07/17/2009
BREAKING...Senate Dems pass hate crimes as Amendment to Defense spending bill Obama promised to Veto
As President Obama addressed the NAACP in New York, the US Senate was busy passing the most sweeping hate crimes bill in 40 years. Supported the president, the new legislation l would expand hate crimes definitions to include physical disability, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation if also passed in its current form by the House.
That said, there are other very real potential pitfalls though it passed with more than the necessary 60 votes to end discussion. Democratic Senate leader attached this hate crimes legislation to the "must pass" Defense spending bill that President Obama has said he will veto. Also opposed by the pentagon, the administration struck an alliance last week with Republican Senator John McCain and made clear it's intention to veto defense spending if it included further funding of the f-22.
Democrats continue to defend the necessity of attaching hate crimes expansion to other legislation in light of the consistent and long term foot dragging by Republican colleagues that have held back attempts to pass the popular legislation named for Matthew Shepard.
Not done yet...
More from Associate Press, Advocate
Posted 2:23 AM EST by Michael Goff in Barack Obama, Crime, Harry Reid, John McCain, Matthew Shepard, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not protest;
I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.
So I ask myself “why”
Why is this happening to me?
He/She was not me, yet he/she was me
He/She did not live as me, yet I lived as him/her
He/She did not aspire like me, yet I aspired just like him/her
He/She did not thrive like me, yet I thrived just like him/her
So I ask myself “why?”
I personally decided not to see things that we shared
And the things we even had to lived for
I embraced a will that nurtured hardness of the heart
Posted by: Layla Miller | Jul 17, 2009 3:10:49 AM
they can blame republicans all they want (which they should) BUT there are 60 democrats in the senate now - there are no excuses.
Posted by: KFLO | Jul 17, 2009 3:14:01 AM
@KFLO
EXACTLY. The reason they are attaching it to this Defense spending bill is because so many DEMOCRATS would vote against it if it weren't. It has nothing to do with Republicans at all.
This country is ripe for a new political party that real progressives can vote for.
Posted by: Mike | Jul 17, 2009 5:32:57 AM
The hate crimes amendment - not the DOD authorization bill itself - was approved 63 to 28. I don't know how they can blame this on the Republicans at all. 63 is bigger than 60. That's three votes more than they need to break a Republican filibuster. More likely, they're trying to use Matthew Shepard as a pawn to pressure Obama into accepting their porky F-22s.
As usual, Washington politicians play games. And we lose.
Posted by: John | Jul 17, 2009 10:05:31 AM
John
exactly!
"More likely, they're trying to use Matthew Shepard as a pawn to pressure Obama into accepting their porky F-22s."
Posted by: jimmyboyo | Jul 17, 2009 10:15:21 AM
Sweet Jesus.....can't you get legislation on distinct and separate issues passed in clear and concise enactments without the mish-mash bullshit ? And Mike, if Democrats would vote against an anti-discrimination Act, let's hold their feet to the fire, let's see which bastards are so bigoted......let them stand up and we will remember them when the time comes......
Posted by: JackFknTwist | Jul 17, 2009 10:17:13 AM
First off, there are not 60 Democrats in Congress. There are 60 members of Congress in the caucus, but they are not all Democrats. Also, I am fairly certain not every Democrat supports hate crimes legislation b/c they find it to be policing thought. In fact I know many gays who do not support it for that reason. If you're a libertarian, chances are you're opposed to such legislation. So the idea that a Democrat will simply vote for it on its own because they have a D behind their name is misleading. Personally I hate these attachments to try to coerce passing something unrelated. If the two have nothing to do with each other, they should not be in the same bill. That, or the President should be allowed a Line Item Veto. They tried that a decade ago and the SC said no.
The only person who should be taking blame for this is Harry Reid.
Posted by: Alex | Jul 17, 2009 10:37:29 AM
1. The two "independents," Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman, are both solidly behind this legislation, I'm not sure what the difference is between them and the Democrats. They're not going to join any filibuster. Your point doesn't seem to have a point.
2. They did vote for it on its own. Once again, the 63-28 vote was on the hate crimes amendment rather than the bill itself. This wasn't a conference report addendum that Pelosi and Reid dropped into the legislation at the last minute.
It was introduced as a regular amendment and voted on by the full Senate. Had they voted to reject the amendment, it wouldn't have defeated the DOD authorization bill in any way, shape, or form. They're using this amendment - which they know the White House wants - to get Obama to compromise on the F-22s. No doubt about that. But your suggestion that this was some sort of smoky, backroom deal and that it couldn't pass on its own is dubious.
3. Who are you kidding, really? A "libertarian" is an unregistered Republican. Consevatives like to say they're libertarian because they think it makes them sound more independent and less like religious sheep. But it really is a meaningless distinction politically. Studies of so-called libertarian voting patterns in partisan elections suggest these folks break for the GOP at a rate of about 9 to 1. They're actually more Republican than the Rockefeller types.
Posted by: John | Jul 17, 2009 11:15:24 AM
I agree with the posters above--looks like Harry Reid and co. are trying to use the Hate Crime legislation as pawn to ram through extra defense spending. I understand politics is "the art of the possible" (and sausage-making), but this really chaps my hide. Matthew's been gone for 11 years folks; how much longer is this obscene delay going to continue?
Posted by: Dback | Jul 17, 2009 11:54:42 AM
Some Republicans also voted for it.
Posted by: Cyd | Jul 17, 2009 2:09:56 PM
Harry Reid is a Mormon. Who funds assaults on our rights more than any other group besides the Knights of Columbus?
Duh, folks!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Bruce Mayhall | Jul 18, 2009 10:29:19 AM