Conservative Republicans block Senate stimulus; McCain was a no-show

Reasonable people can disagree about the utility and efficacy of a federal stimulus bill right now, but on the whole, the Senate approach seems preferable to the deal reached between the White House and House leaders. The Senate version, for example, in addition to tax rebates, included an extension of unemployment benefits, increased subsidies for home energy costs, and increased relief for low-income seniors and disabled veterans. It wasn’t perfect, but it was a pretty good bill.

Senate Republicans, true to form, filibustered the stimulus package. Senate Dems picked up some GOP votes — most notably from some Republicans seeking re-election this year — but came one vote short.

By a single vote, Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked an expansive fiscal stimulus package championed by Democrats, as partisan rancor engulfed the effort to inject a quick burst of spending into the slowing economy.

The package needed 60 votes under Senate rules to move forward but failed 58 to 41, with 8 Republicans joining 48 Democrats and 2 independents in support of it. The majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, switched his vote to no from yes at the last second, a parliamentary move that lets him control the next steps on the bill.

Looking over the roll call, all 49 Dems voted for the stimulus, along with both independents (Lieberman and Sanders), and eight Republicans (Coleman, Collins, Dole, Domenici, Grassley, Smith, Snowe, and Specter). Forty conservatives supported the filibuster, blocking an up-or-down vote.

If you do the math, that’s 99 votes (including both Obama and Clinton, who stayed off the campaign trail to cast the votes). And who didn’t show up for work? It’s an interesting story.

Senator John McCain of Arizona, the leading Republican presidential candidate, returned to Washington fresh off his string of victories in Tuesday’s voting, but he did not appear in the Senate chamber and did not vote. Adding to the partisan rancor, Democrats immediately questioned his whereabouts and seemed poised to blame him personally, and Republicans generally, for stalling the bill.

Aides to Mr. McCain said that he would have sided with the Republican leaders and that his vote was not needed.

It was an interesting response given what the senator has been telling voters.

John McCain (R-AZ) has been repeatedly claiming on the stump that passing an economic stimulus package is at the very top of his agenda. He has told audiences that the “first thing we gotta do is pass the stimulus package through the Senate.” During a Jan. 24 GOP debate, he explicitly pledged to vote on such legislation when it reached the Senate. Watch McCain make this promise on repeated occasions:

As recently as this morning, McCain again told reporters that he planned on returning to the Senate for this evening’s vote on the economic stimulus, stating that Congress needed to quickly pass legislation.

The measure, blocked by conservatives, fell just one vote short of the 60 needed to end debate. At the “last minute,” McCain decided to skip the vote, even though his plane landed in DC in time. McCain claimed that he was “too busy.”

He added that he was “focused on other stuff.”

The reality, of course, is far different. He was in DC, and could have voted, but found it easier to take a pass. If he voted with the bipartisan majority, he’d make the conservative Republican base mad. If he voted with the right, Dems would spend the next nine months beating him over the head with his vote against tax rebates, an extension of unemployment benefits, increased subsidies for home energy costs, and increased relief for low-income seniors and disabled veterans.

So he decided not to show up for work.

Remind me again about how courageous John McCain is?

A football team which can’t put it over from the one yard line lacks whatever that is (courage, oomph?) which means you really want to win.

Reid “came one vote short.”

  • I dont recall what news channel I was listening to this morning, and unfortunately they did not give a source, but they reported that McCain or his camp had actually said candidly that there was nothing in the vote for him – he would either have to look uncaring regarding the economic plight of average Americans, or risk upsetting the pro-Bush conservatives. So he just didn’t vote, because the politics were easier.

    He is just enough of a loose cannon that I can imagine him giving that analysis aloud, but still, if there really is a record of that, it should be made into a 30-second spot by the DNC and go on the air immediately.

  • And this guy is ‘Authentic’ exactly how?

    Look, I can agree with the assertion that a Stimulas would be too little, too late and too expensive.

    But if you say you want A Stimulas package you should damn well show up for the vote.

    But it seems there’s a caste system in this country. [Income] tax payers deserve money, but other Americans don’t.

  • Senate Dems picked up some GOP votes — most notably from some Republicans seeking re-election this year

    Hmmm – re-reading that list one name is conspicuously absent.

    Thanks for playing Mr. Sununu; we have some lovely parting gifts for you.

  • Here is the roll call for the detail-oriented.

    Otherwise:

    Brave Sir John he ran away.
    Bravely ran away away.
    When danger reared it’s ugly head,
    He bravely turned his tail and fled.
    Yes, brave Sir John turned about
    And gallantly he chickened out.

    Bravely taking to his feet,
    He beat a very brave retreat.
    Bravest of the brave, Sir John!

  • I’ll take a divergent view, just to make sure that the rules freaks don’t get ignored.

    If the Reps threaten to filibuster, MAKE THEM FILIBUSTER!!!

    (sorry for shouting)

    Make them stand there and read the Baltimore yellowpages for 12 hours or so…

  • “Forty one conservatives supported the filibuster, blocking an up-or-down vote.”

    That is factually incorrect. 40 supported the filibuster. The 41st was Senator Reid.

    McCain was the swing vote and, by not voting, effectively voted with the 40 conservative Republicans

  • That is factually incorrect. 40 supported the filibuster. The 41st was Senator Reid.

    Good point, Neil. I’ve corrected the post.

  • Do the people of Arizona ever express any displeasure that one of their Senators has been constructively and absent from the Senate for months?

    And at what point does his indifference to his constituents make any difference on the national stage?

    Here’s a link to McCain’s record as compiled by Project VoteSmart: http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270

    It’s interesting to see which things he considered worthy of his presence and his vote.

    All members of Congress are searchable through Project VoteSmart – including former members.

  • It’s really hard understand why, on a matter that he actually seems to care about, that Reid still won’t put the reThugs into the uncomfortable position of, as incafiend said, actually filibustering. What could he possibly lose by doing so? Nonexistent bipartisan comity?

  • Neil Wilson (7): It’s not the 40 that counts. It’s the 60. It doesn’t matter how many people don’t vote. It matters how many people do vote to close discussion. Ried would have been the 59th.

    Ed Stephan (1): “Ried came one vote short”. The way it works with Republicans is that they need to prevent 60 votes for cloture. But they also have many Senators who are running for reelection. It really doesn’t matter who wants to pass the bill and who does not. The Republicans do not participate in a democracy. They merely decide which members need the Yes vote most, and allow them. If Ried had convinced McCain to vote yes, for example, McConnell would have merely told Susan Collins to get back in line.

  • Ed Stephan @ #1:

    Forty Republicans blocked the bill, and because that was the exact number the Republicans needed and the Democrats couldn’t get one more Republican vote, that’s Harry Reid’s fault?

    Right.

    Z @ #4 makes a good point. The Republican strategy obviously was to allow the most vulnerable Republican senators to vote for the bill, with exactly the right number staying loyal to Bush and blocking the bill. Sununu was volunteered to take one for the team.

    Maybe Sununu isn’t planning to run for re-election anyway, but hasn’t announced his plans yet.

  • Anne makes a good point.

    Someone should be hammering the shit out of McCain over this, especially in places like Arizona and the other sunbelt states that are hurting pretty bad right now. Here’s my version of the ad:

    John McCain wasn’t brave enough to go against Rush Limbaugh and vote for a bipartisan stimulus package that would have put an average of $___ in the pocket of every taxpayer in Arizona. He wasn’t brave enough to show up and argue why he wouldn’t support it. If you’re afraid of Rush Limbaugh, are you brave enough to serve as president?

  • Well – here’s one bit of cheerful news: Joe Lieberman has been stripped of his superdelegate status…

    From Think Progress:

    Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who endorsed Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for president, will be disqualified as a superdelegate at the Democratic convention “under what is informally known as the Zell Miller rule.” In 2004, Miller — then a Democratic senator from Georgia — attacked Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) in a speech at the Republican National Convention. The DNC “responded with a rule disqualifying any Democrat who crosses the aisle from being a super delegate.”

    First, super delegate status stripped – next on the list: committee chairs and plum assignments – gone! Last stop, humiliating irrelevance and obscurity.

  • I can’t believe that Lieberman–a man no longer in the Democratic party!!!–could be allowed to even attend the convention much less be a superdelegate. WTF??!!! How could it have taken this long for this decision? What does it have to do with endorsing a Rethuglican? The man is no longer in the party!!!! When will the Dems make that so in every sense of the word?! Are the Dems still giving this ass money? Unbelievable!

  • I can’t believe that Lieberman–a man no longer in the Democratic party!!!–could be allowed to even attend the convention much less be a superdelegate. WTF??!!!

    He still caucuses with the Dems, and he still has his seniority, so it’s unsurprising that he would have been able to keep his superdelegate status had he not, you know, gone out and actively campaigned/endorsed a guy from the other party. The superdelegate stuff is already pretty weird – this doesn’t shock or offend me at all. Well, it does shock me that the Dems decided to yank his status because he endorsed McCain, but that’s shocking in a kind of surprisingly happy way.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that Holy Joe throws a hissy fit over this. Then again, he’s probably going to be attending the GOP convention if McCain keeps going on this track and becomes the nominee, so maybe he won’t care. Joe picking between Clinton and Obama would probably be like Dick Cheney trying to choose between a bed of wooden stakes and a garlic milkshake anyway, so maybe Joe’s relieved not to have to make a decision now.

  • Do the people of Arizona ever express any displeasure that one of their Senators has been constructively and absent from the Senate for months? -Anne

    The whole party is built on governing as little as possible, and with Mr. Vacation in the White House, I doubt any of them see it as much of a big deal until a Democrat does it.

  • Yep, hold McCain’s feet to the fire about missing this vote. And while you’re at it, point out that every promise he makes to improve the economy is a lie because he wants to keep pouring our treasury into Iraq for the next 100+ years. The way to defeat McCain is to tie the economy around his neck with the yoke of Iraq, one of the main reasons the economy is in the dumper. I don’t think the average (Republican/conservative Democrat) voter has connected those dots yet.

  • Aides to Mr. McCain said that he would have sided with the Republican leaders and that his vote was not needed.

    That’s all the voters need to know.

  • Double-standard Anne wrote, “Do the people of Arizona ever express any displeasure that one of their Senators has been constructively and absent from the Senate for months?

    Do the people of New York ever express any displeasure that one of their Senators has been constructively and absent from the Senate for months?

    http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463

    I suspect you’d find a similar pattern with Obama. They’re running for president, you know.

  • Here’s another ad for you folks:

    “The plot fades in to a picture of the White House, then to a picture of the Oval Office. No one is sitting behind the desk. A tumbleweed or two casually roll in through the open door. Sound effects: distant wind, and crickets chirping.

    Then, we fade to an empty Marine One—just sitting there—maybe with a tumbleweed or two blowing by. Sound effects: wind, and crickets chirping.

    Next, it’s on to Air Force One, sitting on the tarmac, with the door open, the stairway rolled into place, and no one on the steps. Inside, all the seats are empty—and a tumbleweed or two roll down the aisle-way. Sound effects: just a tad of wind, and crickets chirping.

    Take this on to the Presidential podium, SOTU, Presidential addresses, what-have-you; no one there but the wind and those tumbleweeds.

    Then—go to a shot of McCain, having a beer with his buddies, or buying carpets in Baghdad, or kicked back on some exotic beach.

    Final shot—a black screen with the words, “John McCain has a problem with showing up for work. Do we really need a President who won’t be there when the country needs him?”

    Fade to black.

    The point is this: McCain is excruciatingly vulnerable. Hit him now, hit him hard, hit him from all sides, and hit him relentlessly. If he makes it through convention as the nominee, he’ll be crippled for the duration of the campaign….

  • McCain had no choice, including not voting.

    I think its the best thing he could have done as far as hampering his campaign in 6 months. Voting for it would have at least have given him the ability to say I tried. Against it, might have gotten him a little help from the base.

    Not voting, gee, do you think this might come up in 6 months a time or two when the economy is really in the crapper and the race is getting hot and heavy ??

    Anyone that thinks this package is going to do anything is living a pipe dream.
    There is a saying amongst traders, ‘never try to catch a falling knife’. It refers to buying stock that is in a free fall, folks we are in a free fall, and the stimulus package is nothing more then trying to catch that knife.

    My point, McCain not voting will make it so easy to put him on the spot and let him explain why exactly he didn’t do anything. “Maverick or coward, tell us John why you didn’t vote again even though you were in DC ??”

    Russert are you listening, that’s a gotcha question with meat on it ??

  • Yes, it looks kind of surreal for McCain not to show his backbone right after his victory on Super Tuesday.

    In any case, may be this might be a window of opportunity to add “Buy American” consideration into this bailout package.

  • Oh, Deb – did you get up on the wrong side of bed, again?

    This is a post on McCain not voting on the Senate economic stimulus bill that he has been out on the campaign trail bloviating about as if he really cares, so – silly me – I thought it a relevant question to ask if he gets any pushback from his home-state constituents. I provided the Project Vote Smart link with the suggestion that people check it out.

    I’m aware that ALL of the candidates have missed votes, but McCain has missed more than any of the candidates – believe it or not, this might actually play a role in the general election. And last I checked, McCain is on the other side of the political aisle.

    I’m not thrilled about Senators keeping their seats while trying to run for another office – I think it cheats the constituency, even if the Senate staffers are no doubt keeping their respective bosses in the loop. And that goes for all the senators who ran in this cycle.

  • ScottW, the Senate version is much less about “catching the knife” than the House version. I agree that a stimulus package will do little to change the economic fundamentals, but the progressive thing the Senate version does it try to provide a shield over those out of work, disabled or otherwise needing benefits, or on fixed income so the uncaught knife doesn’t stab them deeply. The Senate Democrats seem to understand that while the stimulus package is important PR to a country that wants a response, what really counts is the steps to ameliorate the pain the recession will impose on those most vulnerable.

  • Senate Republicans, true to form, filibustered the stimulus package.

    Did they? Or did they just threaten a “soft filibuster” like they always do. Seems to me it was the latter, in which case it’s disappointing to see it reported as a filibuster here…

  • Honestly, Harry Reid must be tone deaf. If he doesn’t see the difference between “Democrats didn’t have enough votes” versus “Republicans blocked” he is an idiot.

    Just because they’re procedurally the same thing doesn’t mean he shouldn’t push ever bad vote by the Republicans into the second framing.

  • Comments are closed.