Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) and several Democratic senators are holding a press conference Thursday morning to "show broad support for repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the lame duck session" as part of the National Defense Appropriations Act, according to Lieberman's press secretary Erika Masonhall.
The senators expected to join Lieberman at the press conference are both California Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) (his Republican successor has not yet been certified and sworn in), Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD). They may be joined by other senators. Also there will be Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, Aubrey Sarvis, Executive Director, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, J. Alexander Nicholson III, Executive Director, Servicemembers United, and representatives from the Center for American Progress Action Fund and The Third Way.
Masonhall said the senators are expected to call on the Democratic leadership, specifically on Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Carl Levin, chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, "to bring this vote up."
Maasonhall also said she expects Sen. Lieberman to press for the expedited release of the Pentagon's survey on the impact of the repeal of DADT. She noted that Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who's been leading the repeal charge on the other side of the aisle, "feels strongly" that releasing the survey as soon as possible is "good for the process" so the senators can begin the process of having an open debate.
News of the press conference comes on a day when White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told The Advocate that repealing DADT before the end of the year is "a priority" for President Barack Obama.
Earlier in the day, White House spokesperson Shin Inouye released a statement that said:
Today, President Obama called Chairman Levin to reiterate his commitment on keeping the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' in the National Defense Authorization Act, and the need for the Senate to pass this legislation during the lame duck. The President's call follows the outreach over the past week by the White House to dozens of Senators from both sides of the aisle on this issue.
Inouye later said:
Today, Jim Messina, Phil Schiliro, Chris Kang and Brian Bond from the White House, along with stakeholders, met with senior staff from Majority Leader Reid's office to discuss the importance of moving forward with the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act and the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' during the lame duck. The President has also previously conveyed this message directly to Senator Reid.
In September, Republicans refused to vote on a measure that would allow debate on the defense bill with the DADT repeal because, they said, Reid restricted introduction and debate of amendments, against tradition.
Meanwhile, LGBT repeal advocates have been concerned about news reports that Levin was cutting a deal with anti-gay Republican Sen. John McCain to remove the repeal provision in order to pass the defense bill.
The American public seems to be increasingly more comfortable with open service for gays. A CNN poll taken November 11-14 reported that 72 percent of respondents said they favor permitting people who are openly gay or lesbian to serve in the military. Only 23 percent opposed. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday, which asked different questions, reported that: "Fully 50% of those surveyed said gays should be allowed to serve openly, while 38% said they favor allowing gays to serve under the current "don't ask, don't tell" policy. One in 10 said gays should not be allowed to serve in the military at all."
"It's the maverick way -- spend a year studying whether soldiers deserve full civil rights,
and a half an hour deciding who will be your presidential running mate."
-- Jon Stewart, on McCain's decision-making process, or lack therof
*wink-wink*
We have only 55 votes in the US Senate during the lame-duck session.
National Polls mean NOTHING to a Senator from an Anti-Gay State like Oklahoma or Alabama.
The President has absolutely NO influence over a US Senator when it is a "moral issue."
I think it's inappropriate for the media of the myriad of LGBT non-profits to give false hope in an effort to continue the "story" or to raise money.
Instead, the emboldened Republicans will hold the line, and the LGBT voters are so disillusioned (see: Pam's House Blend) with the Democratic Party, that it'll take a lot to get them out of their apathy.
But what gets my goat, and what I hope people of Conneticut will remember is the fact that Lieberman, in running in 2006, endorsed the idea of "Medicare for all." He then, obviously, became an assaholic with amnesia and forgot he said that and refused to consider that idea in the late summer/early fall of 2009 at the height of the Healthcare Reform debate.
As such, the plan was watered down with Repubs emboldened by his position.
Look, Lieberman has been on the Dem side for the most part. But that was just flat our Republican of him. And right now, (actually since Jan 21 2009) have been flat out obstructionist to the nth degree. Associated with such will not endear Lieberman to a left of center electorate.
What would Freud say about all the homophobes obsessing about the "showers"? 99.9% of these homophobes are civilians, by the way.
They could have done this 14 months ago....just as easily, Obama needs to get a backbone for Christmas and not rely on Lame Duck sessions for things that matter...
Obama is a TOTAL whimp...
Tools that the Senate Majority Leader has:
- The agenda. Reid could simply refuse to allow anything else to come on the floor until the filibusters were broken, and make them actually filibuster the whole damn time - every second of it.
- Reconciliation. Several filibustered bills had direct financial impacts on the US Government, making them passable by reconciliation. The GOP would howl, but let 'em - they'll howl whatever the Dems do.
Tools the POTUS has:
- Discretionary spending (the hard sell): If it's OK for a Republican senator to put blanket 'hold' motions on almost a hundred nominees on the ground that the President has refused to guarantee-in-perpetuity his pork, then it's OK for the President to refuse to spend pork on filibustering Senators' States.
- The soft sell: Obama is in a better place to dicker with the reasonable(ish) Republicans such as Snowe and Collins on votes.
Nowhere in evidence were these tools being used - note I do not include Pelosi's failings, as she got the damn legislation through the House: it died in the Senate. When your enemy's sharpening his sword, you don't go offering peace treaties: you get your hammer out, and Obama and Reid didn't.
i.e., is it 60 Senators, or 60% of all present and voting Senators?
They have all supported the repeal, provided there is debate on the matter, which Carl Levin has promised (tho ... I'd say 16 years of debate is long enough.....)
One could also try to commune with the ghost of Senator John McCain of Arizona, since he promised to support the repeal if the study revealed support for the repeal within the military community. But I doubt seances are allowed in the Capitol building. (Aw! I *knew* Christine O'Donnell could've come in handy!)
All the Democratic and Independent senators are supporting the repeal.