Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bolton Vote: 54-38 a subtle cloture threat????

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Tamyrlin79 Donating Member (944 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:07 PM
Original message
Bolton Vote: 54-38 a subtle cloture threat????
Okay, call me Concerned, because I am. Aren't we supposed to have 41 votes to block cloture? I know they have to have sixty to overcome on the vote so we still win, but where were the rest of the "nay" voters (last time our side had all 41...)??? Does this vote not show that we have 3-7 weak-kneed Democrats who might be ready to make a deal and vote for cloture? Or were they just absent, or... ???

Basically, what's the deal here?

And, while we are discussing Bolton politics, what will be the political cost to the president for a recess appointment?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. Eight Senators did not vote. Am curious to see who they were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Eight Senators not voting.
Burns (R-MT)
Coleman (R-MN)
Feingold (D-WI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Levin (D-MI)
Thune (R-SD)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00142
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Dem senators absent were not important
That Thune ,Coleman and Burns are absent is a lot more important. Had some Democrats changed their mind and voted yes, their absence could have made the difference.

This is a strong statement they knew they would not have the vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Agreed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunnystarr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. No they needed 60 votes to end debate ... (cloture)
so look for that magic number ..They only got 54.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sometimes Senators just miss votes
I wouldn't read too much into it until we find out why they didn't vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. They need three-fifths of those voting
There were 96 Senators voting today. They needed 58 votes and fell short by four.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. No it is 60, no matter who is there.
If there were 2 senators voting, it still would be 60.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I stand corrected and post from the Senate Rules
From rule 22 (empashis added):

Notwithstanding the provisions of rule II or rule IV or any other rule of the Senate, at any time a motion signed by sixteen Senators, to bring to a close the debate upon any measure, motion, other matter pending before the Senate, or the unfinished business, is presented to the Senate, the Presiding Officer, or clerk at the direction of the Presiding Officer, shall at once state the motion to the Senate, and one hour after the Senate meets on the following calendar day but one, he shall lay the motion before the Senate and direct that the clerk call the roll, and upon the ascertainment that a quorum is present, the Presiding Officer shall, without debate, submit to the Senate by a yea-and-nay vote the question:

"Is it the sense of the Senate that the debate shall be brought to a close?" And if that question shall be decided in the affirmative by three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn -- except on a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules, in which case the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the Senators present and voting -- then said measure, motion, or other matter pending before the Senate, or the unfinished business, shall be the unfinished business to the exclusion of all other business until disposed of.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I made the same error, but somebody had just explained it to me
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 07:13 PM by Mass
before I read your post.

Thanks for posting the actual rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
6. You do not understand how a cloture vote works
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 07:06 PM by Mass
The no votes are not important. Had the vote been 54-0, the cloture vote would still have failed. So those missing are not weak-knee senators, they are probably senators working in their states on Monday.

More interesting are the republicans that were not there (55 Rep - Voinovitch + 3 Dems voting yes = 57 votes, so 3 republicans were absent). As their votes were important, it would be more interesting to know why they were absent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tamyrlin79 Donating Member (944 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. As I said IN MY POST, if you had read it...
I understand that as long as they don't get sixty, it doesn't matter. My concern was about the three we were lacking from the magical 41 and whether this indicated that some senators might be persuaded in some deal and we might EVENTUALLY lose the alliance we've had to block cloture, ie we would lack 2-3 votes necessary to sustain it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
13. Those seeking cloture need the votes, not those opposing cloture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC