Who were the 2 in the 94-2 vote today to repeal the section of the

[napi21]

Patriot Act that gave the AG authority to appoint USA's without Senate approval? I've heard about this votal all day, but noone has ever said who the 2 were?

[steve2470]

1. Bond from MO and Hagel from NE

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00081#position


Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---94
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ) Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Tester (D-MT)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)


NAYs ---2
Bond (R-MO) Hagel (R-NE)

Not Voting - 4
Biden (D-DE)
Johnson (D-SD) McCain (R-AZ)
Mikulski (D-MD)

[napi21]

4. Hagel????? I can understand Bond, but HAGEL?

WHY? What don't I understand about Hagel? Last week he was arguing aginst Shrub's troop escalation, this week he want's him to the the Unitary Executive? OH MAN! I don't think my brain can take much more of this insanity!

[skipos]

9. Hagel is far right. DUers like to think he is a moderate. He isn't.

Hagel has talking about how Ben Nelson is too liberal last election.

[napi21]

12. OK, but how does the Senate giving up it's authority to approve

USA'S translate to being far right? I get the opposing abortion, against gays, supporting religious groups with tax $$'s, and all that, but this is a totally separate issue!

I feel like I'm living in some Wizard of OZ land or something! Up is Down, right is left, and we're all crazy!

[skipos]

21. He voted the way his master (Bush) wanted him too.

nt

[Bozita]

5. Hagel attempting to recapture RWers for '08

His Iraq stance is anathema to the neocons.

[napi21]

8. Oh yea, his big announcement was that he hadn't decided yet! n/t

[man4allcats]

11. Funny. I was sure it would have been Cornyn and Hutchison.

They're both a waste of protoplasm.

[rec_report]

15. Wow, LieberBush actually voted 'Yes.' n/t

[Me.]

2. I Think

they were Hagel & Bond

[Nutmegger]

3. Anti-war Hangel and Bond. [n\t]

[MADem]

6. Others have answered, and I think Hagel has something up his sleeve.

Why is he sucking up to BushCo with this goofy vote? Does he have some sick hope of relieving Cheney following his 'retirement due to illness?'

That would make him the INCUMBENT, the putative nominee, taking all the fire and energy out of the Giuliani, Mittsy, McCain, and so-forth campaigns...and the 'opposite' of Bush, sorta like Gore ran at a distance from Clinton in 00, seeing as they are on opposite sides of the war issue...

[Horse with no Name]

7. I think Hagel was horseheaded

and he won't be stepping outside the lines...at least for awhile.

[MADem]

14. I dunno. That is CERTAINLY a possibility. But maybe they told him to rein it in for NOW

and when Cheney splits, he's IN. It's harder to slide a CANDIDATE into the job. Easier to slide in a simple sitting Senator, which may be why he pulled back on his quest for the WH. They said "Back it up, and we'll give you a prize that's a platform, too!"

Everyone couldn't understand why Ashcroft made it to AG. Everyone said "AAAAGH!!!!! HOW????"

The answer was "The Collegial Senate."

Replacement Killer VPs have to be vetted by both the HOUSE and the SENATE, though. The Senate is easy. They're collegial. The House, though, might look a bit sideways...but the GOP will vote for the guy, because BushCo likes OR wants him (maybe to smooth out THEIR rough edges???), and the antiwar Dems might be swayed by that little "We gotta cut the crap" speech he gave about the war and its costs.

Seriously--how hard do you think a Hagel as VP effort would be to push through? I see it as a cakewalk, he'd be greeted with flowers and sweets...for real, too.

And he's sooooo far to the right...talk about an anointed candidate for the fringe-right crowd!

[Horse with no Name]

16. The only reason that I don't think so

is because he is RABIDLY anti-war.
If he runs, he stands alone on the Republican side.
Conservative Moderates, the Christian Right, as well as some Independents will vote for him.
However, his position on the war will marginalize Bush.
It ain't going to happen.

[MADem]

20. Who knows? Power corrupts...! NT

[Old and In the Way]

23. Interesting speculation.

With Cheney's medical problems, I wonder if you aren't on to something. They may well have some interesting stuff on Hagel...maybe the whole ESS thing in his original campaign. I wonder if he's been co-opted on that issue? Perhaps they've offered him a carrot (VP) and a stick (or else). Let's see if he continues to be outspoken on the war. That would be an issue they'd want to silence him on, too.

His vote to give Bush continued power on the AG selection doesn't make a lot of sense...unless he's thinking about 2008.

Probably worth a thread in and of itself.

[LaPera]

10. Who were the four republican weasels who didn't vote?

[TomInTib]

13. Good one....

I was wondering, early today, about just who did not vote.

Were they really 'pubs?

Surely, some kind of tally will soon be available.

[G_Leo_Criley]

18. S. 214

Biden (D-DE), Not Voting
McCain (R-AZ), Not Voting
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Mikulski (D-MD), Not Voting

http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00081

It's unusual for Mikulski to not be voting on this. Wonder what's up. (Biden would've voted for it too.)

glc

[MADem]

19. Well, Johnson is in hospital, Biden is likely on the road campaigning.

McCain is probably straight talk expressing, too. Milkulski, I've no idea. Sick, maybe?

Amazing they got those numbers with three D's not weighing in.

[G_Leo_Criley]

22. very true, MADem

Amazing numbers, indeed.

If I were a certain somebody, I'd be worrying about how I might fare in my senate trial.

glc

[Nutmegger]

17. Biden (D-DE), Johnson (D-SD), McCain (R-AZ) and Mikulski (D-MD). [n\t]