Extension of Unemployment Benefits Fails: The Johns are Absent

[HFishbine]

Extension of unemployment benefits fails by two votes in the senate while the Johns campaign.
---------

When the bill reached the U.S. Senate this week, it was defeated by only two votes. Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole wisely cast her vote to extend benefits. But Democratic Sen. John Edwards, according to his press spokesman, "was 1,000 miles away'' on the campaign trail (as was Sen. John Kerry).

Yet Edwards has made jobs and the plight of "regular people" the centerpiece of his presidential stump speeches. If he and Kerry had returned to Washington, their votes could have made a difference.

Maybe this is another one of those issues on which we are supposed to "read between the lines."

(on edit, added link: http://www.news-record.com/news/opinions/1_unemployment_022804.htm)

[lcordero]

1. How can I ask anybody to support these two when they won't

even do the job that they are being paid for?

There is NO FUCKING EXCUSE...NONE!!!

[still_one]

25. What are they supposed to do

Super Tuesday is coming up.

WHY THE HELL DID THEY HAVE THAT VOTE NOW?

[dsc]

28. the jobs for which they are being paid, by us, rather handsomely.

[lcordero]

34. How about they do the job that they are PAID FOR.

[NewJerseyDem]

69. This is when the gun liablity bill came up

The democrats can force another vote in the coming weeks. However, both Kerry and Edwards are going to show ON Super Tuesday to vote to extend the assault weapons ban, so clearly they find that more important than unemployment benefits.

[Edwards4President]

78. Repubs scheduled the vote at the last minute just to provoke the reaction

we're seeing right here among Democrats . . .

[blondeatlast]

Exacataly... nt

[blondeatlast]

104. I think we all know the answer to that one. nt

[mhr]

35. Unemployed For 44 Months - This Is The Reason I Support Neither

This is cause to vote Nader in the fall.

Throw your flamethrowers away boys.

I will truck no criticism for that statement.

Go Dennis Go!

[dsc]

42. You have every earthly right to be pissed off

but you should rethink your vote for Nader.

[seaglass]

43. I've been unemployed since June of 2001 and I'm voting

for Kerry - so you justify your vote any way you please.

Of course I'd probably respect your point of view a bit more if you had taken the time to read beyond the sound bite.

[libview]

99. ?????

[libview]

98. You couldn't find a job in 3 1/2 years????

come on, there has to more to this story.

[Forkboy]

121. I'm touched

[loudnclear]

112. What a sound bite for the Bush campaign

However, the fact that so many Rethugs voted against the extension should tell people they need a new Congress as well as a new President.

[flpoljunkie]

2. Or, the vote was ordered when GOP knew Kerry, Edwards unavailable

because they were campaigning in far away states.

Anyone know how this bill is faring in the House? With Bush's poll numbers so slow, perhaps there is a chance unemployment compensation will not be blocked by the GOP and their leader Bush.

[HFishbine]

3. It passed the House

with bi-partisan support. It failed in the senate because of the Johns.

[Renew Deal]

6. Wait, How many people and who voted against it?

Why is it their fault? WHy didn't others vote for it? Any dems not vote for it? Was it 50-48? We would have lost that anyway.

[HFishbine]

20. You can lump Kerry and Edwards with

Zell Miller on this one, the only other democrat not to vote for it. The vote was one to overcome a proceedural objection and failed 58 - 39. It needed 60 votes to pass.

[Renew Deal]

57. So why isn't the fault of the 39 that voted against it?

[HFishbine]

63. Um

Last I heard, no republican senators (Zell Miller included) are running for the presidential nomination of the democratic party.

[flpoljunkie]

11. Great! Am sure JK and JE will come back for a vote, if they are able.

And another vote is taken. But don't be too surprised that no other vote will be taken, and that this will be used by the GOP against them. This is the way they operate.

[NewJerseyDem]

68. There will be another vote

Democrats are going to keep on forcing votes on this until a vote succeeds. The republicans can't stop them from doing it.

Edwards will be able to vote soon, since he will probably drop out next week and will have some free time.

Ben Nighthorse Campbell will be able to vote soon (he was in the hospital on Thursday) and while I don't know what he thinks about extending unemployment benefits, I'm fairly confident that he would support it.

[WitchWay]

84. fooled again, huh?

Great. So, Kerry and Edwards were "tricked" AGAIN by the Republicans, just like they were with IWR.

Boy! That makes me confident about how they would handle the Republican congress as president.

http://resources.kucinich.us/video/video/bush_out/bush_out_real_broadband.ram

[Edwards4President]

85. You're completely missing the point . . . n/t

[NewJerseyDem]

65. Actually, it didn't pass the House

It passed the House many months ago but they have to pass it again because it expired. There is a discharge petition with 200 of the necessary 218 signatures but it won't get enough signatures to force a vote. It won't pass the House and the unemployment benefits would have probably been taken out during the conference anyway.

[NewJerseyDem]

76. Actually, I'm kind of wrong

Well, the House did pass unemployment benefits on an amendment to another bill with 39 republicasn joining all democrats in voting for the amendment. It should be noted that DENNIS KUCINICH was absent from that vote!!!! But, it passed comfortably anyway even though it was expected to be a close vote.

But, that bill isn't the Gun liability bill so if the unemployment benefits are passed on seperate bills it doesn't really matter. They have to be passed on the same bill and they have to survive a conference or be added on in the conference. That is very unlikely.

[Liberal Christian]

4. If you believe that to be the case

then you must believe that any Senate vote scheduled between now and the election in November is a GOP ploy to make the Democrats look bad. Kerry and Edwards are making a choice -- campaign or do their jobs in the Senate. It would be good if they could pay full attention to both, but fairly inhuman to expect it.

Such has ever been the case when sitting legislators run for President. If you can think of a way around it, I'd love to hear it.

[coltman]

49. what about

holding up the vote like they did for medicare?

[revcarol]

5. I can only remark that it is totally amazing that Dennis Kucinich

has made all the votes EXCEPT ONE, a dirty trick last minute vote.

See, one CAN vigorously campaign and STILL attend to the nation's business.

[Renew Deal]

9. I would not call Kucinich's campaign vigorous.

[snoochie]

14. Then you don't know this man's schedule.

He works like a dog. That's part of the reason he's been able to go to so many different places and also be present to do his job in Congress.

[NewJerseyDem]

66. That's not true at all

Kucinich has missed every vote this year, I believe.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/ROLL_000.asp

[NewJerseyDem]

77. Kucinich missed the vote on extending unemployment benefits

The vote was expected to be very close and republican leaders fought against the bill and tried to get members to switch their votes like on the medicare bill. They ultimately failed and gave up but it could have been close, but Kucinich thought that his symbolic presidential run was more important that the unemployed.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll018.xml

[Mairead]

97. .

.

[demnan]

7. Nader's arguing point

Boy, we make it easy for him to make a point, don't we?

[KC21304]

8. Tie would have been broken by Cheney ,

Gee, I wonder how he would have voted.

I am sure the numbers were all known by both parties.

[revcarol]

13. And the administration would have BEEN ON RECORD

as being against ordinary people!! Think people should vote just if the bill is going to pass?

THE JOHNS LOST A GREAT TALKING POINT FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY...AND THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES!!

I guess it's all a lie that Democrats care for people.

[HFishbine]

15. Not Correct

The measure failed because it did not receive the 60 votes needed to overcome a proceedural objection. It received 58 votes. Had the Johns been on the job, the proceedural objection would have been overcome. Their two votes would have made the difference.

As for who voted how, Zell Miller was the only "democrat" to vote against the measure.

These republican senators voted with the democrats:

Christopher Bond of Missouri Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island
Susan Collins of Maine
Mike DeWine of Ohio
Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina
John McCain of Arizona
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
Gordon Smith of Oregon
Olympia Snowe of Maine
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania
James Talent of Missouri
George Voinovich of Ohio

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&ncid=703&e=2&u=/ap/20040227/ap_on_go_co/unemployment_benefits

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:WtNHwMdqih8J:www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/001290.html+unemployment+extension+senate+how+they+voted&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[revcarol]

18. Uh Oh. That's even worse.

Sometimes I am ashamed of my party.

[Edwards4President]

79. Several of these Repubs switched their votes

at the last minute when they knew that Kerry and Edwards couldn't make it just so the vote would appear to be close and Democrats would beat up on the Democratic nominees to the benefit of Bush and the Republicans.

For example, Liddy Dole has repeatedly opposed this measure, but voted for it this time because Republican leaders had done a head count and knew that it would be close. You can bet that if Kerry and Edwards had been there to vote, the Republicans who voted yes would have voted no in order to defeat the measure.

Don't fall for the okie doke.

[Protagoras]

91. This was my first thought but

where can we find online the order in which the different senators voted? If the pugs were crossing over at the last minute then yes that would look an aweful lot like a setup wouldn't it.

[Cuban_Liberal]

10. Just curious, Hfishbine...

Do you actually support anyone, or just despise Kerry and Edwards?

[HFishbine]

16. That's irrelevant

I don't forfeit my right to criticize any democrat because of who I may or may not support. However, if you must know, I support Kucinich now that Dean is out of the race.

Now I'm curious, do you ever critisize your candidate's failings, or does blind allegiance rule?

[bushalert]

19. Support Kucinich?

Now there's a real winner!

[Cuban_Liberal]

21. I'd just never seen a post from you in SUPPORT of anyone.

That's why I asked.

[HFishbine]

23. Then you aren't paying attention

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=391347

[mountainvue]

82. Actually it is relevant

since you are posting on a partisan forum.

[Edwards4President]

83. It is relevant given that

you seem considerably less interested in advancing Kucinich than in trashing Edwards, something you do quite regularly here.

[HFishbine]

102. Since Edwards

is also my senator, for whom I voted, I have the added right, as one of his constitutents to be critical when he fails to represent me.

[Edwards4President]

105. You have a right to speak as you please

and everyone else here has a right to ask you about your views.

We also have a right to call into question your motives given your almost non-stop - and often inaccurate - assault on John Edwards, something that seems to go beyond mere disappointment with his representation.

[snoochie]

12. I honestly don't even know what to say.

Is their staff supposed to contact them if a vote is close on an important bill? I thought the excuse for them missing all these other votes is because 'it wouldn't matter how they voted'.

This is one of the worst things I've heard yet. This is like a direct FU to people - FAMILIES - in need of help. An FU to all the people who are literally dependent on these Senators to stand up for them in Washington. This is how these guys earn votes in Nov?

[seaglass]

17. Is this the unemployment extension amendment that was

attached to the bill that limits civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others?

Are the Dems going to vote for this overall bill? What if they were succesful in adding this amendment but vote against the overall bill? Would that mean they are against extending unemployment benefits? If they voted for the bill would that mean they were for limiting liability?

I don't think this is a simple as portrayed, but it makes great headlines.

If it is a standalone unemployment extension and not part of this bill, please point me to it.

For now I will reserve judgment.

on edit: bad link
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SP02617:

must copy and paste entire http including end colon for it to work

[snoochie]

44. Seems smart to me

If all the Senate Democrats except Miller and the absent Johns were voting in favor of it, I would hazard a guess that getting this amendment attached to a bill we want to see defeated is strategically smart. This way even if enough centrist Democrats vote for the stinky liability bill, everyone has to accept that a bone be thrown to the families facing uncertainty.

So to me it still stinks that they weren't there to help with that. It's really not too much to expect, I don't think.

[seaglass]

46. But the fact is that if this passed every D that voted against

the overall bill could be accused of the exact same thing the two John's are being accused of - not supporting an extension of unemployment.

Would you think that was right?

[snoochie]

50. They could only be accused by that of someone really not trying very hard.

Yes, I think it would be right to vote against the overall bill.

[seaglass]

53. No, I meant right to accuse senators of not supporting

an unemployment extension because they had voted against the overall bill?

The accusation would be very easy to make and it would have been made to score political points.

If Kerry gets the nomination this is what will be done until election day. It will be every voters choice to accept what the media is feeding them or make judgments on their own.

[NewJerseyDem]

67. Well, the bill would pass anyway

The gun liability bill is going to pass easily so the democrats are trying to attach the unemployment benefits to it because they know that it is the only way to be sure that the benefits will pass the senate.

They are also going to vote on Tuesday, Kerry and Edwards will definitely be there, on an amendment that extends the assault weapons ban.

The democrats can't get these issues to the floor on stand alone votes because the republican leadership won't let them. So, they have no other choice but to try to amend other bills. The may try to do something with a minimum wage increase but I don't know if they will do it on this or another bill.

[Crachet2004]

22. Debate on an extension is not dead.

Had Kerry and Edwards been present, the GOP leadership would have had two republicans duck out. No way was this vote gonna pass.

BUT. It increases pressure on the GOP leadership in Congress to stop their obstructionism and allow another vote...as there has been bi-partisan support demonstrated for an extension in both Houses.

It IS a political football. Democrats will not rest until the bill passes, or Bush is forced to veto. I think eventually an extension will pass.

Bush will use it as a photo-op for 'compassionate conservatism'...or he will pay the price politically. Everyone knows it is the GOP who have been fighting against an extension.

That it was Kerry and Edwards? Sorry, that dog won't hunt.

[seaglass]

24. Have you been following this? Are they attaching this

amendment to any bill that comes up on the floor?

[sallyseven]

29. The repukes don't want this bill to extend

benefits to pass. "It decreases the incentive to get a job". Any job.I fail to see that it is John and John's fault. You have to understand the process before you jump to erroneous conclusions. The repuks control both houses. The do not go by the rules and suspend them every day. They are evil and disgusting. The put for example two very opposite things in one bill and then defy the democrats to vote it down. That is how the overtime bill passed and some of the other things that congress voted down. The bush jerks put them in the omnibus bill and it had 25 good things and 10 bad things in it. So it gets passed and then they try to work on it and amend it. Did you know that the repukes will not allow some bills to be amended. They control things so they have to be defeated. I hate them.

[seaglass]

31. I agree with you 100%. I expected more from my

fellow DUers.

[HFishbine]

37. Except

that in this case, the measure had the support of all the dems except Zell Miller.

[seaglass]

41. And it is attached to a bill that I doubt the Dems support.

So what does this mean?

[DrFunkenstein]

26. Um, Do You Think This Might Change When A John Becomes Prez?

I know the argument seems a little self-evident, but that may just be me.

[HFishbine]

38. Ahhh

Back to the "read between the lines" argument.

[dsc]

27. Somewhere in America a 7 year old girl

will go to bed hungry due to her dad's unemployment benefits having run out. And both Edwards and Kerry will be in part to blame. I defended them missing votes that were lopsided. This is a whole other matter. There is no excuse at all for this. None, nada.

[GreenArrow]

32. but, but, but...

what about John Edwards' "two Americas" slogan; is that just talk?

[Kanary]

93. By George, I think you've got it....

[NNN0LHI]

113. Have you ever considered writing drama novels dsc? Give it some thought nt

[seaglass]

30. Does anyone here use their critical thinking skills or do

we all just depend on the media giving us sound bites?

[sallyseven]

33. Some people only hear what they want to hear

That is why we have such stupid elections.

[revcarol]

45. So then give us the facts.

Was this a stand-alone bill?

BTW, the two John's proponents also need to follow your advice sometimes.

[seaglass]

48. The most recent uenmployment extension standalones

that I could find were Oct. and Nov. 2003 and they were both referred to the Finance committee.

From what I can tell, this vote was on an amendment to the bill I mentioned in a post above. The vote count was the same as mentioned in this article.

[revcarol]

51. Thanks for adding some light to the heat.

BUT I am still down on the two Johns for missing SO MANY VOTES.

[Protagoras]

92. How many votes did DK miss this session?

nt

[lcordero]

52. How's this for a soundbite

"A day's worth of work for a day's worth of pay."

Other than being sick or dead, there is no excuse for being absent from the Senate.

[revcarol]

54. BINGO. You win the kewpie doll.

If Dennis can do it, why not the "electables?"

[bornskeptic]

70. Dennis can't do it either.

He missed two roll call votes the same day, 2/26. As a matter of fact, the House has had 31 roll call votes this year. Kucinich has not voted once. Nobody can run for president and make every vote in Congress. How could he be in Washington for an afternoon House session, get to the airport, fly 2500 miles to Los Angeles, and be at USC at 9:00 for the debate? If you don't believe me about his not voting this year, you can check it out yourself.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/ROLL_000.asp

[blondeatlast]

109. 'Fraid so--and I'm on his side. nt

We son't know what Dr. Dean would have done, either, since he isn't in Congress.

I'm willing to hazard a guess, though...

[blondeatlast]

108. Then we will never have Congresspeople campaigning for

president.

I find that unacceptable as a Kucinich supporter.

[blondeatlast]

107. I think a lot of us depend upon other DUers

for the sound bites and news...

[Orangepeel]

36. In fairness, it WOULDN'T have lost by 2 votes if they'd been there

because some republicans given leave to vote for it would have been arm twisted back.

However, it doesn't, in my opinion, excuse them not being there. It is their job and they should have been there to vote.

[HFishbine]

39. This is a valid argument

That speculation is valid. I don't find it a justifiable excuse for the Johns however.

[dsc]

40. Even if you are correct

then two of these people, would have had to cast a very unpopular vote.

Christopher Bond of Missouri Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island
Susan Collins of Maine
Mike DeWine of Ohio
Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina
John McCain of Arizona
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
Gordon Smith of Oregon
Olympia Snowe of Maine
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania
James Talent of Missouri
George Voinovich of Ohio

Senators Voinovich, Specter, Murkowski, Bond, and Chafee (I think) are up for reelection. Wouldn't it have been nice for their opponents to have them on record opposing benefits for the unemployed?

[Orangepeel]

47. Yes, I agree.

Kerry and Edwards should have been there. But IMO, missing the vote caused political consequences, not consequences for the unemployed (because they would have been screwed regardless). That's still bad, but not nearly as bad.

[sangha]

56. That's a good point and it will be ignored

in order for people to wail "What about the children! What about the children!"

Once again, the political dimensions of an event will be ignored for partisan reasons. Let a thousand slogans bloom!

[Paradise]

60. point well-taken...

however, it would not have been any of them, i assure you.

[Edwards4President]

80. Almost all of these Repubs HAVE voted against this in the past

Bond, DeWine, Dole, McCain, Murkowski, Smith, Talent and Voinovich ALL voted against extension of unemployment benefits last year. They only went along this time because the Republican leadership did a head count and were certain that, if they all voted yes, it would lose by two votes, and they could not only blame Edwards and Kerry but, knowing how gullible we sometimes are, also get Democrats to blame them for benefits not being extended.

As I said, if there was any possibility of this measure passing, these Republicans would have not have been allowed to vote yes.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00269

[union_maid]

55. I'm disappointed in both of them

It's not changing the way I'm voting and I understand that when it comes to this stuff what you see is not all that's happening, but I think they both should have changed whatever needed to be changed to get back there long enough to vote on this.

[bornskeptic]

71. That would have made for an interesting one-on-one debate

between Sharpton and Kucinich.

[Paradise]

58. between the lines...

that's why they ask "would any senator wish to change his or her vote?" BEFORE the official tally. as many repugs, as possible, vote for what 'LOOKS GOOD', however prior to the official tally, as many repugs, as needed (like elizabeth dole), fall back in lock step to secure their desired, inevitable (majority rules) result. it's all smoke and mirrors (kerry and edwards votes would not have changed the outcome). all the more reason, we've got to get back control of the congress asap, as well.

[blondeatlast]

111. Riders and the "question" need to be stopped NOW. nt

[Sly Kal]

59. the Johns have been absent for a year

How does that work? You get paid for a year where you don't show up for work? How do I get one of those jobs?

[janx]

61. You learn to speak out of both sides of your mouth at the

same time.

[slinkerwink]

81. I'd love to have that job, but I would never take a year off

just to pursue the presidency---I'd rather have a Dem challenger take my seat and then I'd run for the presidency.

[DrFunkenstein]

62. Another Reason Why I Am Voting Sharpton

[rucky]

64. Why can't Senators/Congressmen vote by proxy?

with palm pilots & shit, it wouldn't be that difficult. on second thought, maybe that's not such a good idea.

[kiahzero]

72. Shame on both of them

*bitter*

[Leilani]

73. What a Mess!

With the Repubs in control, they can schedule things to make Dems look bad.

If the measure had passed, the House still would have to act, & does anyone think Tom Delay will let that happen?

But it makes the Senators look bad, & it's not fair to their constituents that they aren't being represented.

[seaglass]

75. If the measure had passed there would still be a vote in the

Senate on the bill that this amendment is attached to. I would be surprised if many Dems are planning to support the bill.

P.S. I'm one of Kerry's constituents and unemployed and one of my priorities for him is to focus on running the best damn campaign he can.

[arewethereyet]

74. ouch

thats not good

[quaker bill]

86. Lovely, just F'ing lovely

What is a few more hungry people when there are speeches to make?

(sarcasm)

[WitchWay]

87. Here are the facts, read and weep

You know, people should take this seriously and learn some basics about Kucinich before lashing out at him ignorantly to excuse Kerry and Edwards sleeping on the job. Anyone who knows about Kucinich knows he keeps close track of all employment issues and would never
miss a vote on unemployment if his vote was needed.

Kucinich serves on the House Education and Workforce Committee, which is responsible for unemployment benefits, so he has been working closely with George Miller, the ranking Democrat on that committee and
member of the House Progressive Caucus, which Kucinich co-chairs, for months trying to maneuver the unemployment extension through the House. http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp

It was Miller who made the tactical insertion of the
unemployment extension as an amendment in the
Community Services Block Grant Act.
http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/releases/rel2404b.html

It was a brilliant move, obviously, because 39 House
Republicans signed onto it, no doubt scared of
obstructing funds from flowing to their districts'
local government social service programs and having to
explain that it was more important to deny relief to
the unemployed in their districts who are often the
same constituents in need of those social services --
or able to use the amendment as an excuse to vote for
the extension without seeming to imply they think the
economy is as bsd as it really is.

There's no question that Kucinich was not only well
aware of what Miller was doing, but in on the scheming
for it, and that Kucinich would have rushed to D.C.
immediately if his vote was needed. His campaign
website even has a big bold red disclaimer on it
saying that all his schedules are tentative because he
may need to rush to D.C. to vote at a moment's notice:
http://www.kucinich.us/schedule.php

Kucinich also gets the majority of his organizational
campaign support from labor unions, and if you'll
notice, among the other House members who didn't vote
on the bill were Dick Gephardt, the minority leader
and also hugely backed by labor, and John Conyers,
chair of the Black Congressional Caucus. There's no
doubt Kucinich, Gephardt and Conyers knew in advance
what Miller was planning to do and knew their votes
wouldn't be needed for the maneuver.

Kerry and Edwards have no such excuse. They knew this
was coming because the House bill passed on Feb. 4.
Kerry recently got the endorsement of the AFL-CIO and
appeared with Sweeney, who had issued two press
releases on the very day of the House vote, and the
day after, praising Miller for pulling of the tactical
victory for unemployment extension:
http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/pr02042004.cfm
http://www.aflcio.org/yourjobeconomy/jobs/ns01292004.cfm

Sen. Dodd publicly demanded action on the issue on
Feb. 11:
http://www.senate.gov/~dodd/press/Releases/04/0211a.htm

The Charlotte Observer in Edwards' home state knew in
advance and expected it to be close enough to press
Elizabeth Dole to vote for it in an editorial, never
imagining she would do so but be thwarted by Edwards
failing to show up. If the Observer knew the vote was
coming, why didn't Edwards?
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/8053592.htm

What's happened is that Kerry and Edwards just
thwarted months of maneuvering by progressive members
of the House, led by Kucinich and Miller, to get this
bill passed. Now hundreds of thousands of families
will suffer for several more weeks, many becoming
homeless, defaulting on loans, losing homes and cars
to foreclosure, crashing their credit ratings. Kerry
and Edwards have no one to blame for this -- they are
to blame.

And it wasn't any Republican move that brought on the
vote. House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer demanded
action on Feb. 25,:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040225/dcw066_1.html

And finally it was Maria Cantwell who LOUDLY made the
maneuver on the Senate floor on February 26 to insert the extension
into a gun bill:
http://www.the-mechanic.com/mainbb.html
(search on the page for TEUC or Cantwell)
Note that this Feb 25 article even PRINTS IN BOLD that the vote would occur the following morning. And also mentions that the
proceedings on the issue would be broadcast live on
CSPAN-2. Wow, way to sneak it under Kerry and
Edwards' radar, eh?

And way back at the end of January Ted Kennedy said
he'd bring another vote ASAP after the last one
failed:

"Kennedy said he would attempt to bring the issue to a
vote as soon as possible. 'It’s urgent,' he said, 'for
Congress to reinstate these unemployment benefits with
or without the support of this ‘Let them eat cake’
White House.' "
http://www.aflcio.org/yourjobeconomy/jobs/ns01292004.cfm

Once again, we find absolutely resounding evidence
that Kucinich is far and away the best candidate,
three cuts above the others at least, to beat Bush and
restore this country to responsible, decent, and sound governance.

[HFishbine]

103. Thanks

That puts the lie to some assumptions.

[seaglass]

106. So do you know the Dem vote count on the civil liabilities

bill?

[Merlin]

88. PLEASE! Give me a break. If they had voted it STILL would have lost.

Come ON! It takes a majority--not a tie vote--to pass a piece of legislation. In the event of a tie, guess who casts the deciding vote--assuming they can find him in his undisclosed location.

This was a set-up by the repugs. You know it. I know it. We all know it. But let's please understand it in its correct context.

[regnaD kciN]

89. You're completely wrong...

...this was on a procedural vote that required a supermajority of 60 votes. We had 58 -- more than the majority needed had it passed the procedural vote.

:grr:

[NNN0LHI]

94. You are depending on the good nature of 12 Republicans to not...

...change their vote if told to change it by the Senate majority leader Bill Frist. I have a strong suspicion that Frist would have threatened or bribed a couple of them to do just that. If you want the 2 guys who have any chance of removing Bush and his minions to be running back and forth to DC for votes that do nothing more than make a statement on an issue but won't change the outcome go right ahead. I would rather have them out campaigning and raising money to actually accomplish something positive like removing the Chimp in November.

But since you appear to be missing the importance of the fact that the Republicans control the White House and both houses of Congress and therefore control everything that happens in DC what I say here will not probably sink in either. But I tried. See ya.

Don

[Edwards4President]

95. 9 of whom had voted AGAINST this measure in the past . . .

and who no doubt would have voted against it this time if needed to stop it.

The naivete and knee-jerk reaction of some here is breathtaking. We are falling right into the trap the Republicans have set. They had absolutely NO intention of extending unemployment benefits. This was a cynical move to try to appear that they are worker friendly while setting up the Dems to look bad at the same time. And we are falling for it by engaging in petty eating of our own - just like the Republicans want us to do.

Bottom line is that this measure was NOT going to pass, regardless whether Edwards and Kerry voted. Had their two votes been added to the yes column, three more Republicans would have voted no. Simple as that.

[NNN0LHI]

96. Naivete I can live with. If it is actually naivete? n/t

[Edwards4President]

100. Naivete and ignorance, regardless of the motives

It's unfortunate that so many people don't understand the reality of politics and legislative activity. They would rather see a Democrat spending time getting jerked back to Washington by Republican mischief-makers to make statements and cast votes that make no difference to the outcome of a bill than to actually do what it takes to get George Bush out of the White House. Unilateral disarmament may seem emotionally satisfying to true believers, but it also guarantees another four years in the wilderness.

[NewJerseyDem]

101. It wouldn't have passed in July either

Those 9 republicans could have voted for it in July and it still wouldn't have passed. That was a different time and an amendment to a different bill. So, your logic is flawed because you give no reason why those senators didn't vote for extending unemployment benefits last year when their vote wouldn't affect the outcome.

Also, the House of Representatives had a vote and 39 republicans voted for extending unemployment benefits and didn't give in to the leadership. It is possible that one or two would have changed their votes in the Senate but it is unclear if they definitely would have.

[Edwards4President]

110. My logic makes perfect sense

please look at the facts, the voting history and the procedures that led to this vote.

Those Senators crossed over in order to isolate Edwards and Kerry. This has been the m.o. for the last six months or so - the Republicans consistently schedule close votes at the last minute in order to make sure that the candidates don't vote. Sometimes they have to do some manipulation to ensure that the vote is close. It's an old practice of theirs and they're very good at it. The Republican whip process is largely devoted to head counting in order to make sure that votes are scheduled at the opportune moment and that their members vote for the good of the party when needed. That's just how it works.

Remember the vote last fall on DC school vouchers? The House Republican leadership gave about two hours notice that the vote would be taken that night - which happened to be the same night as the Congressional Black Caucus presidential debate. Nearly all of the CBC members had planned to attend the debate, but most of them skipped it in order to stay behind and vote. But, unfortunately, CBC Chair Elijah Cummings had to attend, as did Dennis Kucinich. The measure passed by one vote. (Interestingly, the DC "representative" Eleanor Holmes Norton was opposed to the measure but, of course, couldn't vote.)

These people play hardball. They know that the Democratic candidates would substantially weaken their ability to beat George Bush if they left the campaign trail at a moment's notice in order to make votes the Republicans schedule at their pleasure. And, on the other hand, they know that missing the votes leaves them open to criticism.

Please do not fall into the trap they're setting - these attacks on the candidates and the bickering among their supporters is EXACTLY what they're trying to provoke by putting the Democrats between a rock and a hard place.

[NewJerseyDem]

115. This is the Senate, not the House

The republican leadership in the Senate can't just schedule a vote whenever they want to. The democrats must agree to it by unanimous consent so apparently the democrats let the vote occur on Thursday. Also, if the republicans are planning this great conspiracy against the Kerry and Edwards to make them look bad, why didn't they do that in July?

[Edwards4President]

120. Then why don't you bash the Democrats who didn't object to having a vote?

Moreover, the Republicans didn't do this last year because the Democrats running for president were not running as hard at the time and had an easier time making votes. Things are much different now.

[drfemoe]

122. Eating our Own?

Expecting our US Senators to suit up and show up to represent the will of the People is eating our own? They already knew the Rs had their plans of deception laid, so they just didn't make an effort? Why bother to vote on anything if the Rs already have everything so neatly tucked away?

They should have been there. That belief does not constitute "eating our own". I would very much like an explanation from the Senators John about their decisions to sit this one out.

And we are falling for it by engaging in petty eating of our own - just like the Republicans want us to do.

[Edwards4President]

125. Yes - beating up on Democratic candidates for not unilaterally disarming,

suspending their campaigns and rushing back to Washington on the day of a crucial debate in order to cast a vote that would not change the outcome of an amendment is counterproductive, short-sighted and, in the damage it inflicts upon our efforts to mount a successful campaign against George Bush, is the very definition of eating one's own.

I would very much like an explanation from the Senators John about their decisions to sit this one out.

You already know their explanation. It's been explained repeatedly here and in the numerous other posts on this same topic.

[regnaD kciN]

90. As an unemployed person whose benefits just ran out, all I can say is...

:puke:

[mvd]

114. Just wonderful

I'm really surprised at them - especially Edwards.

[bigtree]

116. The republicans had enough votes to deny as many Democrats as we have

They shuffled just enough votes on this procedural amendment to defeat it and still provide cover for Dole and others to vote yea. If republicans, who have more than enough votes to deny these procedural votes, want a bill then they will come up with the votes. Why do you assume that the republicans didn't manipulate this effort like they have in the past? Why do you suppose the other Democrats aren't blaming their own? Why do we persist in the 'Blame the Democrats First' strategy?

[mvd]

117. I don't think that's the point

The point is that this should be an important enough issue that at this stage in the primary, they could be there for the vote.

[NNN0LHI]

118. And let Frist and the Republicans have our nominee on a string...

...that they can pull anytime they want to and force him back to DC to vote on some bill that is rigged to look close by the Rethugs? Like for instance at the same time he is supposed to be giving a speech at a fundraiser to raise money to beat Bush? I would prefer to have the Dem nominee concentrating his time on beating Bush in November than running around on planes to vote on something his vote will have no effect on. Why would anyone not want the nominee to be concentrating on beating Bush? I don't get it?

Don

[drfemoe]

123. We could use a little effort

in defeating the uber plans of the B administration, on the ground, right now. So far they are only defeating themselves by allowing the B agenda to move full speed ahead. I guess at the appropriate moment they will throw themselves in front of the runaway train and stop it in its tracks? After the fundraisers are done.

[NNN0LHI]

124. I hope you are not trying to sell that snake oil to me friend?

But if you are, save your breath and bandwidth, because I ain't buying none. Jeebuz.

Don

[shivaji]

119. The unemployment extension would have helped my bro-in-law

who works just long enough to qualify for unemployment, then
manages to get fired and collects unemployment, which gives him
more time to make money in his side business of landscaping.