Home » Blog » Trade
Blog for America
Trade
Trade is an issue which, relative to more prominent issues, many do not feel strongly about. It is an issue upon which the mainstream candidates from each of the major parties agree, so it can not be used as an issue to inflame voters with partisanship and get them to go to the polls to vote against the opposition party. Trade is quite unlike the issues of abortion, or gay marriage, or the War in Iraq, in that respect. However, I believe that Trade is a very important issue which affects all of our lives here in the United States on a daily basis. Specifically, whether the United States assumes the policies of Free Trade or of Fair Trade.
Free Trade between countries is essentially when there are no restrictions whatsoever at their borders when it comes to trade. There are no tariffs, regulations, fees, etcetera. With Free Trade, trade is free and open between countries, and companies are allowed to ship their products across the border at very little cost. The argument for this is that it will raise the economic level of countries on both sides of the border. On the other side of the coin, there is Fair Trade. Fair Trade is basically the opposite of Free Trade. In Fair Trade, there are tariffs and regulations at the border. Trade is not open and free between countries. The argument for Fair Trade is that it will protect the workers on both sides of the border.
(Click Read More for the rest of this post)
Under Bill Clinton in the 1990s, we had Free Trade policies. During his terms in office, the NAFTA Treaty, between the United States, Mexico, and Canada, was signed, and it has created one of the largest Free Trade zones in the World. The purpose of NAFTA is to raise the economic level of the lesser economies (Mexico), by allowing them to participate in and benefit from the greater economies (United States). In this way, the total bloc of North America would be made more powerful economically. Currently, under George W. Bush, we have Free Trade policies. Bush has followed Clinton’s example concerning Trade. Both parties, Republican and Democratic, are in favor of Free Trade policies. All of the 2008 Presidential candidates, Republican and Democratic, are in favor of Free Trade, except for Mike Gravel and Ron Paul. So, Obama, Clinton, McCain, Romney, and Huckabee are all in support of Free Trade. Many ordinary Democrats and Republicans simply acquiesce in agreement in favor of Free Trade, for the reason that the leaders of their respective parties are in favor of it.
However, after some thought and discussion about the issue, I find myself very strongly opposed to Free Trade and very much in favor of Fair Trade. I will use NAFTA as an example. Specifically, the effect that NAFTA has upon the United States, Mexico, and workers from both countries.
Mexico imports 75% of its agricultural products from the United States. Because of Free Trade policies and NAFTA, it is cheaper to import the products than it is to just grow them in Mexico. There are no tariffs and trade restrictions, so it is very cheap to just buy the products from the U.S. and ship them across the border, compared to the greater cost of growing the products in Mexico. The result of less agricultural products being grown in Mexico is that Mexican agricultural workers lose their jobs. I should think that that certainly wouldn’t help Mexico’s economy. These Mexicans who have lost their agricultural jobs in Mexico then have to go to the United States to find work. As the jobs move to the United States, the workers have no choice but to move to the United States. This most certainly contributes to the illegal immigration “problem” in the United States, making Free Trade a concern to those who are advocating in favor of securing our borders. I think that if we had Free Trade rather than Fair Trade policies, and if there were tariffs at the border, Mexico would find it more beneficial to just grow the agricultural products in Mexico, and many Mexican agricultural workers would keep their jobs.
Of course, Free Trade between the United States and Mexico certainly doesn’t solely affect Mexico and Mexican workers. On the other side of the equation, the United States loses manufacturing jobs, due to Free Trade. American businesses ship the manufacturing jobs to Mexico for, in my mind, two main reasons: because (1) the workers in Mexico can be paid much less to do the same job and, plus, (2) there are no tariffs and restrictions due to Free Trade, so businesses can ship products across the border (to the United States) at no cost to them and still sell their products to American consumers (at a greater profit to the businesses). It’s a pretty sweet deal for those businesses who outsource jobs to Mexico. Maybe it wouldn’t be such an incentive to outsource jobs if we had some tariffs at the border that the businesses had to pay. The way it is set up now, wih Free Trade, outsourcing is doubly beneficial to the businesses who choose to outsource. Do we really want to encourage outsourcing of American jobs in this fashion? Wouldn’t it be better if we had some tariffs and restrictions on business and trade, in order to protect both American and Mexican workers?
From my point of view, from my perspective, it seems like we should put Fair Trade policies in place, rather than Free Trade policies. The economy of Mexico could better develop if the jobs were kept in Mexico, and the economy of the United States could better develop if the jobs were kept in the United States, in my opinion.
And I have been trying to determine why politicians from both parties, Democratic and Republican, are both very supportive of Free Trade policies and why few are supportive of Fair Trade policies and of protecting the worker. My ultimate conclusion was that politicians from both parties support Free Trade for the same reason that they support our corrupt income tax system: it helps the rich citizens and big corporations who fund their political campaigns.
Show: Expand All Reply
8:55 PM EST
free streaming live online simulcast of a live reunion concert tonight 2/4 by the surviving members of The Grateful Dead 7:30 PM PST (10:30 PM EST) on a stage in San Francisco in support of Barack Obama '08:
http://www.iclips.net/deadheadsforobama.php
Denise, it stayed around -6 all day, clear out. I guess our high would be right now, a balmy 2 , it has turned cloudy. It is 5:06 PM.
Thanks for the De Niro quote.
I find it very interesting that neither JE, Al or Richardson have endorsed, but I didn't think they would. Perhaps they feel as many JE supporters feel - that we are now stuck with the "two rock stars" ... so they are teaming up to be 3 kingmakers, pulling the party, hopefully to a true progressive left, instead of being more repug than dem at this point. Or maybe they will somehow pull off a brokered convention.
Phil, HC voting for Kyl-L also troubles me, but...BUT, BO was out on the campaign trail avoiding the vote completely...which makes him an avoider of deep issues and a bit of a coward. He seems to spend a lot of time talking in generalities and avoiding the very hard questions.
My 3 major issues are: 1. The ME and war and occupation; 2..the restoration of our Constitutional rights 3. and health care.
On 1, BO and HC fail miserably, since they will bow to the will of the corporations. AIPAC has both of them in it's pockets. And both of them owe the CM big time. (GE=war)
On 2, again they both fail miserably, BO more so, since he should know better. Neither addressed these issues leading me to believe that we will elect another bush, who keeps the power for him/herself.
On 3, Hillary's plan is better.
Most of the voters know nothing about the issues or voting records and these people will nominate one of two...war party and war party lite.
BO's statements on Pakistan are chilling. And his use of "actionable intel" is more chilling. Would he let his fans who voted for him decide what's actionable or isn't? Are his fans gonna set the date for withdrawal? Are his voting fans gonna talk to the big pharma?
It's a fairy tale to think that the voters will actually have a say in what the prez does. Would he take 50 polls a day to see what we think? How would he do that? Logistically it's impossible.
We elect people to represent us and most of them are horribly disappointing. Besides, half the dems don't even want him ... nor Hillary. The dem party is fractured.
Time for a truly progressive party. IMO
Called CA independents for an hour. No one answered their phone. Discouraging.
seashell :-)
Mon, 02/04/08
"It's a fairy tale to think that the voters will actually have a say in what the prez does. Would he take 50 polls a day to see what we think? How would he do that? Logistically it's impossible.
We elect people to represent us and most of them are horribly disappointing. Besides, half the dems don't even want him ... nor Hillary. The dem party is fractured.
Time for a truly progressive party. IMO"
So, what are you going to do about it, sea? You DO have the power.
9:12 PM, EST
My comment #2 was in response to seashell's comment #6.
How can you have a dialogue this way? HQ FIX THE FREAKING BLOG!!
Remember how much whining we heard for a while after some of the debates this year? We tend to forget the heated debates from 2003 and into 2004, especially when Howard got to be the frontrunner.
Sorry if this has been posted:
Garrison Keillor endorses Obama for president
ST. PAUL, Minn. – Garrison Keillor, host of public radio's “A Prairie Home Companion,” has endorsed Democratic Sen. Barack Obama for president, Obama's campaign announced Sunday.
“I'm happy to support your candidacy, which is so full of promise for our country,” the best-selling author and humorist wrote in a letter declaring his support. “Seven years of a failed presidency is a depressing thing, and the country is pressing for a change and looking for someone with clear vision who is determined to break through the rhetorical logjam and find sensible ways to move our country forward. That's you, friend.”
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20080203-1108-keillor-obama.html
OMG, hubby just gave me mail.
He asked why we were receiving an overnmight package from the US Dpt of Energy National Nuclear Security Adminstration.
This is the Environmental Impact Summary for the Nuclear Bombplex that has been proposed.
THIS IS HUGE. IT IS A FRIGGIN BOOK.
oh goodie.
rae don't be discouraged. It's rush hour at the moment and many have a heck of a commute - or they could be having dinner at the moment.
But you can call me :) I'm done with my tuna sandwich LOL
Cool - Jerry McNerney was just on our local ABC news about oil drilling and its effect on polar bears. We need to keep this man in office!
Military donations going to...not McCain or Hillary.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/...
Also, this shows where the lobbyists are sending their bucks - no surprises.
Those sane CA folks who want privacy in their lives are probably screening all incoming calls, rae (and have been over-saturated, is my guess).
I always do--unless it's someone on my Caller ID, I never pick up, or review messages.
Delete and mute buttons are my friend....
Don't take it personally.
Phonebanking is a PITA; and doesn't do diddly squat.
They are not enrolled in a party, 'cuz they don't wanna be.
rae hart -- nominate you for a Howardly for canvassing in AK.
11.
seashell :-)
Mon, 02/04/08
My 3 major issues are: 1. The ME and war and occupation; 2..the restoration of our Constitutional rights 3. and health care.
On 1, BO and HC fail miserably, since they will bow to the will of the corporations. AIPAC has both of them in it's pockets. And both of them owe the CM big time. (GE=war)
On 2, again they both fail miserably, BO more so, since he should know better. Neither addressed these issues leading me to believe that we will elect another bush, who keeps the power for him/herself.
On 3, Hillary's plan is better.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Seashell, Barack has definite plans for the war, he talks about 2 in his stump speech over and over (restore the Constitution, restore Habeas Corpus), and his health plan is about the same as Hill except for the mandate bit. All this stuff is spelled out and very clickable on his website or if you'd just LISTEN to a stump speech you might get some more info.
As for me, I'm tired of trying to rebut the repeated misinformation being set forth on the blog -- there's opinion and there's fact. 'Facts' are being stated that we've refuted with links and quotes over and over and you folks simply are not listening.
So goodnite all -- I'm tired. Other things to stress over. Blog s/b fun, not stressful. Tomorrow will be never ending. Hope it doesn't end up like NH.
Interesting article here and ties into today's spirited debate on health care costs -
Healthy people cost society more: study
February 4, 2008
FROM ASSOCIATED PRESS
LONDON — Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it doesn’t save money, researchers reported Monday.
It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.
‘‘It was a small surprise,’’ said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the Netherlands’ National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, who led the study. ‘‘But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more.’’
In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/77600...
Hey my phone just rang but by the time I got to it, my machine picked up. 888 number, probably was rae :)
:waving at mainefem:
Check Out This Heart-Warming Yet Chilly Story At Least Partially About the Fifty State Strategy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0,,2251763,00.html
Tomorrow is Mardi Gras.
Thinking of you, jc
L'aissez les bon temps roullez - je te manque beaucoup, cher.
19. Denise - About now during Mardi Gras jc would be talking about what she was having for a special dinner. I do miss jc. If she were around - I'm sure she would have made a special coffee mug with whatever candidates likeness on it that we are supporting...
I think rae hart will enjoy the posting linked to by PA about Alaska. Very cool.
mary - sigh....yes she would
In Chicago's Polish neighborhoods, Paczki day is celebrated. A paczki is a deep fried cake filled with jelly or custard. A last hurrah before the lenten sacrifices as well.
10:49 PM EST
http://www.fijilive.com/news_new/index.php/news/show_news/1633
Current time in Fiji: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:46 pm
Obama wins first voting abroad
05 FEB 2008
US Democratic Party voters in Indonesia, where Barack Obama spent part of his childhood, handed him a win over Hillary Clinton in the first voting abroad on "Super Tuesday," party officials said.
Seventy-five percent of nearly 100 votes cast by expatriate Americans just past midnight (1700 GMT Monday) went to Obama and 25 percent went to Clinton, Democrats Abroad officials here said.
...
rdorgan - I hope this is the beginning of Barack's Super Tuesday. But I don't want to get my hopes up too high. :-)
11:02 PM EST
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janet-ritz/the-environmentalist-our_b_84979.html
Janet Ritz
THE ENVIRONMENTALIST: Our Reasons for Choosing ObamaPosted February 4, 2008 | 08:49 PM (EST)
The contributing writers at The Environmentalist, where I am the managing editor, just completed a conference call to discuss which candidate we felt would be most effective on the environment.
The consensus: Senator Barack Obama.
...
Our reason for choosing Senator Obama:
1. The endorsements .... in order to insure Democratic electoral results at the state and national level. Senator Obama's appeal to Independents and disaffected Republicans seems more likely to provide that outcome. This consideration is important to the environment, as a strong state and national legislative majority will be an imperative to undo the damage done.
2. The potential for international cooperation: The environment is by its nature global.
...
In terms of policies, we were encouraged by the growing detail on Senator Obama's website and look forward to more specifics from all the candidates as the campaign progresses.
Here are links to some of Senator Obama's environmental proposals we reviewed:
* Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050
* Invest in a Clean Energy Future
* Support Next Generation Biofuels
* Set America on Path to Oil Independence
* Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030
* Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change
...
Oh come on, rd, what does The Environmentalist know? ;)
Thanks for the post
In for one post, then gone. Just FYI, here is general information about the historic Global Primary being held by Dems Abroad.
We are Howard's guinea pigs.
Because I happen to be stateside right now and am registered both for the Global Primary and in MD, I am able to choose which I wish to participate in but I am not able to vote twice.
This information is provided to each of us in English and in Spanish.
**************
Dear xxxxxxxxxx,
Thank you for choosing to participate in Democrats Abroad's historic online Global Presidential Primary. Here's what you need to know to cast your vote.
HOW
Go to www.DemocratsAbroadPrimary.org/voting/
Your Ballot Number: xxxxxxxxxx
Your Personal Identification Number (PIN): xxxxxxxxxxx
Additional information will be requested to authenticate your identity.
WHEN
You can log in and vote anytime between Tuesday, February 5 at GMT+13 and Tuesday, February 12 at GMT-10.
PAPER TRAIL
You will be asked to print a copy of your ballot before you logout. We encourage you to do so.
NOVEMBER BALLOT
This online voting system is available for the Democrats Abroad primary election only. In November, you need to vote the old-fashioned way. Go to www.VoteFromAbroad.org to request a ballot from the state where you last resided in the U.S.
NO DOUBLE VOTING!
The Global Presidential Primary is the full legal equivalent of a state primary election. Democrats Abroad will send 22 delegates to the Democratic National Convention. You may not vote for president in any state primary election - by absentee ballot or in person - or participate in any state caucus. You may not participate in Democrats Abroad's Global Presidential Primary if you have already voted in any state primary or caucus.
Thank you for voting and ensuring that your voice is heard this February.
Christine Schon Marques
International Chair
Democrats Abroad
Hmmm...military people back the two candidates who didn't follow Bush blindly into Iraq or support him now.
Annilow, it's hard to listen to stump speeches when the cands. never come to our states and the CM covers only sound bytes.
These questions should have been posed at the debates and again, our CM fails us.
11:14 PM EST
Indeed, mary vb, The Environmentalist organization and Americans abroad in Indonesia, what were they thginking of !? [smile]
Well, off for the night (tomorrow will be a looooooooonnnnggggggg day)
seashell - the debates are wholly disappointing. Lots of gotcha questions. They also don't seem to follow up with any fact checking on the spot - which I assume may be difficult. The best resources are their websites for where they stand on issues, their voting records and maybe your gut feelings.
CSPAN and CNN was broadcasting large portions of stump speeches throughout the weekend. Many are also posted on You Tube if one cares to listen to them. They are also posted on some candidate websites.
Well, I just scoured BO's website, after I waded thru him want my email addy and zip code, (and not getting it) but I finally found something about issues. There was nothing on the restoration of Constitutional rights. Çonsitution was not even on the issues list.
So...someone please quote what and where and when he spoke of Haebus Corpus, the MCA, the repealing of that and the Patriot Act, the closing of Gitmo, abuse of veto power, snooping on citizens...etc
Nothing about that on his website.
Hey Sea, I just googled "obama habeas corpus" and pulled up lots of stuff.
I am not being snotty so don't take this the wrong way - but there is quite a bit out there on it from him.
Seek and ye shall find! :)
Sea here is one to start you off
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060927-fl...
HABEAS LAWYERS FOR OBAMA
http://habeaslawyersforobama.blogspot.co...
Jan. 31, 1008
Dear Friends:
We are at a critical point in the Presidential campaign, and as lawyers who have been deeply involved in the Guantanamo litigation to preserve the important right to habeas corpus, we are writing to urge you to support Senator Obama.
The Administration's Guantanamo policies have undercut our values at home and stained our reputation around the world. All of us are lawyers who have worked on the Guantanamo habeas corpus litigation for many years, some of us since early 2002, and we were all deeply involved in opposing the Administration’s attempt to overturn the Supreme Court's Rasul decision by stripping the courts of jurisdiction to hear the Guantanamo cases. We have talked with Senator Obama about why the Guantanamo litigation is so significant, and we have worked closely with Senator Obama in the fight to preserve habeas corpus.
Some politicians are all talk and no action. But we know from first-hand experience that Senator Obama has demonstrated extraordinary leadership on this critical and controversial issue. When others stood back, Senator Obama helped lead the fight in the Senate against the Administration's efforts in the Fall of 2006 to strip the courts of jurisdiction, and when we were walking the halls of the Capitol trying to win over enough Senators to beat back the Administration's bill, Senator Obama made his key staffers and even his offices available to help us. Senator Obama worked with us to count the votes, and he personally lobbied colleagues who worried about the political ramifications of voting to preserve habeas corpus for the men held at Guantanamo. He has understood that our strength as a nation stems from our commitment to our core values, and that we are strong enough to protect both our security and those values. Senator Obama demonstrated real leadership then and since, continuing to raise Guantanamo and habeas corpus in his speeches and in the debates.
The writ of habeas corpus dates to the Magna Carta, and was enshrined by the Founders in our Constitution. The Administration's attack on habeas corpus rights is dangerous and wrong. America needs a President who will not triangulate this issue. We need a President who will restore the rule of law, demonstrate our commitment to human rights, and repair our reputation in the world community. Based on our work with him, we are convinced that Senator Obama can do this because he truly feels these issues "in his bones."
We urge you to support Senator Obama.
We encourage you to forward this message to anyone who might be interested.
Signed by numerous attorneys that can be found at this link
http://www.democrats.com/node/15557
Contrasting Messages
Clinton: "Change is hard."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/us/politics/05campaign.html?hp
Obama:" Yes. We. Can."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ebgLiU_0Ys4
Obama (d)
IRAQ WAR WITHDRAWAL: He was not in office at the time of the vote to authorize the war, and says that he would have voted against it. He has pledged to pull all combat brigades out of Iraq “within 16 months.”
FISA/WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING: He says that this practice will not be allowed under his administration, and also opposes telecom immunity.
NAFTA and “Free” Trade: Obama voted against CAFTA, and, like his fellow frontrunner, has demonstrated a balanced view toward trade. However, his rhetoric has been a bit harsher, saying that he would seek “amendments” to NAFTA.
Immigration: Voted in favor of building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and increasing penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants, but joined Edwards in co-sponsoring tuition legislation and supports a guest-worker program.
Torture: Obama voted against the MCA, saying that the bill authorized torture: “This is not how a serious administration would approach the problem of terrorism, and the sad part about all of this is that this betrayal of American values is unnecessary.”
Abortion: Obama says that a women’s ability to choose is a fundamental right. Obama introduced the “Prevention Through Affordable Access Act” in the Senate to make birth control more available to teens and the poor.
Health Care: Obama has proposed a nationwide health-care program modeled around the benefits available to Congress members. The plan guarantees universal eligibility, but mandates only health care for children.
Energy Policy: Obama’s proposal to reduce carbon emissions echoes California’s currently successful policy, focusing on reducing transportation emissions and oil dependence and creating market-based incentives for research and investment in clean energy.
http://www.metroland.net/features.html
Positions for other candidates can be found at the above link as well.
I just heard Obama speaking about restoring Habeus Corpus tonight on the Jeff Farius Show on Nova M Network (1480 am KPHX in Phoenix).
There is a new post. And it's a mouthful. Reason and Logic.
there is a new thread on this poor broken bloggie.
11pmcst--Sunlight, I missed your new post post 'til mine kinda krunked up there w/yours. It's a lot like cowlot bingo, casting nuggets on this field.
Sorry, it's called a new thread.
Got carried away reading a new 'thread' that I mislabeled it post.
Posting is very difficult when doing it timelessly.
12:02 am
Seashell....
You were asked how would the Pres. know what we wanted, would they have to take a poll? Well, no, not if they did what Howard said when he told us we could have a blog in the WH. They could just take a running pulse.
Agreed to H.R. 3199 Conference Report; USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005
Vote Summary
Question: On the Conference Report (H.R. 3199 Conference Report )
Vote Number: 29 Vote Date: March 2, 2006, 03:01 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Conference Report Agreed to
Measure Number: H.R. 3199
Measure Title: A bill to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 89
NAYs 10
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Yea
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dole (R-NC), Yea Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Not Voting
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---89
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT) Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY) Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
NAYs ---10
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Feingold (D-WI) Harkin (D-IA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI) Murray (D-WA)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 1
Inouye (D-HI)
Rejected Kerry Amdt. No. 4442; To require the redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq in order to further a political solution in Iraq, encourage the people of Iraq to provide for their own security, and achieve victory in the war on terror.
Question: On the Amendment (Kerry Amdt. No. 4442 )
Vote Number: 181 Vote Date: June 22, 2006, 11:07 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766
Statement of Purpose: To require the redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq in order to further a political solution in Iraq, encourage the people of Iraq to provide for their own security, and achieve victory in the war on terror.
Vote Counts: YEAs 13
NAYs 86
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Allen (R-VA), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burns (R-MT), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Nay
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Frist (R-TN), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hagel (R-NE), Nay
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Nay
Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Martinez (R-FL), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Nay McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Nay
Obama (D-IL), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Not Voting
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Santorum (R-PA), Nay
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Smith (R-OR), Nay
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (R-PA), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Nay
Sununu (R-NH), Nay
Talent (R-MO), Nay
Thomas (R-WY), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---13
Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs ---86
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeMint (R-SC) DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY) Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Not Voting - 1
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Howard ... from Geneva
==============
Last Time!! SUPER TUESDAY
Events in Geneva, Zurich and Basel.
A. If you registered for Internet Voting in the Global Primary by the January 31st deadline, you should have received voting instructions from our International Chair Christine Schon Marques in an email.
GO VOTE !! and make Internet Voting a success.
See the Howard Dean YouTube Video, made from Governor Deans remarks in Geneva January 23rd, after you vote. You will feel good about making history!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALii8OWkl...
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
-
By Michael Ellis on Feb 4, 2008 8:43 PM ESTFirst................was up late last night partying...............just got a nap in.............time for naother victory cigar