Rob noted last night, following the Senate passage of the $109-billion "emergency" supplemental: "If there’s a silver lining in today’s Senate vote for a $109 billion “emergency” supplemental bill, it’s the fact that 21 Republican senators, led by Majority Leader Bill Frist, voted against the bill."
Unfortunately, 21 is not enough to sustain a Bush veto that has been promised if a bloated bill (exceeding $94.5 billion) is finally passed by both houses.
What really has me scratching my head is that Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions issued a press release on April 26, 2006, stating that Sessions had the signatures of 35 senators vowing to sustain a presidential veto (as Mike Franc noted). From the press release:
“Like you, we are seriously concerned with the overall funding level in the Senate-reported bill, and the numerous items that are unrelated to the Global War on Terror or emergency hurricane relief needs,” the letter said.
“Should the final bill presented to you exceed the total amount requested, forcing you to veto the bill, we will vote to sustain your veto.”
So, where are the other 14 votes?
According to Franc's piece, written before yesterday's vote:
Sessions was astonished at the response: 35 Republican senators signed on (more than enough to sustain a veto), including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.), Majority Whip Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky.), Armed Services Chairman John Warner (R.-Va.) and Budget Chairman Judd Gregg (R.-N.H.) and liberal Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee. Frist issued a timely supportive statement, noting that "the Senate's willingness to support a veto reflects that we're not kidding about fiscal restraint and responsibility."
If you look at the vote tally, you'll note that McConnell, Warner and Chafee all voted for the Senate version last night. Certainly, signing the letter does not obligate a senator to vote against the Senate version, since it still must go to conference, but this is not too encouraging.
