Posted on 09/23/2010 1:59:12 PM PDT by Bokababe
Senate Republicans on Thursday stood fast in blocking legislation requiring special interest groups running campaign ads to identify their donors.....The 59-39 vote fell one short of the 60 needed to advance the legislation. Two Republicans didn't vote. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Half of ObamaCare passed when the Democrats had 60 votes, so they didn’t need any Republicans.
Then the Democrats lost Scott Brown’s seat, so they had to pass the rest with filibuster-proof reconciliation.
The 59-39 vote fell one short of the 60 needed to advance the legislation.Can't quite get it done? I thought they had a filibuster-proof majority! Of course, if the bill passes, I wouldn't bet two cents on the continued existence of the fascist agitators who voted in favor of it -- it's literally a cornerstone of a single party state dictatorship. Thanks Bokababe.
Previous vote to end the filibuster
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00220
23Sep10 roll call will be publised at
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00240
not there when I posted.
S.3628
Title: Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act
Sponsor: Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] (introduced 7/21/2010) Cosponsors (7)
Related Bills: H.R.5175
Latest Major Action: 7/27/2010 Senate floor actions. Status: Motion by Senator Reid to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked on the motion to proceed to the bill made in Senate.
The dems still had a filibuster proof senate, and no dem defectors. The senate bill that passed was intended to be a draft - not law. It was to go to conference committee, and then back to both houses.
After Scott Brown was elected they knew they could not get it through the senate, after conference. So Pelosi had the house pass the Senate bill as a reconciliation bill. Reconciliation bills can not be filibustered in the Senate.
Thank you for that. I know what happened and how it happened. The point I was trying to make was that when there is a backbone, things get accomplished. They seem particularly focused right now and they’re laying out their game plan. No matter how deathcare got through, if all the repubics would have been as focused at that time, who knows what might have happened.
The last really good leader with ability to get his point across in a way that the average American would immediately agree with was Ronald Reagan.
And when they draw their line in the sand, they often shoot their own foot off. Like holding up unemployment benefits. Democrats scream they don't want to help families who are hurting. Pubbies say we agree with extending unemployment benefits, but we need to find a way to fund it. Not the best issue to pick, and weak articulation. Makes them look like obstructionists.
The American people(not conservatives like FReepers) say you seem to find money for everything under the sun except those little people who need it most. Pubbies should re-frame such issues if they are going to do such things.
For example, something like : The American people have made it clear that they want us to stop adding to the debt, and cut spending. The dems need to hurry up and figure out the funding so that we get the funds to people who need it, and still comply with Obama’s pay-go mandate. Puts the monkey on their back to get it done, and makes them the party of yes how can I help instead the party of no.
This frames the issue as we are soooo anxious to help the people-just as soon as the dems do their job and figure out how to fund it with out increasing the debt, we'll be ready to go. Then ask when can we expect your solution? If they try to take it from defense, the Pubbies say oh no can't do it, the president said that cuts in defense were off the table, and so forth.
They ought to be able to totally use the dems rules and statements against them all the while being Mr. and Mrs cooperative. It would probably cause a bunch of dems heads to explode and Nancy Pelosi might have a stroke, and the American people blame the dems instead of the Pubbies for the hold up in benefits.
No, no, no! Not voting is the same as a NO vote. The GOP members who voted all voted NO.
"all 39 Republicans who voted stopped Democrats from bringing the campaign disclosure bill to the Senate floor."
Listing all donors is often impossible in a political ad, so it is a way of blocking them. If this ever looks like it is going to pass make the unions list all of their members on their ads as well.
I hate it when elected officials don’t vote. What are they there for? A “non vote” is a run for cover end run to fool their constituents. It is a gutless way to “vote”.
One ws probably Moocowski.
And two RINO's DIDN'T VOTE! I want to know who they are - the article doesn't say.
Not voting: Murkowski, Alaska and Hutchison, Texas.
Probably more like people worried about their jobs.
Closer than you think....We came within one vote of losing more of our freedom.......The vote that saved the day was that of.......... Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.