Blog @ MoreWhat.com

An earlier post on this blog discussed Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s personal agenda versus Congress. At that time the roll call vote record did not appear on senate.gov but a copy of the information is now provided below. This post involves a letter Nancy Pelosi sent after S.1927 passed both Houses. She intends to defeat this legislation in November although it has already been voted on and will sunset next February. So the question is what does this tell you about Nancy Pelosi and the remainder of the Democratic party?

In the last post without benefit of the roll call voting record, it was estimated at least a dozen Democrats voted in favor of this legislation. Actually there were 16 Democrats and one former Democrat, now an Independent. So what is the New Direction for America (Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid) telling Democrats who voted in favor of S.1927?

The Senators voting no were all Democrats as well as the other Independent. There were an equal number of Democrats and Republicans not voting on this legislation in the Senate. The reasons for not voting could be varied and the net effect was a wash. But the point should be there is no excuse for not voting.

Some reports suggest the typical analysis that the President wanted the bill to pass before the recess and gave reasons of national security threats that may be moving forward so members of the GOP supported a party vote. The 15 Democrats and one Independent are explained as voting in favor for political cover as a no vote would be indefensible in the event of a terrorist attack.

Was it the follow up reports calling the passage of S.1927 a victory for President Bush that caused Pelosi to send the letter? Was it the shrewd move to make the request just before Congress leaves town that caused the 16 Democrats and an Independent to vote in favor of what 28 other Democrats voted against and 6 Democrats not to vote?

With the Republicans the voting was either a party vote or a vote to do the right or an uninformed vote that was an educated guess. With the Democrats the same possibilities are in play. There is a good chance votes on either side were uninformed due to the late call for a vote. The evidence that Congressional politicians may not review critical information was established after the vote to authorize military force in Iraq. It has been widely reported that few Congressman reviewed intel reports dealing with the vote.

This still leaves the question unanswered as to why Nancy Pelosi wants to undo the passage of this law. If a person sincerely believed that the legislation was wrong, flawed or somehow needing to be readdressed, why wait until November? For that matter, why allow it on the floor if the House and Senate leadership does not want it passed? It is starting to look like Pelosi misjudged the outcome and wants ‘overs’ like the guy who just lost a bet. Can it be that another political victory by her political opponents is so distasteful she would put the country at risk over an argument on privacy or other related issue?

Whatever the reason for Nancy Pelosi’s S.1927 letter, there is little evidence to suggest it was in the best interest of the American people she claims to represent.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On Passage of the Bill (S.1927 as Amended )
Vote Number: 309 Vote Date: August 3, 2007, 09:16 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: S. 1927
Measure Title: A bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to provide additional procedures for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence information and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 60
NAYs 28
Not Voting 12

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs —60

Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Burr (R-NC)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)

NAYs —28

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 12

Alexander (R-TN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Bunning (R-KY)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Gregg (R-NH)
Harkin (D-IA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
Murray (D-WA)

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 7th, 2007 at 11:24 pm and is filed under Public Affairs, Terrorism, wordpress, Politics, Democrats, United States, Pelosi, Reid, Congress. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.