A good summary of the cloture vote causing so much fuss

[AP]

This is from the thread that got locked:

sierra_moon  (1000+ posts)

Thu Jan-22-04 11:44 AM
Response to Original message

7. I disagree, this time.

1) Frist did not break with the Republicans. He voted against cloture Tuesday as a parliamentary maneuver to put him into position to call a re-vote on the issue. He did this at the very end, when the Republicans realized they did not have 60 votes to invoke cloture. Frist voted for cloture today, and for the bill after that.

2) The vote on cloture today was 61-32. Those Dems who were not present to vote would not have helped us. Blame the 16 Dems who DID vote FOR cloture. Those are the ones to excoriate.
See http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00002

If only two of them had voted no, this stinker of a bill would still be up for debate and revision.

3) The vote on the bill itself was 65-28, with 21 Dems voting yes. Those not present to vote would not have made a difference. Again, fault the 28 who voted FOR. See
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00003

Of non-Dems, Allard, Snowe, McCain, and Jeffords voted against.

s_m

[beaconess]

1. There you go again causing the spin to come to a screeching halt!

[buckeye1]

2. a good lesson.

the republicans attached these poison pills on a moneny bill. because Dems have no votes the choice is this vote yes or we will vote you out of office.

this tactic was used against McGovern and 2 others in 1980. it worked.
now its an institution.
there are 13 big spending bill that must be passed to fund the gov.
if you vote no you hurt the veterans and many more dissevering people.

if you vote yes you swallow the poison pills.

there was a time when republicans could be swayed. now they have been thretened.
we do not have the votes so there you are.
thats politics. that is where change is.

GET THE VOTES!

[dusty64]

6. They DID have a choice.

With all these despicable extremist items shoved into the bill, they should have stood up and said NO. A simple explanation of why these items were worth fighting against would have been applauded. This would require leadership however, something the Democrats still do not offer after three long years. They had better pray there is not a third party in the election this time, I imagine they would be even more attractive to many than 2000. There really is NO excuse for this crap and I DO blame those that voted for this POS. They've sold us out again to the corporate extremist agenda, I for one am sick of it.

[isbister]

3. Own one of these?

Maybe a thoughtful letter would be appropriate?

Cloture

Bingaman (D-NM)
Breaux (D-LA)
Carper (D-DE)
Dayton (D-MN)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Miller (D-GA)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reid (D-NV)
Schumer (D-NY)

Bill

Bingaman (D-NM)
Breaux (D-LA)
Carper (D-DE)
Dayton (D-MN)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Miller (D-GA)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reid (D-NV)
Schumer (D-NY)

[sweetheart]

4. what cloture? It sounds painful...

What are they voting on... ?

[beaconess]

5. Cloture is a mechanism for breaking a filibuster...

Filibusters are no longer the podium thumping marathon talkathons that people think they are (although Harry Reid DID talk nonstop for 8 hours a few weeks ago to protest Republicans trying to shove through judges - it was great, especially when he started talking about how he keeps rabbits from chewing up his garden). Nowadays, a filibuster is simply a refusal by the minority to close of debate on a measure and take it to a vote.

If the minority indicates is plans to filibuster, the majority can file for cloture, which is then voted on two days after it is proposed. In order to involke cloture, the majority has to get two thirds - 60 - votes. If they don't get 60 votes in favor of cloture, it fails and the measure will not go to a vote at that time. Depending upon the nature of the measure, the importance and the fervor of the support and opposition, that will a failed cloture vote can either kill the measure or just keep it going till another day since there is no limit to the number of cloture attempts that can be made on a vote.

As we've noted in other threads, cloture is different than regular up and down votes because the no votes don't matter. The only votes that count are the yes votes. If the majority doesn't get 60 votes in favor of cloture, the filibuster continues, regardless how many no votes are cast.

Hope this is helpful.

[sweetheart]

7. ok cloture...thanks... now what were they voting on?

I don't understand in the context of this thread the reason that a list of democrats need to be "bonk'ed". ? Is it an appointment or something?

BTW beaconness... thank you very much for explaining.

cheers to you,
-s

[beaconess]

11. Some Democrats who originally supported the filibuster relented

largely because of pressure from the Administration and their constituents. What often goes unsaid in these "black and white" discussions is the grey area that makes these bills tough choices for some members.

Because the Republican Congress failed to pass the individual spending bills for most of the government Departments, to save time, they rolled all of the spending bills into one big "Omnibus" package. Thus the Omnibus bill contains most of the funding authorizations and levels for the entire federal government. Until it passed, the government is essentially unfunded or operating at last year's levels - far too low to operate effectively.

The Omnibus bill contained many provisions (not all pork, mind you) that are desperately needed in their home states - homeland security dollars, education funding programs, drug treatment funding, etc. Continuing to hold out on the bill over provisions that, although important to the Democratic base, might not be as important to their constituents, could be a serious problem for them. So some Democrats backed down and voted for cloture, breaking the filibuster, and then voted for the bill.

It is wrong and unfair to attack Democrats for switching unless you know the details of why that particular member switched. For example, among those crossing over was Tom Harkin - I don't think that anyone really believes that Harkin is a sellout weakling Bush-lite who won't fight for what he believes in. It could be that he truly believed that, on balance, the bill did helped the people he represenets more than it hurt.

Once the filibuster was broken, 70-28, there were more than enough votes to pass the bill. So it passed.

This was one of those instances where many Democrats believed that it was better for the country to make sure the government was funded adequately than to continue to try to make political points against Bush, who was going to win the battle in the end anyway. Some of these folks believed that they had made their point, put the issues out there for the American people and showed the President they can fight back. But they couldn't continue the logjam indefinitely just to score more points, thereb jeopardizing important programs and preventing Congress from moving on to other important issues.

Personally, I wish they had fought a little longer - the question was not whether to back down but when - but because I know how all of this works and understand the big picture, I do not attack these members who had to make very, very difficult choices that none of us is ever called upon to make for doing what they think is the right thing.

[Karmadillo]

8. Alert! Alert! Original poster relied on facts with links to support them!

Not fair.

[blm]

9. I wish more at DU understood how congress works.

It would be so much easier.

[beaconess]

10. What a concept!

[sweetheart]

13. I wish more folks at DU understood complex financial derivatives

as then they'd understand how the treasury can be raided using voodoo. Perhaps if everyone knew about software engineering, they'd write their own operating system and ditch microsoft.

Life is short and we can't know everything. Considering that we, the speakers in this thread represent say 10% of the audience, then by being patient and explaining, we can help educate those who don't know.

Congress has done nothing, IMO, except fuck up the country, so i've not got that much interest in the methods they use to do it.... but that makes me ignerent... but not stupid.

What i do understand is that we could win back the senate in this next election if we make it happen. I'm for that! :)

[Karmadillo]

12. Kick for those misled by the earlier thread

n/t