 |
 |
Brownback plans stem cell filibuster by kos Thu Jan 04, 2007 at 10:35:25 AM PST The stem cell research issue cost Republicans at least one race -- the Missouri Senate seat. And as we saw yesterday, it's an issue that polls well for Democrats: Funding embryonic stem cell research: 62/32/6 Yet despite being supported 2-1 by the American people, Senate Republicans led by Kansas' Sam Brownback plan a "mini-filibuster", according to Bob Novak in his latest Evans-Novak Political Report (via email, but available at the wingnut Human Events website): Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), a master obstructer during two years as Senate minority leader, is about to get a taste of obstruction himself. Passage this year of embryonic stem-cell research legislation that was vetoed by Bush last year is a prime Democratic priority. But Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), a leader of the social conservatives, plans a mini-filibuster that will delay passage at least three weeks. And if it passes, are there enough votes to override a presidential veto? Novak thinks it would be close. This is an issue where the vote will be very close on overturning President Bush's veto in both Houses. House passage over Bush's veto will be difficult, since 12 of the Republicans who lost voted for federal funding of embryo-destroying research. It is unclear how some of the new Democrats in the House will vote as well. With Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) currently on the sidelines, the Senate overriding vote could come down to Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.). Casey told at least one news outlet during the campaign that he supports Bush's policy and would not back the current bill, which would overturn Bush's policy. Hmm, is that so? 63 Senators voted for the last stem cell research bill. Only one Dem voted against it -- Ben Nelson. So of the Democrats who were around in 2006, that leaves us with 41 votes. Sanders replaces Jeffords, so we keep that vote. We're at 42. We'll keep our pro-stem cell research votes in Minnesota and Maryland, which gets us to 44. In addition, 19 Republicans voted for stem cell reseearch -- Alexander, Bennet, Burr, Chafee, Cochran, Collins, Frist, Gregg, Hatch, Bailey, Hutchinson, Lott, Lugar, McCain, Murkowski, Smith, Snowe, Specter, Stevens, and Warner. Frist wasn't a real vote -- he voted "for" it because it gave him the parliamentary right to revisit the vote. So of those 18 real votes, only Chafee is gone, and he was replaced with a likely "pro" vote. So that puts us at 62. We need five more. Of the 37 "no" votes, the following are now gone -- Allen, Burns, DeWine, Santorum, and Talent. We would need all five to override a veto, so Novak was right, Casey could be the swing vote. And as Novak notes, Casey opposes expanding stem cell research funding. But here's the rub for opponents -- the following "no" Republicans face tough reelection fights in tough battleground states, and won't want to be the next Jim Talent (who lost his reelection bid in large part because of this issue): Allard in Colorado, Coleman in Minnesota, Dole in North Carolina, and Sununu in New Hampshire. Do they really want to give Democrats such an easy, fat, juicy target? I would bet that at least one flips. And if they don't, I would bet that stem cell research would be one of the biggest bats used to beat them to a bloody electoral pulp in 2008. Meanwhile, the House actually had a vote to override the president's veto, and the override garnered 235 votes out of 428 present, or well short of the 282 or whatever votes needed to override Bush's veto (remember that it's 2/3rds of House members present). Even with the Dems 30 new seats, we'd still be short over a dozen votes necessary to override. Are there enough "moderate" Republicans, fearful of reelection left to switch their votes? Perhaps, but it would be tough. So as important as it is to get this passed now rather than later, Republicans would end up doing Democrats a political favor by stymying these efforts. Not only would it provide further ammunition against them in the 2008 Congressional races, but also inject the issue into the White House race. As noted above, the issue polls a spectacular 2-1 in our favor. It has already directly cost the GOP one Senate seat. And if Republicans continue to stand in the way of life-saving medical research, it'll end up costing them far more. :: Tags: Stem Cell Research (all tags) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn