9 votes

Update: Early Version of NDAA 2013 Passed Senate 98-0

I wanna like Rand, but he's making it harder.

"The Senate on Tuesday passed a massive, wide-ranging defense authorization bill that restores threatened Pentagon biofuels programs, issues new sanctions against Iran and changes U.S. detention policy for American citizens.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) passed the Senate unanimously 98-0 after the bill was debated for five days and hundreds of amendments were considered on the floor."

YEAs ---98
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lee (R-UT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 2
Kirk (R-IL)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/budget-appropriations/2...

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_c...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Like what?

Which part sucks tell me, I want to know...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

It directs the President to come up with a contingency plan

for a no fly zone over Syria, for one thing. I also wonder whether it cuts costs in any budget saving sense, but I don't know. I believe it is the big defense appropriation for the year, however, and I do see something to the point that you can't vote to not raise the debt ceiling with credibility when you voted for the spending. But if it really did/does get rid of indefinite detention, that is worth something extraordinary, imho. I'm just not sure yet that it does.

Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesnt want to hear -RonPaul

House Concurrent Resolution 107:

March, 2012

Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

Did you guys read the article at least?

"The Senate bill also included a new round of Iran sanctions, a “permanent ban” on transferring detainees from Guantánamo and prohibitions on the military detention of U.S. citizens."

We already knew Rand voted for the Iran sanctions, the important part is that "prohibitions on the military detention of U.S. citizens": this is NOT the 2012 version and all of the senators that were opposed to the provision that allowed for indefinite detention voted yes for this bill...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

From the article...

"The most contentious debate on the floor surrounded U.S. detention policies, which had sparked a month-long fight between lawmakers and the White House last year.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) proposed an amendment to bar military detention for U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism, a measure she said would correct the language in the 2012 bill.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and McCain and Ayotte have staunchly defended the necessity of military detention to help win the global war on terror. But McCain, Graham and Levin all wound up supporting Feinstein’s amendment — only after arguing that her amendment did in fact allow the detention of U.S. citizens to continue. The amendment passed 67-29."
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/budget-appropriations/2...

There's the debate.

Most people say Feinstein's amendment is enough to prevent the indefinite detention without trial, others believe that it isn't. There's a thread on that here, Amash seems to believe it isn't enough, law professors seem to think that it is.

Rand was co-sponsor for Feinstein's bill so obviously he thinks it is enough, hence the yes vote on this year's NDAA...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

You all know that if he runs for president

he will blow all kinds of smoke up every ones ass.
He will call this vote a "mistake" or say he "regrets it"

He is a douchebag, I won't vote for him.

Refusing to vote for Rand is

Refusing to vote for Rand is essentially a vote for someone like Marco Rubio. I hope you're happy when Marco Rubio wins the GOP nomination in 2016.

Wow - no.

Seriously, you sound like the people saying if I don't vote for Romney I'm voting for Obama. The only way voting works is if you vote for the person you support the most.

The difference is that Rand

The difference is that Rand is a liberty candidate, while Romney wasn't.

Yeah, and voting for an

Yeah, and voting for an unconstitutional bill like the NDAA puts you right there next to Ol' Mitt. Open your eyes.

This is still to be seen

Unfortunately, there is no "guarantee" that he will always stand for liberty, and he is new to the senate and does not have an extensive voting record to back him up. I do agree with a lot of his votes - but not all. There could be better liberty candidates out there - it shall remain to be seen.

My bottom line is that it is very important to always check out all options and choose the best for what you believe in (hopefully liberty!!!)

I'll add: Ron Paul spoiled me.

Rand is his fathers son.

Rand is his fathers son. Liberty runs through his veins.

No, Rand doesn't "always"

No, Rand doesn't "always" vote the right way. But, when he votes the right way 98% of the time, that's good enough for me. I don't demand perfection from politicians.

then f-ing don't vote for him

I could care less, but if it comes down to him or Rubio or Bush I'm voting Rand.

It's like choosing between gold and a Federal Reserve note and a Visa, I'm going gold. Keep your plastic and paper.

It might be a small amount of gold vs Ron Paul ( alot of gold) but its still gold

Please don't apply that flawed logic here

"if you do/don't vote for _____ is a vote for ______.

No need to get defensive about Rand voting yes as this year's NDAA includes the Feinstein amendment.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

This year's NDAA was voted on

This year's NDAA was voted on by McCain and Graham because they claimed it DID allow indefinite detention. Read the bill. Would you really have voted for it?

Read the bill?

No I haven't, The NDAA bill is hundreds of pages... have you?

The bottom line is that Rand believes Feinstein's amendment is enough, others like Amash and even Graham and Levin think that there's still ways around it. There's a thread discussing that here, read it. I'm no lawyer and I don't pretend to understand the jargon of the bill so there's no point on what my opinion of it is, what matters is what the lawyers on both sides say regarding Feinstein's amendment(unfortunately)...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

jrd3820's picture

I love it when people ask if you have read the bill

Most of us have not read most bills in their entirety. Hell, congress doesn't even read most bills fully. We read overviews of the bill, we know if things sound like a good idea or not, but none of us have read the full bill.

In another forum a guy and I have been debating Obamcare back and forth for quite some time, (I say no good, he says it is great). Anyways, the other day he said "have you read the bill? It sounds like you are confused about this..." LMAO.

Everyone is confused by it, my Grandma is a business owner with an accountant and a legal aid and they do not even understand it in its entirety.

Sorry, for rambling, but I am just glad that I am not the only one who cracks up when people say "have you read the bill?"

No, I have not, and your congress member probably hasn't either!

"Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

"Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and McCain and Ayotte have staunchly defended the necessity of military detention to help win the global war on terror. But McCain, Graham and Levin all wound up supporting Feinstein’s amendment — only after arguing that her amendment did in fact allow the detention of U.S. citizens to continue. The amendment passed 67-29."

Maybe he did it so he

Maybe he did it so he wouldn't be kicked out of the committees he is on by the WHIP. :(
Still blows on his part to vote for it.

Southern Agrarian

That hurts

bad

  • New Jersey's Premier Junk Removal Junk Service!
  • Accepts Bitcoin
    www.powercleanouts.com
    Check out my blog:
    www.yoanante.com

    This really sucks!

    Rand Paul is a huge disappointment to me and the liberty movement..

    This nation is so screwed up, I just can't believe how so very disappointing people can be...

    The congress is indeed full of cowardly traitors..

    Lord, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing..

    Unfortunately

    They know exactly what they are doing

    2 Chron 7:13-14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

    You bettter start praying for us

    screw them.