It Looks Like We Win!

[wewoapsiak]

Can someone point me to the vote details? I would like to see which Senators voted for the amendment and how our 2 from Tennessee voted.

Click on 00097 and I think it'll give you the votes an hour after it happens

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/a_three_sections_with_teasers/votes.htm

Edited April 17, 2013 by wewoapsiak

[Garufa]

It's still gonna be a long hard ride....I'm glad, but the vote was closer than I'd hoped it would be.  There's lot's more coming.  46 voted for it.  Must be the same 46 that voted FOR the UN Small Arms Treaty.....

 

54 voted FOR it, 46 against.  Not enough for it to pass.

 

McCain one of 4 repubs voting for.  The Tennessee twits voted against.

Edited April 17, 2013 by Garufa

[The Legion]

From what I can tell 4 Republicans voted for the bill.

 

Only four Republican senators committed to voting for the amendment ahead of time. The last was Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who announced his support Wednesday afternoon. The other three were Toomey, Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/17/background-check-plan-in-trouble-as-dems-call-votes-on-gun-bill/#ixzz2QkwpOrvK

[mikegideon]

From CNN, if you can believe what they say...

 

In a major defeat for supporters of tougher gun laws, the Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on firearms sales.

 

The bipartisan compromise was championed by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and backed by President Barack Obama in his push for a package of gun laws in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre.

 

Votes on other amendments are upcoming. Follow them live on CNN.com

[CJDore]

Background checks ammendment defeated 54-46 in Senate
Fienstein Ammendment (assault weapons ban) failed 60-40

We are batting 1000% today

[mikegideon]

Dang... Barry's pissed! I usually won't watch him, but had to take a moment to enjoy his ass whippin' :rofl: . He swears it's just round one.

[Troutburger]

54-46 is too close for comfort

[mikegideon]

54-46 is too close for comfort

 

6 votes. I figured it would be closer than that.

[rugerla1]

54-46 is too close for comfort

Yes sir it is, and they'll keep coming, its not over.

[gregintenn]

If they even vote today. Both of our guys have said they will vote against it.

So...did they?

 

Why lookie there! They did vote against it.

                      http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00097#state

Edited April 17, 2013 by gregintenn

[Oh Shoot]

So I've lost track. What's left of the original bill that all these were amendments to? As I understand it, it is much worse than the Manchin-Toomey amendment.

 

Was the whole bill also voted down along with the 60 vote agreement on the amendments?

 

- OS

Edited April 17, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[bubbadavis]

We've won the battle - but the war ain't over by a long shot!

[Superman]

So did Harry Reid

[Oh Shoot]

So did Harry Reid

 

Yep. Whole reason he allowed the vote. He's been caught in the middle on all this anti-gun stuff.

 

- OS

[Raoul]

Don't let your guard down. This ain't over. It's just started.

[Oh Shoot]

I realize they they understand the finer points of the procedure. If they screw it up, they'll be held accountable. We KNOW it will pass with 51.

 

Never mind, I see the 60 vote was a procedural deal so all amendments could be voted on one after another, without debate for each one. Conventional way would have only required 51 votes for each, but could have drug out for weeks.

 

I was wrong about it being "cloture" at this point. This explains it well for anyone else who didn't quite grok it:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/17/the-gun-amendments-need-60-votes-to-pass-but-why/

 

And as far as the whole background check thing apparently shot down, at least for the rest of this calendar year, let me say I've never been happier to have been wrong!!

 

- OS

Edited April 17, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[mikegideon]

Never mind, I see the 60 vote was a procedural deal so all amendments could be voted on one after another, without debate for each one. Conventional way would have only required 51 votes for each, but could have drug out for weeks.

 

I was wrong about it being "cloture" at this point. This explains it well for anyone else who didn't quite grok it:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/17/the-gun-amendments-need-60-votes-to-pass-but-why/

 

And as far as the whole background check thing apparently shot down, at least for the rest of this calendar year, let me say I've never been happier to have been wrong!!

 

- OS

 

I thought you were wrong, but try to be gentle with you old guys :)

[Oh Shoot]

I thought you were wrong, but try to be gentle with you old guys :)

 

Thanks, sonny.

[mikegideon]

Don't let your guard down. This ain't over. It's just started.

 

I'm not letting my guard down. I still don't expect gun control to get much more popular. We won this fair and square. It's especially gratifying that Feinstein got a mudhole stomped in her ass.

[Raoul]

Thanks, sonny.

Eh?

[Oh Shoot]

I'm not letting my guard down. I still don't expect gun control to get much more popular. We won this fair and square. It's especially gratifying that Feinstein got a mudhole stomped in her ass.

 

Well, to be fair, unfortunately I'm not for sure wrong until the end of the 113th, so still a better part of two years to go on my prediction.

 

Then of course, the midterms to determine what things look like in the 114th.

 

- OS

[RED333]

Democrats who defected and voted "no":

North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp 

Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor

Alaska Sen. Mark Begich

Montana Sen. Max Baucus

Nevada Sen. Harry Reid (Reid only voted no for procedural reasons, so that Democrats can call up the provision later on)

Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2013/04/17/senators-who-crossed-party-lines-background-check-vote/#ixzz2QlbMid47

 

What does this mean, Reid voted no, so it can be called back up, need some help on this one.

Edited April 17, 2013 by RED333

[Garufa]

I just can't seem to get too excited.  It will come up again and again and again until it is passed.  May take a while, but it will happen.

 

Democrats will eventually have a majority, it is folly to think otherwise.  Then the game is up.

Edited April 17, 2013 by Garufa

[Oh Shoot]

....

What does this mean, Reid voted no, so it can be called back up, need some help on this one.

 

Question raised already, no idea, never heard that one before.

 

- OS

[gregintenn]

Whadda ya say we send an email thanking Corker and Alexander for voting correctly today. Goodness knows we're on their hind ends about this and other things. A word of encouragement may or may not help, but it sure couldn't hurt.