Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DU Exclusive: FMA bill will not pass Senate

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:05 PM
Original message
DU Exclusive: FMA bill will not pass Senate
Edited on Wed Feb-25-04 10:20 PM by Bleachers7
These are official finds through the press or the senators offices. These are not speculation. It looks like the bill is DEAD. This should be forwarded to the news agencies. Let them start talking about it.

34 confirmed:

Boxer
Breaux
Carper
Chafee (R)
Clinton
Collins (R)
Corzine
Daschle
Dodd
Edwards
Feinstein
Fiengold
Graham
Hagel (R)
Jeffords
Kennedy
Kerry
Lautenburg
Leahy
Lieberman
Lugar (R)
McCain (R)
Murray
Nelson
Schumer
Snowe (R)
Campbell (R)
Durbin
Wyden
Cantwell
Reid
Alexander (R)
Bingaman
Lincoln

More here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Thanks to everyone for their hard work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. A number to throw around when using this
17% of those 34 are Republicans, or in English 6 senators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
foreigncorrespondent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks for posting the fully...
...up to date list of those opposed to this, Bleachers. I was watching the other thread as much as possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. Amendment to the Constitution DOA, Bush clearly overreached....
now what? (will they try next?) :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Even if it gets out of the house, they don't have a majority here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. How about we try to keep it in the House?
That would make him look REALLY bad that he can't even get his big moral issue through the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. I agree
I doubt it will pass. You have to wonder if it will get a majority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
85. Tom DeLay might not be voting for it...
There's a chance it could stay in the house.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. He never thought it would.
The point was to make him the moral pointman again, standing up to those slacker, corrupt Congresspeople who don't want a moral America.

Now, is that how he looks? Or merely like an opportunistic annoying toad?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I'd have to go with the second one
Especially when we point out to people all the BAD things he's done and he wants to mess with the Constitution over something this trivial in comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peaches2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
52. He could care less
Bush always knew it wouldn't pass and could care less. Actually he probably hopes it doesn't pass, so it won't be his legacy. He just used it as an election year ploy to keep his base of right wing wackos. He has no shame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. What will they try next?
Who knows? But just in case they DO, please keep the info from my sig line handy.

I used this number this morning (I feel as though I call it almost every friggin' day!), to call Lautenberg (to praise the Chickenhawk speech he gave recently, and I did a "by the way" about the gay marriage amendment - PLEASE do NOT support putting discrimination INTO OUR CONSTITUTION!), plus my own Boxer and Feinstein, and a few assorted others. I also called the lovely Marilyn Musgrave, R-CO, whose sanctimonious buzz-phrase-blathering was on Larry King last night, and reminded her of the same thing, and mentioned that a majority of the callers to the show were staunchly opposed to mucking with the Constitution in this way, for this purpose.

I realize reps like Musgrave won't be swayed, but at least I'm on record there. And it's important that she be made aware that there are PLENTY of people who do NOT agree with what she's doing. They need to face this. They need this fact shoved IN THEIR FACES. OVER AND OVER. They need to see that there are MULTITUDES of people out here who will NOT be bullied, and who will NOT be cowed because some knuckle-dragger thinks their opposing views are unpatriotic, and will not stand passively by and watch them ramrod yet another extremist splinter idea down the national throat. These are people who have not been told "NO" NEARLY enough. Especially lately. Especially since bush took over. Heck, especially since Reagan and Gingrich took over and launched their intimidation machine against liberals and progressives everywhere.

Frankly, every single accursed one of them needs one of those Howard Dean rebel yells right in their faces, and blown full-blast in their ears. At least once every minute of the day. They've had their monopoly fun long enough. Now, they need to be sent back to their corners, and under their rocks. They've done enough damage. And they need to be told this, over and over. Had enough? I sure have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
f33dback Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-04 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
112. What will they try next? "Weapons of Media Distraction"
The same thing that has been working for them, "weapons of media distraction" ratchet up the terror alerts, focus media output on martha stewart not ken lay, distract, befuddle and otherwise abuse media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brian Sweat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
80. "Bush clearly overreached...."
Horse manure. Bush knew he had the votes to kill the amendment before he proposed it. He doesn't want the amendment. He wants the political gain from supporting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #80
98. Obvious political charade- red meat for his base- a bad move overall?
Kerry accuses Bush of tampering with the constitution. Spin game in progress. Most Americans don't want an amendment. Bush had to have known this. Bush fabricating an issues where there should be none.
Repugs accuse Kerry of hypocrisy on issue.
Kerry accuses Repugs of trying to avoid debate on other issues that matter much more.
Bottom line: How does this issue matter?- Kerry hopes not much to most Americans. Bush hopes a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. no Zell?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Zell is voting for it.
WHat's with the Clark picture. There are so many good ones. Why did you pick that one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mattforclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Nooop
Edited on Wed Feb-25-04 10:24 PM by Mattforclark
He's a friggin SPONSOR of fma.

The state of Georgia would be better served by a box of laundry detergent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mattforclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
13. Re: Blanche Lincoln
Someone on the other thread was saying she was not confirmed.

http://epaper.ardemgaz.com/Daily/Skins/Arkansas/?AW=107...

I think that says... But I am not a subscriber, so I don't know for sure.

And what about Inouye and Akaka? Did they get confirmed? (Both were against DOMA)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I called both HI senators. Blanche is confirmed
Edited on Wed Feb-25-04 10:34 PM by Bleachers7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #14
33. But Lincoln is from Arkansas.
And she is up for reelection. That's no real excuse to vote for it, but we should be careful about counting on her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ButterflyBlood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. but she should be safe
since the GOP hasn't found a credible challenger.

hell, look at how many times Arkansas voted for Clinton, and he was quite pro-gay, DOMA nonwithstanding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ArkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #34
81. Not while governor
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
15. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northofdenali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
16. Want a shock? Add MURKOWSKI (R-AK)
Per phone call from her office this afternoon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #16
28. yeah, one more. lets try to get more on
it would be good to start a list of those we can most likely get to change to those least likely and focus on those most likely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
17. Good
Thanks to everyone who made the calls and helped compile this list. I see Atrios just posted this thread on his site. Hi fellow Eschatoners! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tedoll78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
18. Can we pin this?
This is phenomenal news!!!

Time to celebrate! No second-class citizenship for me!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tedoll78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
19. One more thing:
Edited on Wed Feb-25-04 11:34 PM by tedoll78
ignore this post :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
20. Cool! I predicted this last night
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wellstone_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
21. as usual
the land of my birth stands for freedom, my current residence (Texas) is enthusiastically runnin' to string someone up or hold 'em back in life.

Well, proud today to have been born in Mass!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kayleybeth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
22. Bleachers, you are famous
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #22
26. Cool, but this was a team effort.
Someone else started the original thread and we all did the research. It's a great effort. I really wanted to have the No's confirmed tonight and we got that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
23. Thanks so much Bleachers
Being that it was Mike Malloy's last night on the radio, I was kinda bummed. Seeing this setback for * on this dreadful pandering proposal, I know I'll sleep better tonight. America isn't a total lost cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
24. Patty Murray voted no
and she also voted no to IWR and she is up for re-election. She still has my vote.

Dean still gets my caucus vote.

Geee bleachers7...I am a long time Democratic voter, supporter and have always voted for Senator Murray and I will still cast my caucus vote for Dean.

But according to you on these DU forums, I should be purged from the Democratic Party for voting for and supporting Howard Dean... :puke:

'Purging' is a not so thinly veiled rethuglican tactic.

You still want to 'purge' me...duly noted. I have been a DUer since I saw the banner.

Jax
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. You are wrong about that post.
I never ever ever said anyone should be purged for supporting Dean. Never, not once. Besides that, I apologized for the whole incident. And if you aren't sure what I wrote originally, CynicalSOB reposted it so I have a copy. I will send it to you if you want.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. I do not trust you
Jax
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. I do not care.
It doesn't matter one way or another. If you want to believe that I said something I didn't, that's up to you. I take responsibility for what I did say and I apologized. If you have a problem with that, I don't care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
27. Lindsey Graham should be on that list
is he that self hating or that much in need of approval from the hateful crowd ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #27
31. He'd be eaten alive if he opposed this...
the only reason the South Carolina fascist, er, Republicans, overlooked his orientation is because he promised to be their faithful automaton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:45 AM
Response to Original message
32. Please let's not be complacent at all...
We absolutely need maximum pressure against this. I do believe it will be killed, but we need as high a vote against it as possible. And we cannot rely on many of these votes. Some are more solid than others. This is a protracted war and we must prepare for serious struggle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tedoll78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #32
35. True.
I'm wondering if Bush would be willing to strongarm one or two GOP senators if it's close.

BTW.. here are the Dems that aren't on the above list:

Akaka-HI
Baucus-MT
Bayh-IN
Biden-DE
Bingaman-NM
Byrd-WV
Conrad-ND
Dayton-MN
Dorgan-ND
Harkin-IA
Hollings-SC
Inouye-HI
Johnson-SD
Kohl-WI
Landrieu-LA
Levin-MI
Mikulski-MD
Pryor-AR
Reed-RI
Rockefeller-WV
Sarbanes-MD
Stabenow-MI

22 Democratic senators who are not on the above list (correct me if I'm wrong!). There are some I can see as chickening-out on this issue, but there's definite potential for getting more padding on the defeat of this measure. Let's keep-up the pressure!

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senat...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. yeah, i think bleachers7 list is just the confirmed
so far. i don't think it means those NOT on that list do support the amendment, it may also mean their position is just not k nown for sure yet. i'm thinking akaka,biden,bingaman,harkin,inouye,levin,mikulski,reed,sarbanes and stabenow are ones we should work on first as they seem more likely to oppose based on their own record and the states they are from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShimokitaJer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. Oxblog lists Stabenow as opposed
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 07:54 AM by ShimokitaJer
But there's no link, meaning it was based on "constituent communication." A vote against seems more in line with Stabenow's voting record.

In the meantime, I don't see either of my Senators listed as opposed. Time to make some calls...

On edit: My Senators: Sarbanes & Mikulski
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. Stabenow is not on the list because they weren't confirmed when I posted.
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 07:54 AM by Bleachers7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShimokitaJer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. Gotcha.
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 07:58 AM by ShimokitaJer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #44
45. If Stabenow is confirmed they are 36 I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blistex Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #35
56. Don't forget...
Miller-GA

He may act like a far-right wackjob, but he is technically a Democrat, or so I am told.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trogdor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #56
76. Zell Miller supports George W. Bush for President
That makes him persona non grata around here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #56
87. Miller is a SPONSOR of FMA n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exultant Democracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
36. As much as I can't stand Campbell I am glad to see him on that list
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveOinSF Donating Member (40 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:01 AM
Response to Original message
37. OK...
I have not found statements confirming Feinstein, Lautenberg, Lugar, McCain, or Snowe. How are those Senators on the list?

Others who are not on the list that I believe should be are Biden, Pryor, Cantwell, Stabenow (can't find link), and Johnson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcooksey Donating Member (373 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. I count 35, combining this list with the one from Oxblog
The Oxblog list is at http://www.oxblog.blogspot.com/2004_02_22_oxblog_archiv...

Oxblog lists Snowe as "cop-out", meaning no firm stand either way. Feinstein, Lautenberg, and Lugar are not listed, meaning no documented comment from them yet. But McCain is listed as against.

All of the ones you list as against are also listed on Oxblog as being against.

So we take the 34 from here, subtract 4 (Feinstein, Lautenberg, Lugar, and Snowe), add 5 (Biden, Pryor, Cantwell, Stabenow, and Johnson), and now we have 35. If we don't have to subtract those 4 then we'd have 39! Holy crap, wouldn't that be sweet?

And nobody has posted a response yet from either of the two moderate Maryland Democrats, Mikulski and Sarbanes. They are likely no votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShimokitaJer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #39
48. Just got off the phone with Mikulski's office
She hasn't decided on a position yet and the woman I talked to didn't want to speculate on when she might do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShimokitaJer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. Same for Sarbanes
No announcement yet, but the guy said he'd "mail" me a reply when he had one. I gave him an e-mail address, but somehow I have a feeling I'll find out before a reply gets here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. Check the link I provided. It says how some were confirmed.
I personally called Lautenberg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveOinSF Donating Member (40 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #40
84. Cool
It's a bit unclear in that previous thread as to how some of the names ended up there. Personally, I don't think McCain's public statements so far amount to opposition to the FMA (He kind of sounds like Baucus).

So who are the ones who have been confirmed only by phone call and not through some press release? Is the following correct?

(on the list above, FMA "no" vote confirmed by phone call)
Lautenberg
Feinstein
Snowe
Lugar

(not on the list, but "no" vote confirmed by phone call)
Murkowski
Kohl

(these were called, but they did not confirm "no" or "yes")
Mikulski
Sarbanes
Dayton
Akaka
Inouye
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skippysmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
41. Wonderful work
Makes my heart proud that this is DOA.

And further proof this was just more divisive politics from Rove et al.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nickinSTL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #41
46. House?
I know there was a parallel thread on the House votes pro/con, how's that looking?

I don't have the search feature, and can't find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DennisReveni Donating Member (203 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
47. Not quite certain
If a bill is proposed we have to wait until then to count the votes.
Everyone should by now that not only are politicians sneaky, voice votes, but their opinions tend to blow in the wind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
50. isn't Lugar from Indiana ?
if he can oppose such an amendment being from that state and being a republican, there is no excuse for evan bayh to support the amendment and i'm hoping he doesn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #50
54. In the past three years... Evan has been increasingly hard to
predict.

During the war buildup - Lugar was critical (worked on an amendment to IWR... and while in the end supporting the war, was very vocal about concerns pre-invasion about post war plans (and the apparent lack of them) )... while Bayh was supportive (to the point not just of voting for IWR - but doing the Rose Garden speech - which ended the chances of the Biden-Lugar (and other) negotiations for various proposed amendments.)

He has been seen on the air - post Kay report - denying Kay's response (no WMDs now, probably no WMDs pre-invastion)... affirming that we WILL find them.

However, though he has pharma ties (Lilly is in his back yard, so to speak), he stood with the party in opposition to the medicare bill; AND he held firm in opposition to the energy bill. So just when it looks as though he might be going the way of Zell... he holds firm.

That said, I would never use Lugar as a bellweather for Bayh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valphoosier Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #54
57. Bayh will vote no...
He knows that a national democrat who votes yes can kiss his chances of winning a democatic primary goodbye. He's safe enough in Indiana to pull the "I'm against gay marriage, but it's not the time to amend the consitution" line...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #57
68. I would think so
but he seems to have lurched further right than is required by us hoosier voters since bush was elected. Though on that first count you could be right... he does seem to have an interest in a slot on a national ticket...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
51. I phoned Senators Dayton and Coleman
last night. As of last night, they were still not confirmed either way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #51
83. Dayton still not decided, as of 1:50 PM central time. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichV Donating Member (858 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
53. So....
should we hope they vote on this and fails, or that it just doesn't go anywhere?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #53
55. Sarbanes and Mikulski
I just called them and neither one has taken a stance. Sarbanes' office had to put me on hold and she sounded highly annoyed and frazzled. I hope their phones are ringing off the hook.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrBB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
58. This thread now CITED ON TPM
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 11:20 AM by DrBB
Josh Marshall gets cited so often over here (deservedly so), it's nice to see it going the other way!

edit: post --> thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
59. So Which Democrats haven't we heard from yet ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
60. Coleman is his usual squishy self
"Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., said he would support a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to a man and a woman that is "narrow in scope ... that's very clear and concise."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #60
101. The teeth from Brooklyn's opportunistic stance does not surprise
me, but Dayton's silence truly does. I'll have to phone Dayton again tonight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
61. Baucus mostly against
Says amending the constitution should always be the last resort
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcooksey Donating Member (373 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
62. Senator Allen of Virginia against FMA
I'm stunned. Senator Allen says he will support the FMA, but only if a constitutional amendment is necessary after DOMA is challenged in court. So, by inference, he is against it for now.

This is the key paragraph in an e-mail I received from his office:

I hope the existing Defense of Marriage Act, which I support, can accomplish this goal. If indicated because of a court decision, statutory changes may be necessary. I will support statutory protections of marriage. If a constitutional amendment is required, I will support one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. Yeah I got the same one
Not entirely satisfactory...but more than I expected from Allen to tell you the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #62
72. Not sure I would count that as against
more like - keeping his options open both ways... including publically supporting the amendment (in the case that all else fails)... allows him to switch to full support. He might go against - but I wouldn't tally him as against.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcooksey Donating Member (373 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. He might change positions, but his letter is clear
No amending the constitution until DOMA is challenged in court. That has not happened yet and won't for months, maybe a couple of years. It's a clear vote against, for now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carolinayellowdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #62
88. Wonder what Warner and Dole will do
Frankly I thought Allen was the more likely to support the amendment than either of those more moderate Republicans. But with people like Sarbanes and Mikulski contemplating a yes vote, who the hell knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveOinSF Donating Member (40 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #88
89. Dole
Will support the amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #89
90. She is for it...her statement
"Unfortunately, a constitutional amendment is now necessary to preserve marriage as the union between a man and a woman," she said in a statement.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #89
94. so having helped to break up a marraige doesn't hurt that marriage
or the sanctity of the institution... but gay marriage does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
63. Why, you don't suppose the whole thing was a wedge issue...
to force Democratic Senators up for reelection to either energize the RW opposition or alienate their liberal base, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #63
67. I do certainly...but
Chimpy has got to be a bit disheartened byt he number of Republicans who are opposing it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhino47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
64. You can add Arlen Specter (R) Pa to that list.
I called his office and the reply was he would not vote for the amendment.He believes its an issue best left to the individual states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. Arlen's under attack from the right. His opponent Pat Toomey will..
have a field day with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wilson46201 Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
69. 2 more Senators against
According to our local paper, both Indiana Senators (Lugar and Bayh) are leaning AGAINST the amendment. http://www.indystar.com/articles/0/123851-3330-009.html
Both lean conservative and might break to support it IF it looks advantageous to do so. One is a Republican, the other is allegedly a Democrat. Go figure!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. Welcome to DU!!! Lugar is old news. Bayh is now official. Woo hoo
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 01:02 PM by Bleachers7
:bounce: :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #69
73. welcome to DU, wilson
:hi:

Glad to read that. Always hard to predict how Evan is going to go on these things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
71. I wish we could get Dayton to come out of hiding
I'm really disappointed he didn't slam the door on this right away !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
75. Hello Joshua Micah ...
Great having you here, and GREAT blog: .. perhaps the greatest of the blogs .... TPM is awesome ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frank frankly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #75
79. TPM is really something excellent
a pleasure to read and such information

an important resource in these important times
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GonzoWiz Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
77. Kohl (D-WI) confirmed against!
I just called Sen. Kohl's office, and he's confirmed against. Which is good, because otherwise that would make him a giant hypocrite, if you get what I'm saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
78. MONTANA | BAUCUS probably AGAINST | BURNS probably FOR
At least that seems to be the gist of this article in the Helena Independant-Record. Neither one of them have statements on their websites though, so I will call this afternoon to see if I can get some confirmation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #78
91. I called Baucus' office
And I talked to what I am assuming to have been a receptionist. She said she was not qualified to answer the question, but would have a legislative assistant (who was in a meeting) get back to me either by phone or in the mail. From the article I linked in the previous post, it sounds as though he's a no vote, but he didn't say no outright, so I want confirmation. Also, Baucus' office is usually very responsive, so I don't expect a huge delay or any sort of rigamarol from them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #78
96. BURNS *UNDECIDED* but might lean NO!
I called his DC office and a very friendly woman named Erika talked with me for some time about his views. She said he's officially undecided on the issue of the ammendment itself, and doesn't support gay marriage; BUT HE DOES NOT LIKE THE IDEA OF AMMENDING THE CONSTITUTION.

So, let's put Burns firmly in the undecided column, but be prepared for a possible surprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
82. So looks like 37 against now
with Baucus, Bayh, and Kohl ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
86. VERY glad to see Kerry and Edwards on this list...
Just hope they make it back to washington for the vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsipple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #86
95. Not Strictly Necessary
The amendment will only pass the Senate if 67 senators actually vote Yea. Abstentions count as No votes for these purposes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
92. So far only 1 "Democrat" for
Miller...though I am disappointed some well known liberals like Dayton, Mikulski, Sarbanes, and Harkin haven't spoken up yet !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GainesT1958 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
93. Well, it sounds like my junior senator...
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 02:29 PM by GainesT1958
Is continuing her tradition of not supporting anything of consequence...or anything else worth a DAMN!!! :mad:

Way to go, Liddy; you, too, have thusfar been a "Miserable Failure!" :grr:

At least our presidential candidate...er, senior senator; yeah, that's it! :eyes: ...is opposing it.

If these spines--er, positions--hold, looks like a pretty good DONE DEAL to kill this abomination to the Constitution in the Senate! :D

Thanks a lot, BLEACHERS, for some hard scouting work on compiling this count--you're a credit to The General! :7 :thumbsup:

:kick:

B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
97. Has anyone tried calling Harkins office ?
I would have expected him to oppose this right away
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ButterflyBlood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #97
106. he's against
link: http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c4789004/2363...

Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin said amending the Constitution is a "very serious matter," and he would oppose an amendment. "I have always believed that the contract of marriage should be left to states and the sacrament of marriage should be left to religious institutions."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #106
107. Very cool...41 Then...43 with Snowe, MacCain, and Lugar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveOinSF Donating Member (40 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #107
108. I think you mean 44
44, which includes Snowe, McCain, Lugar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
99. Let's hope that more join them. These people should
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 03:09 PM by Skidmore
figure out that, if rights are removed from one group, it then will be easier and more permissible to remove rights from additional groups in society. This is a very steep and slippery slope we are being pushed over by indecent and amoral people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
100. Looks like you can add Conrad (ND)
Edited on Thu Feb-26-04 03:18 PM by salin
same article does not indicate where Sen. Dorgan would fall.

Debate Over Gay Marriage Amendment Continues

KFYR-TV News

Senator Kent Conrad and Congressman Earl Pomeroy say it isn't necessary. Governor Hoeven supports it.
They're talking about a federal constitutional amendment to block gay marriage. President Bush has declared his support for an amendment.


http://www.kfyrtv.com/showNews.asp?whatStory=2605
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #100
102. Excellent...that makes 38 I think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveOinSF Donating Member (40 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. I think that's 40, and I'm not counting McCain, Snowe or Lugar
Anything wrong with this list? If you want to count McCain, Snowe and Lugar, that's 43, but I'm not convinced by their public statements.

Alexander, Lamar (R-TN)
Bayh, Evan (D-IN)
Biden, Joseph (D-DE)
Bingaman, Jeff (D-NM) (link)
Boxer, Barbara (D-CA)
Breaux, John (D-LA)
Campbell, Ben (R-CO)
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA)
Carper, Thomas (D-DE)
Chafee, Lincoln (R-RI)
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY)
Collins, Susan (R-ME)
Conrad, Kent (D-ND)
Corzine, Jon (D-NJ)
Daschle, Thomas (D-SD)
Dodd, Christopher (D-CT) (constitutent communication)
Durbin, Richard (D-IL)
Edwards, John (D-NC)
Feingold, Russell (D-WI)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA) (constitutent communication)
Graham, Bob (D-FL)
Hagel, Chuck (R-NE)
Jeffords, James (I-VT)
Johnson, Tim (D-SD)
Kennedy, Edward (D-MA)
Kerry, John (D-MA)
Kohl, Herb (D-WI) (constitutent communication)
Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ) (constitutent communication)
Leahy, Patrick (D-VT)
Lieberman, Joseph (D-CT)
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) (constitutent communication)
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK) (constitutent communication)
Murray, Patty (D-WA)
Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
Pryor, Mark (D-AR)
Reed, Jack (D-RI) (link)
Reid, Harry (D-NV)
Schumer, Charles (D-NY)
Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI) (constitutent communication)
Wyden, Ron (D-OR)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #103
105. Looks good
I didn't know about Reed, Pryor and Johnson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dob Bole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
104. Excellent...printing to read on my TV show....nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thexanman Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #104
109. Both FL Senators are against
Hi everyone, I'm new.

I called both of my senators today, Bill Nelson (D) and Bob Graham (D) and they both said that they are AGAINST a constitutional amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aldian159 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
110. Alexander is against it?
I'm happy and all, but what the hell. I shouldn't ask, but isn't he a RW or is he opposed to banning the constitution/states rights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJerseyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-26-04 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #110
111. Here's a story on Alexander and FMA
Basically, it is a states' rights thing, but in general Alexander is more moderate than republicans.

http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/national/article/0,1406,KNS...

WASHINGTON - Three East Tennessee House members are backing a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages, but U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander said Wednesday he does not think it is needed.

"Federal law makes clear our state's right" to enforce its law defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, Alexander, R-Tenn., said. "I am not persuaded that amending the Constitution is necessary."

The issue is receiving national attention because of San Francisco's issuance of about 2,600 marriage licenses in recent days to gays and lesbians. So far there's been no court injunction barring the practice.

Also, the highest court in Massachusetts issued a ruling that is expected to allow gay marriages starting in May.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aldian159 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-04 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #111
113. Thanks for the info
NewJerseyDem.
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 Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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