"BROWN BACKS DADT REPEAL...." Come on DADT REPEAL!

[Cha]

There's no longer any question as to whether the votes are there.

Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown today voiced his support for a stand-alone repeal of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, bringing the bill one vote over the 60-vote threshold that it will need to reach if and when the Senate votes on the measure in the coming weeks.

"Sen. Brown accepts the Pentagon's recommendation to repeal the policy after proper preparations have been completed. If and when a clean repeal bill comes up for a vote, he will support it," said Brown spokesperson Gail Gitcho.

The use of the word "clean" is pretty important -- Brown doesn't want to see a bunch of amendments added to the legislation, which puts him entirely in line with what proponents of repeal want, too. In other words, this is exactly what we wanted to hear from him.

Just to recap, last week, repeal garnered 57 votes. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) was at the dentist, but she'll be on hand for the next vote, and she'll support repeal. That's 58.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) said she'd oppose repeal until after the vote on the tax deal, but now that the Senate has approved the policy, she announced yesterday she's a "yes" on this, too. That's 59.

And Brown's announcement this morning makes 60. The ABC report added that Alaska's Lisa Murkowski is also on board, and while I haven't seen official confirmation of that elsewhere, her vote would presumably be the 61st.

At this point, it appears the only thing standing between the repeal effort and success is the leadership finding time to bring this to the floor.

However, Reid has warned that bringing the bill to a vote in the Senate is not an issue of support, but rather of time. With just over a week before Christmas, the Senate is only now kicking off debate on the START nuclear treaty and a massive $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill. It will likely be early next week before the Senate wraps up work on those two measures - and numerous GOP senators have voiced stern opposition to both bills, preferring instead to fund the government into early next year and go home for the holidays. That leaves little time for the Senate to pass the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal.

If this effort falls short because of a crowded calendar next week, and senators' desire not to work the week between Christmas and New Year's, the response will not be kind.

—Steve Benen 11:25 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (23)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archive...hp#1873354

Sometimes everyone has to work extra time to get what they want and in the Senators' case what's better for our Country~

[CraigGrant]

great news

[NYC Liberal]

I can't wait for it to finally be repealed. Good riddance I say!

[sandnsea]

Reid needs to do whatever it takes to get this passed. It would be a catastrophic mistake, on every level, to fail when the votes are there.

[Adelante]

Quote:Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said Thursday that President Obama would stop defending "don't ask, don't tell" in courts, even if a bill forcing its repeal fails to pass in the Senate.

"I believe he has no longer any obligation to defend it in court," Frank told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann about the military's law prohibiting gay servicemembers from openly serving. "If he's against it, the House majorities voted against it, an overwhelming majority of the Senate votes against it, the administrators don't want it, that's lost its legitimacy, and he's made that clear."

Frank explained that he expected the bill -- now planned for a Senate vote on Saturday -- to be passed and sent on for President Obama's signature. In the event of a last-minute change of heart from some of the bipartisan coalition who is expected to favor the measure, however, Frank said that he thought Obama would let go of his belief, in this case, that "presidents are supposed to defend laws."

"He (the President) will drop his defense of it because the argument has been 'well, you're the President and you have this obligation,' and I think that's generally right, we don't want the President picking and choosing what laws they defend in court. But this one will have lost its legitimacy, its moral legitimacy, its majoritarian claim, it won't be a case anybody could argue with the courts, overturning the will of the voter; the voters, majorities in the House and Senate have said, no more to this," Frank said.

Huffington Post

[There Is No Spoon]