Would like a logical answer for Reid(D-Nv) being leader....

[dmosh42]

Yesterday, The Medicare improvement Act(S-3101) is brought up in the Senate for a cloture vote. It needs a 60 vote majority to carry. Result 54-39 -- another one down! All the Democrats, except Reid, vote 'aye'. Plus the two independents. But Reid votes 'no'! WTF! What I wondered about is why the majority leader would schedule this vote on important legislation, knowing he's missing 5 Democratic votes?(Obama, Clinton, Kennedy, Inouye and Landrieu) As is usual, no media comments from what I heard. What a bunch of losers we have for leadership!

[tkmorris]

1. I may be wrong, but...

I believe the reason for a 'no' vote in this scenario is that it allows him to make a motion for a new cloture vote at a later date according to the rules. Someone want to check my work here?

[KharmaTrain]

2. A Procedural Motion

It's a device where he can bring the bill back up at a future date...why he voted against it. Silly Senate rules.

[dmosh42]

3. OK, thanks for that, but still why have the vote without trying to have..

as many as possible. Or why did he bring the bill up during this week might be the better question.

[KharmaTrain]

4. It's Because It Makes The GOOP Look Bad

Remember, any bill his assholiness doesn't like, he vetoes and it gets thrown back to the Senate and, this time it needs 67 votes to override. It's a game mcconnell and boooosh have played all year that deadlock any legislation they don't like...enabled by the 33 Senator/Lemmings who voted against Veterans benefits, children's health care...even Mother's Day.

The way the deadlock is broken is with a solid Democratic majority in the Senate as well as Barack Obama in the White House....and mcconnell back to bumming smokes in the gallery.

Reid isn't the best leader...I'd prefer my Senior Senator, Durbin, in that role, but he's doing what he can with a stacked deck.

[MiniMe]

5. He voted Aye, and changed it to no at the last minute once the votes had been counted

It is for procedural reasons, if you look at some of Frist's votes, he did the same thing. It allows him to withdraw the bill and then resubmit it with a minor change. If he didn't change his vote and withdraw the bill, I believe that the bill would be tabled.

[dmosh42]

6. ah so! There's some hope yet!

At least there might have been that thinking that all of you have provided. And yes, Durbin, or even a Dodd would have been much better. They usually communicate well to give their positions.