Both amendments were directed at preventing funds being used for military action against Iran.
You might therefore have thought that the same folks who opposed the Iraq adventure would oppose an adventure next door.
Up to a point, Lord Copper.
The score on DeFazio was 136-280, the Dems split 132-62.
Compare the 62 voting to give war a chance with the voting on the (in)famous RC 425 on HR 2206 (one leg of the Bush Dogs test).
By my reckoning, 374 of the reps that voted on DeFazio also voted on RC 425.
Now, you have to recode one of the votes - because the nonimperialist vote on DeFazio was a yea whereas the nonimperialist vote on HR 425 was a nay. (I recoded 425.)
The result: 20 Dem reps waved through a Bush war on Iran whilst opposing a similar waver on Iraq; 27 went the other way.
The 20:
| Name |
CD |
| ALLEN |
ME-1 |
| BISHOP |
NY-1 |
| BRADY |
PA-1 |
| DAVIS |
AL-7 |
| DOYLE |
PA-14 |
| FATTAH |
PA-2 |
| HASTINGS |
FL-23 |
| ISRAEL |
NY-2 |
| JEFFERSO |
LA-2 |
| KAPTUR |
OH-9 |
| KENNEDY |
RI-1 |
| LANGEVIN |
RI-2 |
| LOWEY |
NY-18 |
| LYNCH |
MA-9 |
| MCCARTHY |
NY-4 |
| MILLER |
NC-13 |
| RYAN |
OH-17 |
| SCHIFF |
CA-29 |
| SHERMAN |
CA-27 |
| WATERS |
CA-35 |
And the 27:
| Name |
CD |
| ANDREWS |
NJ-1 |
| BACA |
CA-43 |
| BAIRD |
WA-3 |
| BERKLEY |
NV-1 |
| BERRY |
AR-1 |
| BISHOP |
GA-2 |
| BOSWELL |
IA-3 |
| BOUCHER |
VA-9 |
| CHANDLER |
KY-6 |
| CLYBURN |
SC-6 |
| DINGELL |
MI-15 |
| EDWARDS |
TX-17 |
| EMANUEL |
IL-5 |
| GONZALEZ |
TX-20 |
| GREEN |
TX-29 |
| HINOJOSA |
TX-15 |
| KILDEE |
MI-5 |
| KIND |
WI-3 |
| LARSEN |
WA-2 |
| LEVIN |
MI-12 |
| MEEK |
FL-17 |
| ORTIZ |
TX-27 |
| RAHALL |
WV-3 |
| REYES |
TX-16 |
| SCOTT |
GA-13 |
| THOMPSON |
MS-2 |
| UDALL |
CO-2 |
Some parsing due there, clearly.
A more immediate concern is the ranks of Dem reps prepared to enable Bush wars extend rather further than the Bush Dogs.
Of the 62 Dems who war-whooped DeFazio, I reckon 22 are also on the list of Bush Dogs. (The August 16 list, that is: it seems that additions may hourly be expected.)
Some or all of 110th freshmen Bush Dogs may have joined the whoopers given the chance. But they weren't.
And that still leaves 40 non-Bush Dogs who, on June 20 2005 at least, were not much exercised about the odd US bomb or two falling on Iran.
(Because of course, so early in the game, there was absolutely no evidence that Bush would turn into the war-crazed megalomaniac he subsequently became.
Or was it that, being non-Bush Dogs, their purity of soul blinded them to the possibility that a war in Iran might be cunningly engineered?)
What about the intervening two years or so? Have the 40 subsequently come to their senses?
Presumably not, otherwise we would surely have heard the row as they protested the leadership's AIPAC-rimming withdrawal of the Iran amendment a bare three months ago?
(Except, of course, Hoyer (one of the 62) is in the leadership. Perhaps they didn't want to embarrass the poor chap.)
A lot more thought required about the whole business, I think.
[Spreadsheets are here, here, here, here and here.] |
STATE BLOGS
