Why don't they re-introduce repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell as stand-alone bill???

[paulflorez]

For goodness sake:

Over 70% of Americans support a repeal.

The repeal would not take effect until after the review is done.

If it passes, the Dem base would be energized in triumph, including youth.

It would depress Social Conservatives who would feel betrayed by Republicans; they are already disappointed that the "Pledge" did not have many socially conservative issues.

It will do the Democrats ZERO political goods to repeal DADT during lame duck, which means Dems WON'T PASS IT.

The day of the vote, the Dems could ask that all Senators wear yellow ribbons to show support for our troops.

If it failed to pass, Democrats could attack Republicans for failing to support our troops, they should have their yellow ribbons ripped from their chests.

Why, why WHY is DADT Repeal not being passed????????

[Uzybone]

1. probably because it would stand no chance of being passed

GOP just voted down the line against funding our troops, what makes you think they vote differently for DADT repeal.

[paulflorez]

2. That wasn't open to amendments and had DREAM Act

Not open to Amendments + DREAM Act = poison pill.

At the very least Collins + Snowe would vote for repeal.

They could argue with Brown that repeal wouldn't take effect until AFTER review.

Over 70% of Americans support repeal. I doubt DREAM Act would have that much popular support at least without significant amendments.

[Davis_X_Machina]

6. "At the very least Collins + Snowe would vote for repeal."

And I am an Adélie penguin.

[Ozymanithrax]

3. Because Republicans don't want it to...

Asking and telling bugs their homophobic base.

[BAU]

4. Because they didn't want it to pass...

...so they can use it as ammunition on the campaign trail. This is the same reason Diane Feinstein doesn't want to vote on the tax cuts right now. So, the GOP can't use that as ammo on the trail. Meanwhile, our lawmaking is held hostage by all of these ass holes in DC for political points.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

5. Politicians make a career out of obscuring facts so they can pander to different demographics.

That's why every bill has a dozen conflicting ryders,wedge issues, and earmarks attached to it. Plausible deniability, scapegoating, and flip-flopping... that pretty much sums up 95% of politicians.

"Oh I wasn't voting for this I was voting for that..." :eyes:

No way would a single issue topic without earmarks EVER make it's way to the floor for a vote. Heck No! That'd be like asking a politician a Yes/No question and recieving one word in response. Although I must say that the ability to respond to a simple yes/no question with a 5 minute reply and not even coming close to addressing the original question is damn impressive.

I believe that unrelated ryders and earmarks should not be allowed to be attached to any legislation. If legislation is sound enough to be implemented then it should be able to stand up to scrutiny on its own accord. There should be no reason to hide it on the back of unrelated legislation. There's been too much shit-legislation happening on the side-stage in washington for the past 2-3 decades.

[zipplewrath]

7. Procedures

The votes and maneuvers required to accomplish that would either take alot of time (go back through committee) or alot of cooperation from the GOP. You can't just write a new bill and dump it on the senate, without the cooperation of the minority.

[emulatorloo]

8. Pretty sure Republicans would block it by voting against Cloture

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. It would demoralize the base to see how many Democratic politicians

would not stand up for it.

If it was to be done, it should have been done in Obama's first 6 months when his high popularity could have carried the vote and swayed even the blue dogs.

Everybody is talking about how it was killed by the Republicans, but Pryor and Lincoln ALSO voted against it.