- Senate: Fiscal 2018 Defense Authorization
- Senate: Francisco Nomination – Confirmation
- Senate: Delrahim Nomination – Confirmation
- House: Maternal and Infant Home Visit Program
- House: FAA Short Term Reauthorization, Flood Insurance and Hurricane Tax Adjustments
- House: Parole Violators' Benefits Revocation
- Senate: Pai Nomination
- House: Abortion Ban
- House: Fiscal 2018 Budget Resolution
Here is an link to the text of the bill.
- Paul (R-KY), Nay
- Lee (R-UT), Nay
- Corker (R-TN), Nay
- Merkley (D-OR), Nay
- Wyden (D-OR), Nay
- Leahy (D-VT), Nay
- Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay
- Sanders (I-VT)
Is is not interesting that the nay voters would all be considered on the extreme side of their party. Below, folks that know it is f'd up but are unwilling to be on record.
- Graham (R-SC), Not Voting
- Menendez (D-NJ), Not Voting
- Rubio (R-FL), Not Voting
A party line vote except for three abstentions.
- Cochran (R-MS)
- Menendez (D-NJ)
- Moran (R-KS)
Cochran is pissed at the president, and Menendez is busy fighting extradition to New Jersey. Who the heck is Moran.
Noel Francisco is a lawyer 48 years old, studied at Brandeis University, got his JD at University of Chicago. The new Solicitor General clerked for Supreme Court Antonin Scalia.
The United States Solicitor General is the third-highest-ranking official in the Department of Justice. The Solicitor General represents the federal government of the United States before the Supreme Court of the United States. The Office of the Solicitor General also reviews cases decided against the United States in the federal district courts and approves every case in which the government files an appeal.
More damned lawyers voting on other lawyers. Less so of a party line vote
Delrahim studied at UCLA and obtained his JD at George Washington University Law School and has worked as a lobbyist for some significant industries entities. No doubt Delrahim's experience is the cause for resistance from from like Elizabeth Warren.
OMG, my representative voted against children. Just kidding, doubt as a democrat his position is that the requirement is too onerous. My position as a taxpayer is that every dollar spent should have positive effect, if standards make that happen, do it. Truth though is that government requirements are often obstructive in their application.
More democrats crossed on this one, but not David. Who knows, they load so much unrelated shit into these things, its hard to tell what is right and what is wrong.
Don't mess with a man's gub-mint check, anybody who would passes judgement on a wanted fellon must be racist.
Four and a half months is plenty of time for a woman, or couple, to decide on the abortion option. For me evolving in my church life, am against it but accept the judicial position. What seems to be lost in all the bitching about restricting the rights of women, are the rights of a child that could live. Lucky for the feminist column, this will provide fertile (sic) ground for attacking all men and Republicans.