A Fourth Republican Vote in the Senate for Withdrawal?

It's certainly taken a long enough time, but it seems that there now be a fourth Republican vote in in the Senate in favor of Congress setting a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops. The AP's Hope Yen has the story (via Steve Benen).

GOP Sen. John Warner, who wants U.S. troops to start coming home from Iraq by Christmas, said Sunday he may support Democratic legislation ordering withdrawals if President Bush refuses to set a return timetable soon.

"I'm going to have to evaluate it," Warner said. "I don't say that as a threat, but I say that is an option we all have to consider."

As Benen notes, this seems to be a departure from Warner's stance just a few days ago, when he said,

"Let the president set the timetable; let's not have the Congress set any timetable.... [T]he Congress has repeatedly tried to set timetables and a total plan by certain dates to have a withdrawal. I have voted against that, and I will continue to vote against that type of proposition."

First let's make clear that Warner is not yet coming out in favor of Congressional legislation setting a binding timeline for the withdrawal of American troops out of Iraq. But if he were to vote for such a measure out of unhappiness with the President's stubborn unwillingness to change course in Iraq, Warner would represent the fourth Republican vote in the Senate (after Gordon Smith, Chuck Hagel and Olympia Snowe) in favor of a timetable for redeployment.

Four Republican votes are not enough to force the President's hand -- or even to move legislation in the Senate. With Joe Lieberman voting consistently with the right on Iraq, it would take 10 Republican votes (plus a hopefully returning Tim Johnson voting with his party) just to get an up-or-down vote on legislation that would help bring an end to the war in Iraq. Yet despite the fact that Warner is seemingly on his way out, he does, as former chairman of the armed services panel, continue to maintain at least some sway with his Republican colleagues, perhaps enough to persuade even a few to join him in support of a timeline. That still doesn't get us to the 67 votes required to override the President in the Senate, let alone the 60 votes necessary to invoke cloture, but at the least it gets us a bit closer. So all eyes should be on John Warner in the coming weeks to see if he might actually follow through and try to force the President's hand on Iraq.



Display:


Re: A Fourth Republican Vote in the Senate for Wit (none / 0)

oooooooooooh ...a possible 4th vote.


by Djneedle83 on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 02:34:11 PM EST

Re: A Fourth Republican Vote in the Senate for Wit (none / 0)

Way back when, the Douchebag of Liberty was claiming that Warner was the key vote for the "moderates."  Let's see if the dam breaks...


by Ramo on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 02:44:26 PM EST

Dont think so (none / 0)

if you listen to his comments in full he's only calling for around 5000 troops to be removed "to send a message". He still doesn't get it.


by okamichan13 on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 02:50:20 PM EST

A Fourth Republican Vote (none / 0)

Don't get your hopes up. Warner is really just calling for some window dressing from the Bush/Cheney administration.


by hwc on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 02:52:44 PM EST

Re: A Fourth Republican Vote (none / 0)

Heh.

Sure Warner will vote for it. Riiiiight.

Man are you intent on playing Charlie Brown here.


by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 03:14:36 PM EST

Re: A Fourth Republican Vote (none / 0)

Perhaps that why I wrote, "First let's make clear that Warner is not yet coming out in favor of Congressional legislation setting a binding timeline for the withdrawal of American troops out of Iraq" (emphasis original). I'm speculating about the possibility that Warner will follow through on his sentiments with out stipulating that I believe he will follow through on his sentiments.


Blogging here @ MyDD.com. Twittering @jonathanhsinger.
by Jonathan Singer on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 03:45:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He's posturing for his re-election or (2.00 / 0)

posturing for Tom Davis, so it looks like the GOP senate brand in Virginia is not hardcore.  So if he appears resonable (only window-dressing), it reflects positively on Tom Davis, who John Warner adores.


McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.
by jgarcia on Sun Aug 26, 2007 at 05:04:04 PM EST

Democrats Don't Need Repubs (none / 0)

The Democrats don't need 60 votes or 67 votes to sit on their hands and do nothing. If they do not vote for more funding for the Department of Defense, then there is no money to support the occupation of Iraq by military troops and the occupation would have to end.

Now clearly, taking this direction would be politically dicey. But the Democrats should force Bush and the Republicans to come to them and beg for funding, not the other way around.

All the Democrats have to say is "Sorry, we can't vote for any more funding for this misbegotten occupation. We're happy to vote for funding to bring the troops home, but the Republicans won't let this legislation go forward and the President threatens to veto it. So we're just going to do nothing until the Republicans and the President propose something we can support."


by RandomNonviolence on Mon Aug 27, 2007 at 08:00:48 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.