In the Meantime
I warned folks here that while we were spending all of our time gawking and squawking at the White House's current discomfort with the Plame investigation some mean and nasty doings could be afoot in Congress. It now appears that my paranoia was not too far off base. The Specter-Harkin Stem Cell Research bill is now in some trouble.
As this article in the Washington Post points out, the addition of hearings for the Supreme Court nominee announced last night to the Senate agenda only makes it more tenuous that the stem cell bill will even come to the floor for a vote. That new chore, along with the competing bills introduced to peel off conservatives who had promised to vote for the Specter bill, does in fact complicate matters.
WASHINGTON -- Chances for a Senate vote soon on stem cell research grew uncertain Tuesday as the sponsors of a half-dozen bills haggled with each other and Majority Leader Bill Frist over which should come up for debate.
Asked whether the bill was stuck or even dead for the year, Frist, R-Tenn., said, "Not yet."
Frist, balancing the interests of the White House, Senate Republicans and his own presidential ambitions, has circulated proposals that would require any stem cell bill to get 60 votes instead of the normally required simple majority _ 51 if every senator votes. That could preclude the House bill or any of the Senate bills from reaching the White House. Frist's office noted that filibusters _ which require 60 votes to break _ have been promised by senators on both sides of the issue.
Specter and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, had announced months ago that their bill mirroring the House's version had more than 60 votes to pass. Smith, however, said Tuesday he counts only 54 votes if a competing measure also is debated on the Senate floor.
I'm afraid we've all dropped the ball on this. We've bought into the wall-to-wall coverage on the Rove/Lewis/Plame matter, and we're about to do the same on the nomination of Mr. Roberts to the Supreme Court. What is really galling about all of this is that the House managed to push through a bill that is comparable to the Specter bill, and if the Senate somehow manages to pass the Specter bill with 60 votes or more, a veto-override is a real possibility.
The fact that the Washington Post and the New York Times have covered the problem (albeit lightly) will hopefully catch more than my attention long enough for some phone calls and letters being dashed off to Senators urging them to vote for the Specter bill this session.
Go, contact your senator. Now.
As this article in the Washington Post points out, the addition of hearings for the Supreme Court nominee announced last night to the Senate agenda only makes it more tenuous that the stem cell bill will even come to the floor for a vote. That new chore, along with the competing bills introduced to peel off conservatives who had promised to vote for the Specter bill, does in fact complicate matters.
WASHINGTON -- Chances for a Senate vote soon on stem cell research grew uncertain Tuesday as the sponsors of a half-dozen bills haggled with each other and Majority Leader Bill Frist over which should come up for debate.
Asked whether the bill was stuck or even dead for the year, Frist, R-Tenn., said, "Not yet."
Frist, balancing the interests of the White House, Senate Republicans and his own presidential ambitions, has circulated proposals that would require any stem cell bill to get 60 votes instead of the normally required simple majority _ 51 if every senator votes. That could preclude the House bill or any of the Senate bills from reaching the White House. Frist's office noted that filibusters _ which require 60 votes to break _ have been promised by senators on both sides of the issue.
Specter and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, had announced months ago that their bill mirroring the House's version had more than 60 votes to pass. Smith, however, said Tuesday he counts only 54 votes if a competing measure also is debated on the Senate floor.
I'm afraid we've all dropped the ball on this. We've bought into the wall-to-wall coverage on the Rove/Lewis/Plame matter, and we're about to do the same on the nomination of Mr. Roberts to the Supreme Court. What is really galling about all of this is that the House managed to push through a bill that is comparable to the Specter bill, and if the Senate somehow manages to pass the Specter bill with 60 votes or more, a veto-override is a real possibility.
The fact that the Washington Post and the New York Times have covered the problem (albeit lightly) will hopefully catch more than my attention long enough for some phone calls and letters being dashed off to Senators urging them to vote for the Specter bill this session.
Go, contact your senator. Now.
posted by Diane at 5:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home