KUCINICH misses his first House vote -- on DC vouchers

[Mairead]

And Gephardt missed his nth, but who's counting.

The House of Representatives approved the nation's first federally funded voucher program by a single vote last night, sending the Senate a plan that would provide $10 million in private school tuition grants to at least 1,300 D.C. children next year.

...

House Republican leaders scheduled the vote to begin after 8 p.m., coinciding with a debate among Democratic presidential candidates in Baltimore that several House members who oppose vouchers -- including debate participants Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) and Dennis J. Kucinich (Ohio) -- had planned to attend.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51656-2003Sep9.html


Given what sounds like scummy tactics by the GOP, should we count this one against Dennis or not?

[helleborient]

1. No we shouldn't - lay the blame squarely on Republicans

Howard Dean responded to these slimy tactics and I'm sure does not blame Dennis:

"Burlington-- Howard Dean today condemned House Republican leaders for scheduling a crucial vote on, and then approving, the first federally-imposed school voucher program for the District of Columbia last night:

"Scheduling a vote on school vouchers to take place at the exact hour of the Democratic Presidential debate sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus marks a new low for the Republican Party."

http://www.blogforamerica.com/

Scroll down a bit for his full statement.

[Cha]

2. NO and Dean has already come out and denounced the House

for having the vote when the candidates were in a debate!

the house repukes are bottom feeding trolls.

[sandnsea]

3. No way

I didn't even click the link but these votes are pretty well known ahead of time. And even the ones that appear close often have swing voters who can be 'persuaded' to vote the party line at the last minute. As soon as it goes the Republican way, bam, vote closees. If a member is needed to be there, they'll be there. I have no doubt on that at all.

[goobergunch]

14. This was actually a "dupe vote" on an amendment adopted earlier

On September 5, 2003, the House approved the Tom Davis (VA) Amdt:

TOM DAVIS OF VIRGINIA AMENDMENT
ON AGREEING TO THE AMENDMENT
H R           2765
            AYES NOES PRES NV 
REPUBLICAN  201  14        13 
DEMOCRATIC    4 188        13 
INDEPENDENT       1     
TOTALS      205 203        26 
       TIME REMAINING  0:00

However, this amendment was technically adopted in the Committee of the Whole. When the committee "rose" and reported the amendment back to the House, the Dems forced a second vote in the full House:

TOM DAVIS OF VIRGINIA AMENDMENT
ON AGREEING TO THE AMENDMENT
H R          2765
           AYES NOES PRES NV 
REPUBLICAN  206   15       7 
DEMOCRATIC    3  192      10 
INDEPENDENT        1     
TOTALS      209  208      17 
      TIME REMAINING  0:00

Here's the dialogue during the vote:

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry) (during the vote). Members are advised that 2 minutes remain in this vote.

PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRIES

Mr. HOYER (during the vote). Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. THORNBERRY). The gentleman may state a parliamentary inquiry pertaining to the vote.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, under regular order, we were told at the beginning of this session that the leadership of the House and the message from the Speaker of the House, DENNIS HASTERT, was that we were going to allot 15 minutes for votes with only 2 minutes, and that at 17 minutes, the voting tally would close, and we were all urged to be on time so that the work of the House could be done efficiently and effectively.

Mr. Speaker, my inquiry is, is that regular order still in place? Is that still the policy of the leadership of this House?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would respond to the gentleman from Maryland that clause 2 of rule XX states that the minimum time for a recorded vote or quorum call by electronic device shall be 15 minutes.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his further parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, was that the rule that the distinguished Robert Walker of Pennsylvania raised such cane about and was so angry about and felt that Jim Wright was so out of order about when he held the vote open? Is that the rule, Mr. Speaker?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman did not state a further parliamentary inquiry.

The Chair would further note, from House Practice, chapter 58, section 20, that the Chair has the discretion either to close a vote and to announce the result at any time after 15 minutes have elapsed or may allow additional time for Members to record their votes before announcing the result.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Maryland may state his further parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, listening to the Chair's recitation of the rule, would that mean that the Chair now has the authority to close this vote and express the will of the House of Representatives as reflected on the board?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would again state to the gentleman that the Chair has the discretion either to close a vote and announce the result at any time after 15 minutes have elapsed or to allow additional time for Members to record their votes before announcing the result.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. For what purpose does the gentleman from Massachusetts rise?

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The question is not whether the Chair has the discretion but whether or not he has the integrity and courage to do so.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin may state his parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire if anyone from the attending physician is present? I understand someone's arm is being broken.

[renie408]

4. Hey....not really on this topic, but

I heard Kucinich on NPR the other day and I really liked a lot of what he had to say. I also felt like he handled having the first caller be a really rabid anti-Kucinich person pretty well. He seems like a sincere person who really wants to make a difference.

[MuseRider]

5. "A sincere person

who really wants to make a difference" really does describe him. I will back him until we are given our candidate and if it is not him I will back whoever it is. This is not DK's fault, those damned repubs keep doing this kind of shit. I don't think he has missed a vote yet since he started his run, I could be wrong but I think he does not go out if a vote is coming. I know the others have missed votes to campaign.

[Brucey]

6. Repugs

are very clever and sleazy about getting their way. Every day they remind us that they are not at all in favor of democracy (why not count all the votes?) but just want their rich friends to get richer. We need to make it clear to voters that the repugs do not favor democracy and do not want fair play.

[lcordero]

7. Sorry

Kucinich is one of the three people that I would vote for BUT it's already a given that the GOP run the schedule. Trusting that anything important will not come up is naive.

[JohnKleeb]

8. typical bastards

Dont worry Dennis and Dick, its not your fault.

[genius]

9. That's impressive.

Dean skipped out on his last year as governor just to campaign.
The other candiates in Congress have been missing votes right and left to campaign.

To participate in an important debate, Dennis missed his first vote. That shows dedication on his part to doing his job and repsect to those holding Tuesday's debate.

[dsc]

11. Yet again no link

Dean missed 100 days, many not days the Vermont Goverment was open BTW, to campaign. That is not missing a whole year as you dishonestly say and without a link as always. Do you ever, ever, ever, actually research what you post?

[AP]

10. When the bill goes to the senate, the Dems better make a big stink

about how the bill was forced through when the black caucus was at a Fox broadcast, black caucus sponsored debate.

I'm sure they'll be able to shame a Republican or two into voting against it.

[mbali]

16. Hypocrites

Not to mention the fact that the Washington DC's delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, was the only member of the House prohibited from voting on the issue directly affecting the District of Columbia.

So much for the state's rights party, eh?

[LuminousX]

12. The GOP

Will do anything to circumvent a Democratic will, though I don't think the Democratic representatives would be above such a tactic.

Anyone who wants to make this an issue for DK had better take a careful look at his complete record. This is a non-starter. The real villains here, as always, are the Republicans.

[UnapologeticLiberal]

13. The RNC is counting

Except they have not updated the "missed vote watch" since July

[indigo32]

15. That was a terrible thing for the GOP to do

but typical.

[The Sushi Bandit]

17. Scummy Republican dirt bags!!

Dennis cant be in two places at once!