Kerry, Edwards May Not Vote on Marriage

[GreenPartyVoter]

BOSTON (AP) - Democrat John Kerry and his running mate John Edwards may not end up voting on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, a polarizing issue in the presidential campaign.

President Bush has called for the amendment and top Republicans are trying to get one passed in the Senate. But opponents of the measure are trying to block the amendment from ever coming to a direct vote, and the only vote likely to occur now is a procedural one scheduled for Wednesday aimed at forcing the Senate to act on the amendment.

Kerry spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Kerry and Edwards would be in the Senate to vote against the amendment if it came up, but they will not be there to vote on the procedural measure.

Republicans, who had already conceded they lacked the two-thirds majority - or 67 votes - needed to advance a constitutional amendment, would have to get 60 votes to go to a final vote on the issue itself.

http://apnews1.iwon.com/article/20040713/D83Q0DF81.html

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. I hope they do.

I don't want to have to get angry all over again. I just got over Kerry not showing up to vote on overtime laws...:(

[Frances]

2. You have a choice

1. Have Kerry sit around in the Senate while the Repubs who control it keep stalling and postponing so that Kerry can't campaign.

2. Have Kerry campaign so that he can replace Bush and veto the crazy bills the Repubs come up with.

[Joe the Revelator]

3. Thats exactly it..

If Kerry starts playing games with procedural votes then the republicans will never let him get back on the campaign.

[ScreamingMeemie]

4. I don't have a choice, he does. The best bit of campaigning he

can do IMO is to vote. The best bit of campaigning he could have done on the overtime bill was to vote against it. That's what he was elected for. Bush is doing a fair job of campaigning against himself. This farce has gone on long enough, I agree, but we need him to show up and vote on it. The choice isn't mine.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

6. Sorry, but i have to completely and totally disagree with you.

He HAS to campaign. The polls are too close not to, and you might have noticed that all of Bush's campaigning against himself hasn't made a huge dent in the polls. And a simple vote is NOT the best way to do it. He's already made it perfectly clear where he stands on the issue, an irrelevant "no" vote is a waste of time. As has already been said, a non-vote is just as good as a vote against.

[ScreamingMeemie]

7. Then we will agree to disagree, I guess.

A non vote is a could have, would have, should have in a lot of cases.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

9. "could have, would have , should have" what?

Kindly point out for me what difference it makes on this specific issue?

[ScreamingMeemie]

15. I am tired of our congresspeople not taking a stand on issues.

I am tired of wishwash. I am tired of hearing how it won't make a difference. It makes a difference to me, who holds some of these causes near and dear. They are elected to show up, whether we think it's going to matter or not.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

11. Good name you picked for yourself there

excellent choice.

[ScreamingMeemie]

13. Thanks!

:hi: Good to know one can still have an opinion here. Except I like to keep namecalling out of it. I'll stand my opinion and allow you to stand by yours.

[emulatorloo]

10. PLEASE READ! - He WILL vote AGAINST the amendment if it comes to a vote

but he is not going to hang around for the "pre-voting" scheduling stuff.

Once again, Ms Cutler is saying the will VOTE AGAINST THE AMENDMENT>

But it is so lame that it may never come up for a vote.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. People have a bad habit of selectively reading.

[Kipepeo]

16. No, MsGrumpy...

They are not talking about him skipping a vote, they are saying he might not have to (get a chance to) vote.

If the Republicans can't get the 60 votes they need to CALL a vote then there won't be a vote. Here's another article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5416297


WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats on Tuesday appeared headed toward a tactical victory over the hot-button issue of gay marriage.

What seemed likely Monday — an up-or-down Senate vote on a proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage as only "the union of a man and a woman" — appeared very doubtful a day later as Republican and Democratic leaders were unable to agree on a procedure for a vote.

Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has scheduled a Wednesday vote on cloture, a procedural move that would limit debate on the topic and allow the Senate to proceed to voting on the proposed amendment itself.

Senators who who want to avoid casting election-year votes on the amendment, one way or the other, will vote against cloture and it seems unlikely that Frist will be able to muster the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture and allow a vote on the amendment.

That will let Democrats who didn't want to cast a vote on the question of whether marriage should be limited to heterosexual couples breathing easier.

The Democratic presidential nominee, Sen. John Kerry, had said that he and his running mate, Sen. John Edwards, would return to the Senate from campaigning to vote against the amendment. But since it now appears there will be no vote, Kerry and Edwards will not need to show up.

btw, I'm with you on this issue. If it ever gets to a vote I think this is one occassion where he and Edwards would need to show up take a stand...which he has said they will do.

[TexasSissy]

5. A failure to vote on this = a "no" vote. This kind of bill counts

the "yes" votes. So what really matters is to show up to vote "yes" on a bill (like when Kerry didn't show up for unemployment extension - that would've been a "yes" vote). I don't see this as a big deal. It's the bills we WANT to pass that matter.

[Tweed]

8. Good, it's best if they don't have to take a stance on this dividing issue

Especially if the Republicans need a certain amount of votes to get it passed, not just a majority. If Kerry and Edwards don't vote on this then the vote is 60-38 maybe. If they do vote it will be 60-40, what's the difference?

[rucky]

12. good. it's a trap....

and it doesn't have a chance in hell of passing - with or without their vote. maybe we can put this non-issue to bed after it gets shot down without our leadership even trying.

[pinto]

14. Kerry, Edwards may not vote on procedural measure.

Article clearly states they would show up if the Republican effort makes it to the floor.

This is the same "vote counting" being used about Kerry by the Republicans...

A procedural vote is not a vote for or against any Senate action other than bringing the issue to the entire body.

Happens all the time.

[CaTeacher]

18. honestly I want them to be on

record opposing this horrible piece of legislation...this is a technicality that enables them to not come out against a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

I say that no matter what they need to speak out strongly on behalf of the gay community.

[Frances]

19. Read the posts

And don't forget to get your priorities straight

The Repubs will play all kinds of games. If Kerry and Edwards don't win, then gays will lose big time for years to come.