Here's How to Follow Today's Big Vote!! Sirota warning Dick Cheney Dems for wimping.

[KoKo]

Here's How to Follow Today's Big Iraq Vote
by davidsirota
Thu May 24, 2007 at 06:05:24 AM PDT

REMEMBER, THE RULE VOTE IS THE KEY VOTE. THE RULE IS DESIGNED TO PASS A BLANK CHECK BUT LET DEMOCRATS PRETEND THEY OPPOSE THE BLANK CHECK. DON'T BE FOOLED - WATCH THE RULE VOTE. -D

Today is the day House Democrats are expected to vote on Iraq - except, news out of Washington this morning says the leadership has come up with a nifty little trick to try to prevent the public from seeing who voted for giving Bush a blank check, and who voted against it. If you thought Democrats were behaving like cowards by caving into a President at a three-decade low in presidential polling and giving him the very blank check they explicitly promised not to give him during the 2006 election, you ain't seen nothing yet. We are watching the rise of the Dick Cheney Democrats - that is, the rise of Democrats who endorse governing in secret and hiding the public's business from the public itself.

* davidsirota's diary :: ::
*

Here's how it is expected to work today in a process only Dick Cheney could love (though you never know - it could change at the last minute). Every bill comes to the House floor with what is known as a "rule" that sets the terms of the debate over the legislation in question. House members first vote to approve this parliamentary rule, and then vote on the legislation. Today, however, Democrats are planning to essentially include the Iraq blank check bill IN the rule itself, by making sure the underlying bill the rule brings to the floor includes no timelines for withdrawal, and that the rule only allows amendments that fund the war with no restrictions - blank check amendments that House Democratic leaders know Republicans will have the votes to pass.

This means that when the public goes to look for the real vote on the Iraq supplemental bill, the public won't find that. All we will find is a complex parliamentary procedure vote, which was the real vote. Democratic lawmakers, of course, will use the Memorial Day recess to tell their angry constituents they really are using all of their power to end the war, that they voted against the Republican blank check amendment which the rule deliberately propels, and that the vote on the rule - which was the real vote for war - wasn't really the important vote, when, in fact, they know very well it is the biggest vote on the war since original 2002 authorization for the invasion. It is a devious, deliberately confusing cherry on top of the manure sundae being served up to the American public, which voted Democrats into office on the premise that they would use their congressional majority to end the war. To read more on these deliberately complex machinations, see Congressional Quarterly's piece just out on the web.

much more at .........

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/24/9255/80693

[whistle]

1. Who precisely are "Dick Cheney Dems"...is there a list?

[orleans]

3. the ones who want to do this iraq vote in secret. a list? that's a secret too

the whole point is that you don't know who voted for what.

now...who could set up such a thing? who could put this vote into a procedural vote? hummm....

[KoKo]

8. He has a little more here about who could fillibuster and an update:

Remember, all we need is 20 Democrats to vote no on the rule to send the bill down and start over. If that doesn't happen, then the question becomes which U.S. Senator is going to answer the "where's the beef?" question by putting their antiwar rhetoric into action by pulling an old-school, read-the-phonebook filibuster? Sens. Chris Dodd, John Kerry, Bernie Sanders and Russ Feingold seem to be girding for a big fight, while the Associated Press reports both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama "declined" to take a position. Will we see a real filibuster, or will we see capitulation in the upper chamber? Stay tuned.

UPDATE: I am told that the rule includes a procedure to require another vote on troop withdrawal, probably in the fall. I'm certainly glad this is in the rule, but its inclusion is an implicit commentary on just how much of a deliberate travesty the overall situation on the House floor is. They included this provision in the rule to get antiwar Democrats to ignore the fact that the rule is designed to create the situation on the House floor where the blank check is passed, while Democrats claim they are trying to stop the war.

[Zodiak]

15. Then get rid of them ALL

If they will not put their vote on record, then they need to be all removed for refusing to be accountable.

Whever was responsible for burying this vote into a procedural vote need to be identified and publically shamed.

I won't tolerate this shit from Democrats or Republicans. Put your name by your vote or I will ASSUME you voted for the war. Unless, of course, you are Dennis Kucinich.

Activists and grassroots can play hardbell. Loyalty is no longer given for free.

[loudsue]

17. Hackable elections mean we CAN NOT VOTE THEM ALL OUT.

THAT is why the FIRST order of business for ALL activists is to work on the county and state level to get RID of the electronic voting machines.

If we didn't vote 'em in, we can't vote 'em out. It's a racket, and it is KILLING our Democracy.

:kick::kick::kick:

[panader0]

2. What time is the vote? Is it on CSPAN?

[orleans]

4. their doing a "procedural" vote now, but i don't know if this is it or not n/t

[KoKo]

14. C-Span is saying they are doing Procedural Vote, then debate then voting on the Rule...

then voting on something else. It's so confusing what they describe, I've gotta figure that Sirota is correct in what he said.

He will have an update on "Working Assets" site when the whole thing is over later today...I'll post when he does.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. It has already happened:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll418.xml

[AndyA]

5. If this is true, this really stinks, Democrats.

This stinks as bad as the feces delivered to Marilyn Musgrave. It stinks to high heaven, and Democratic constituents WILL NOT FORGET you are PLAYING GAMES with us. YOU ARE HIDING, TRYING TO DECEIVE US.

You are Republicans, for all the good you're doing.

This will not stand, it will not be tolerated!

[EFerrari]

7. Do we know if this is true? n/t

[AndyA]

9. Nope, I haven't heard it from Pelosi, just the same sources listed here at DU.

But, I doubt too many are going to go on record if it is true. We'll know soon enough, I suppose.

[KoKo]

10. There's a long discussion thread about this over at Kos and a few people

didn't believe it...but others posted the text of the bills and reminded us of how the "Bridge to Nowhere" and other weird things are always tacked onto bills but are never found in the description of the Bill over at US GOV or C-Span by the bill number.

Most folks on that long thread thought that it was pretty accurate as to what they could be doing.

Sirota has an update with a little more:

Remember, all we need is 20 Democrats to vote no on the rule to send the bill down and start over. If that doesn't happen, then the question becomes which U.S. Senator is going to answer the "where's the beef?" question by putting their antiwar rhetoric into action by pulling an old-school, read-the-phonebook filibuster? Sens. Chris Dodd, John Kerry, Bernie Sanders and Russ Feingold seem to be girding for a big fight, while the Associated Press reports both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama "declined" to take a position. Will we see a real filibuster, or will we see capitulation in the upper chamber? Stay tuned.

UPDATE: I am told that the rule includes a procedure to require another vote on troop withdrawal, probably in the fall. I'm certainly glad this is in the rule, but its inclusion is an implicit commentary on just how much of a deliberate travesty the overall situation on the House floor is. They included this provision in the rule to get antiwar Democrats to ignore the fact that the rule is designed to create the situation on the House floor where the blank check is passed, while Democrats claim they are trying to stop the war.

[KoKo]

12. Looks like they are voting on it from the C-Span scroll... n/t

[EFerrari]

13. I thought it was the Ethics vote, but you're right. n/t

[KoKo]

16. This is so confusing because C-Span just now said it's the "Ethics Bill" and this is after

they had a scroll up about the Iraq Denfense Bill. :crazy: But, then they started talking about voting on "The Rule."

I give up following it. I'll wait for Sirota's post when it's all done over at his website.

It's too depressing to sit in front of C-Span not knowing what's going on.

[EFerrari]

On another thread I asked if Woody Allen scheduled this session.

Maybe it wasn't him. Maybe it was Monty Python.

[LiberalArkie]

6. I know how my DemoPublicans here in Arkansas will vote.

In the next election and probably for a hell of a lot to follow, I plan on voting Socialist, Populist, Progressive, Communist or even a Nazi, anybody but Democrat/Republican. I know that who ever has been bought will vote the same.

[KoKo]

11. We've got to drag our Dem Party Back...Maybe a "Refreshed Party" that remembers

Labor and the New Deal principles of Franklin Roosevelt and the Anti-trust busting of Teddy Roosevelt!

Our Party has lost it's way....can it be saved ...it's on life support now....:-(

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. Only seven Democrats voted against the rule

Clay

Harman

Kucinich

McNerney

Moore (WI)

Stark

Waters

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll418.xml

[mdmc]

20. What was the ROLL 418 vote all about

My Rep Maurice Hinchey (and John Hall NYSCD19) voted for this. I can't believe that they would be part of any rat worm enabling. Please help me understand what the yea vote represented.

[Freddie Stubbs]

21. Here you go:

H. Res. 438 - Rule providing for the consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 2206) making emergency supplemental appropriations and additional supplemental appropriations for agricultural and other emergency assistance for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes (Rep. Slaughter-Rules): The rule makes in order a motion by the chairman of the Committee of Appropriations to concur in the Senate amendment with each of the two House amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The rule provides one hour of debate on the motion equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule also provides that the Chair shall divide the question of adoption of the motion between the two House amendments and if both amendments are adopted, they will be engrossed into a single amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 2206. The rule further provides that during consideration in the Committee of the Whole of a bill making FY08 supplemental appropriations for military operations in Iraq or Afghanistan, before consideration of any other amendment, it shall be in order to consider an amendment only proposing to add to the bill the text of H.R. 2451. The rule provides that section 4(a) of the resolution does not apply to a regular FY08 Department of Defense appropriations bill. Debate on the rule will be managed by Rules Committee Chair Rep. Louise Slaughter, and consideration will proceed in the following order:


One hour of debate on the rule.
Possible vote on a Democratic motion to move the previous question. Democrats are urged to vote yes on the motion.
Vote on adoption of the rule. Democrats are urged to vote yes on adoption of the rule.

http://majoritywhip.house.gov/daily_whipline/2007/05/24/

[mdmc]

23. Why are dems urged to vote yes?

I'm still not getting it. Why did the GOP vote no?

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. If the rule is defeated the bill cannot be brought up for a vote

If the rule would have been defeated it would have been a major embarrassment to the leadership.

[KoKo]

37. Thanks for posting the Rule, Freddie....good info...as to why they had to..

vote for it and I guess what Sirota was getting at.

[KoKo]

26. OOPS...Thanks for listing the Dems above.....

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll418.xml


*
It looks to me like it's done? (0 / 0)

It looks to me like the recorded vote happened at 1:23 EDT, and the Rule passed 218-201, if I'm reading this correctly.

And only 7 Democrats crossed the aisle to vote against this betrayal:

Clay-MO
Harman-CA (?!?)
Kucinich-OH
McNerny-CA
Moore-WI
Stark-CA
Waters-CA

by packerland progressive on Thu May 24, 2007 at 11:05:28 AM PDT

o
That was the vote on the rule (H Res 438) (0 / 0)

Later today, debate and votes (as usual) on the bill and amendments, then over to the Senate for final fireworks and final passage.

With all these ponies, there must be a manure pile around here somewhere.

by RonK Seattle on Thu May 24, 2007 at 11:21:33 AM PDT

< Parent >

Permalink | 516 comments

[orleans]

28. doesn't pelosi vote? n/t

[KoKo]

29. She must have voted for it....she's not in the absent....n/t

[orleans]

31. i can't find her in the yays or nays either n/t

[mmonk]

25. Short list of trust.

[AzDar]

19. Kick.....

:kick:

[blondeatlast]

22. Damn, gotta leave for a while. Kicked and in "My DU!"

Thanks to those who watch for those who can't.

[KoKo]

30. So it's on now to the Senate and last hope is a Fillibuster....

They want to get it done today they say....

[trashcanistanista]

34. I am having a hard time believing this

because Woolsey (CA) would never ever vote in favor of a rule that passes as the Iraq supplemental. Never in a million years. She is so anti war it breaks my heart. Anyone else skeptical of this?

[KoKo]

35. Well...she must have been forced to...My Anti-War Liberal Rep voted for it too...

And, there's no way I could have forseen that.

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. No, the House still has to vote on the actual bill

And don't expect a fillibuster, Kerry has said he will not try that:

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2007/5/24/114745/908/419#c419

[mdmc]

40. thanks for all the data

:kick:

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our second quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.

[blondeatlast]

38. Long time no see! Where ya been, buddy?! nt

[KoKo]

33. SENATE TO VOTE TONIGHT! After 7:00 p.m. House to Debate 5-7!

But, sadly we know the House Debate is just a Potemkin Village.

[trashcanistanista]

36. Thank you

I think we all need to get a collective grip. It will happen soon enough. It hasn't happened yet.