Why did Reid vote AGAINST the Iraq debate?

[Kelvin Mace]

Am I missing some subtle parliamentary trick here?

http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00044

Reid (D-NV), Nay

I mean he was on the news railing against the GOP, yet he voted with them?

[Mass]

1. PROCEDURAL VOTE, so that he can bring the bill back to the floor.

[Kelvin Mace]

3. Could you explain

this one. I'm sorry, I am rusty on parliamentary skulduggery.

[Kber]

12. "Debate" in this case is a tool to keep the motion from coming to a vote.

He was attempting to end the debate because he wanted the senate to vote on the motion now.

The republicans are keeping the issue open, and therefore not allowing the Iraq war resolutions to be voted apon.

Is that clearer?

[Igel]

14. You can only move to reconsider if you were on the

winning side in the first vote on the motion. Otherwise the folk on the losing side could simply move to reconsider over and over and generally be more annoying than anybody has a right to be.

If only people opposed to cloture (closing debate) had voted to end cloture, and none of them ever changed their minds, the motion would be dead for the current session. You can't resubmit the same motion twice in a session; you have to alter it to make it "substantially" (whatever that means to the chair) a new motion, or there must be new information/context to change how a motion is viewed.

Since Reid voted to oppose cloture, and the cloture motion failed, it means he was on the winning side. That grants him the right to move to reconsider, should circumstances change. It's assumed that all votes are made in good faith, not playing parliamentary games; for one of the winners to move to reconsider means s/he changed his/her mind--and since changes of mind aren't trivial, there must be either new information or a new context for the motion that alters the motion's importance or meaning.

[Rose Siding]

4. This is true

[bigtree]

6. the rules of the Senate can be very limiting, and enabling of the minority

in their obstruction

[ixion]

9. too bad the dems didn't use exploit that leverage when they were in the minority

they were too busy 'keeping their powder dry'.

[bigtree]

10. I agree with that

[Igel]

15. Robert's Rules of Order--and most others--

stem from the old liberal tradition in which free debate was important, and the rights of a minority in a committee (the Congress is a committee for this purposes) are protected. The problem is how to protect minority rights and not completely hamstring a committee.

Some minority rights can't be abrogated; some can be, if a supermajority votes on them. It's a compromise.

I've both chaired and participated in many meetings, and hated it when my views were the majority's viewed and were thwarted. But I've also chaired or participated in many meetings in which I held the minority opinion. Sometimes I/we could stop what we thought was a horrible decision; sometimes I or we couldn't, but I learned to respect the compromise. It's imperfect, but it's far better than having everything decided by a 50% + 1 vote.

(And I've gotten very many nasty looks when I employed the device Reid used in this cloture vote. It pays to know the rules of order, charter, and bylaws inside out. I view it as "being aware of one's environment".)

[skipos]

2. A technicality. SO he can bring up the vote again I guess. nt

[babylonsister]

5. He knew they didn't have the votes. I recall Frist doing this last year, I think.

Next topic, the budget. I don't really agree with that as the war is a major part of the budget, but I don't know. I have to believe he knows what he's doing.

[tuvor]

7. From AmericaBlog: "just a procedural thing"

"And as an aside, Senator Reid is reported as voting for the filibuster, but that's just a procedural thing - he voted against it, then switched his vote at the end because it gives him the ability to make additional motions that can be useful in the future - i.e., don't sweat it, he voted against the filibuster."

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2007/02/republicans-filibuster-any-discussion.html

[Kelvin Mace]

8. Thank you

[Beelzebud]

11. So he can bring it up again at a later date. Same reason Frist always voted with the Dems.

There is plenty to pissed off at the Dem leadership for, this isn't one of them.

[Kelvin Mace]

13. That's why I asked

I wanted to get the facts before I started making phone calls. :)

As usual, DUers have helped clarify a murky situation.