Senate Showdown Set On DADT, Military Funding Today

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_09/025763.php

SENATE SHOWDOWN SET ON DADT, MILITARY FUNDING.... If the Senate follows its schedule today, in about six hours there will be a vote to advance defense authorization bill. A spokesperson for the Palm Center, a University of California think tank dedicated to repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, said yesterday, "This is the most important vote in the history of the gay civil rights movement."

That may seem a little hyperbolic, but it's certainly right up there.

The bill should enjoy broad, bipartisan support. We are, after all, talking about a spending measure that funds the military during two wars. Senate Republicans are, however, going to filibuster the motion to proceed, preventing the chamber from even debating the bill, in large part because of a provision that would empower the administration end discrimination against gay servicemen and women.

Democrats need 60 votes to overcome Republican obstructionism, led primarily by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). If 60 votes are there, passing the bill with the DADT provision appears very likely. If the 60 votes aren't there, Republicans will have blocked funding for the U.S. military during two wars, and will have very likely killed DADT repeal for the foreseeable future.

As of this morning, those 60 votes don't appear to be there. There's still some time, but the outlook isn't encouraging.

As mind-numbing as this may seem, "moderate" Republicans may end up killing DADT repeal over a procedural question -- how many amendments will be considered to the military spending bill.

On the surface, the dispute Monday centered less on the substance of the bill and more on a procedural question about how many amendments Republicans would be able to offer to the massive defense spending bill.

Two key senators thought to be open to repealing the ban on openly gay soldiers serving in the military -- Maine Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe -- complained Monday that Republicans were being shut out of the debate.

Collins "believes that our armed forces should welcome the service of any qualified individual who is willing and capable to serve our country," said spokesman Kevin Kelley. "She would like the Senate to proceed to a full and open debate on the defense authorization bill, with members able to offer amendments on all relevant issues."

Just so we're clear, there's a very real chance that senators like Collins and Snowe -- who claim to oppose the existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law -- will allow servicemen and women to be thrown out of the military for the indefinite future over a procedural question. The Democratic leadership will allow three amendments; Republicans want more.

Also note, GOP senators like Collins and Scott Brown already supported the spending bill at the committee level. They would, in effect, be filibustering legislation that they've already voted for.

For what it's worth, pro-repeal activists were hard at work yesterday. Organizing for America has made its first foray into gay rights, rallying support for DADT repeal, and the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network hosted a rally yesterday in Maine with entertainer Lady Gaga.

Will the efforts pay off? We'll know more in about six hours.

—Steve Benen

[Kdillard]

1. It doesn't look encouraging but I am trying to stay positive

and hope the Dems have a plan in place to either move this forward or at least embarass the Republicans enough with this so that they cave.

[karynnj]

2. I think they can they wait to pass the appropriations bill until after the election.

The 2006 defense appropriations bill passed in the 2005 lame duck session after the republicans removed a provision that would have allowed drilling in ANWR that the Democrats filibustered. It was about the first real victory for us since at least 2004.

This means that they absolutely should not cave on this to pass the funding before the election. In the lame duck session, it is possible that we will have two less votes - if Kirk wins Illinois and Buck wins Colorado - as in both cases, the incumbent was appointed and they take office immediately. Gillibrand is about 20 points ahead and I don't even want to speculate that the witch of Delaware has a chance.) But, by then, the excuse given by Snowe, Brown and Webb and maybe others- the "study" not being done will be moot. In addition, Reid could allow Collins the amendment vote that she seems to want.

[Kdillard]

3. I like the way you think. :)

[vaberella]

4. It's not only DADT---it's also immigration. n/t

[flpoljunkie]

5. The voting should begin about 2:30pm today, according to NBC's Jim Miklaszewski.

[COLGATE4]

6. Trying to stay optimistic but got this sinking feeling in

my gut that we're about to get stabbed once again. God only knows how long it will take before there's any realistic chance of bringing this to the floor of Congress again - my guess is that way past Obama's reelection.:mad:

[vaberella]

7. I don't trust the Dems in Congress. n/t

[karynnj]

8. I think that IF the Democrats do not pass the overall defense bill before the election

the lame duck session will be the place. If you listen to the "nos" there are some wanting the cover of the report the military is putting out in December. I think if you look to the ambitious YOUNGER Senators currently against it, there might be some who see that this is something whose time has come. It is already approved by far over 50% of the population. For example, Scott Brown will be in an awkward position voting against it. I have not seen state level polls on this, put MA has to be higher than the nation. When it was in committee, he argued that it shouldn't be done before the report. He has no cover in December.

I followed a link from a Kerry oped that had some of the questioning he faced when he testified in favor of gays in the military before Strom Thurmond's Armed Services committee. Having watched the hearing where it came up this year, there has been a HUGE shift towards accepting this.