I'm sure this time it will do the trick.
May 13, 2009 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, democracy sucks like that when you're in the majority and you've got a laundry list of things you want done overnight and you're going to be rightously outrageously pissed if each and every one of them isn't done perfectly. But I seem to recall I was thanking god it worked that way not so very long ago when we were in the minority.
May 13, 2009 11:19 PM | Reply | Permalink