WASHINGTON - The Senate gridlocked on the Iraq war in a sharply worded showdown on Saturday as Republicans foiled a Democratic attempt to rebuke President Bush over his deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops.
The vote was 56-34. That was six short of the 60 needed to advance the measure, which is identical to a nonbinding resolution that Democrats pushed through the House on Friday.
[....]
The vote marked the second time this winter that Senate Republicans have blocked action on nonbinding measures critical of the president’s war policies. This time, however, there were signs of restlessness within the GOP.
Seven Republicans broke with their leadership, compared with only two on the previous test vote.
Also this time, the maneuvering concerned a nonbinding measure that disapproved of Bush’s decision to deploy the additional troops and pledged to support and protect the troops.
The vote in the House on Friday was 246-182, with 17 Republicans breaking ranks to support the measure and two Democrats voting in opposition.
At this time, Americablog has posted a list of the Republicans who broke ranks to permit the debate on the Bush "surge plan," who voted to filibuster and stop the debate, and who did not vote. Here are the results from Americablog:
Voting to permit debate about Bush's "surge" plan"
- Snowe (R-ME)
- Specter (R-PA)
- Warner (R-VA)
- Collins (R-ME)
- Hagel (R-NE)
- Coleman (R-MN)
- Smith (R-OR)
Voting to filibuster and stop the debate.
- Lieberman (I-CT)
Not voting: Nine Republicans and one Democrat, Tim Johnson (who is in the hospital):
- Bennett (R-UT)
- Bond (R-MO)
- Cochran (R-MS)
- Corker (R-TN)
- Ensign (R-NV)
- Hatch (R-UT)
- Johnson (D-SD)
- Kyl (R-AZ)
- McCain (R-AZ)
- Murksowksi (R-AK)
A couple of interesting points here. The first is that Senators Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter, John Warner, Susan Collins, and Chuck Hagel bolted from their political party to vote in permitting the debate on the Bush surge plan. They are all moderate Republicans. Senators Norm Coleman and Gordon Smith appear to be questionable moderates, who have voted against the Bush White House on this filibuster. According to this January 23, 2007 Washington Post article, Warner, Collins, Coleman, and Smith are all up for reelection in 2008. Their vote with the Democrats may be an attempt to keep their political careers alive in the face of American opposition to the Bush administration's war in Iraq, and a possible Republican defeat in Congress and the White House.
It is obvious that Senator Joe Lieberman voted for the filibuster to stop the debate. Lieberman also voted to continue the filibuster in the February 5, 2007 vote. No big surprise here, since Lieberman has been a big supporter of the Bush administration's escalation of the Iraq war.
But now look at the ten senators who did not participate in this Saturday vote. Democratic Senator Tim Johnson is still in the hospital recovering from a brain hemorrhage and emergency brain surgery. He was in no position to vote on this filibuster. The rest of the senators who did not participate in this vote were Republican. Arizona Senator John McCain was the big one to not participate--I've commented on McCain's absence here. McCain also did not participate in the February 5, 2007 filibuster vote. However, the other nine Republicans who did not participate in this Saturday vote, voted to continue the filibuster in the February 5, 2007 vote.
I'm not sure how to figure this one out--aside from a potential CYA by these GOP senators who fear a GOP self-destruction in 2008 due to Iraq. They are on record for one filibuster against the Warner resolution. The last thing they would want is a continuous record of opposing Democratic resolutions on the Iraq war that could come back to haunt them in 2008. McCain's non-participation is just another CYA strategy, especially since he would not want to explain any shifting of his position, or criticism of the Bush administration's surge plan, that he may make in 2008 if the Iraq war gets even worst. For the moment, McCain is playing the big Bush supporter for the Iraq war in order to get hard-lined conservative votes, and lock up the Republican nomination for president. If he gets the nomination, he could shift his position slightly in order to gather just enough moderate and independent votes to capture the White House. The last thing McCain would want is to explain his vote on these early resolutions during the election. For McCain, it is all about winning the White House, and achieving his crass, personal ambition here.
No comments:
Post a Comment