The squad voted against helping Afghan translators.

[BlueLucy]

The bill that replenishes the resources for the Capitol Police and the National Guard depleted due to the January 6 insurrection also includes funding and resources for a program that assists Afghan translators who helped US and allied forces relocate.

Just so we know what their priorities are.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

1. That would seem to tell us what they are NOT, rather than what they are ...

Perhaps you could elucidate those priorities, since you're bringing it up?

[BlueLucy]

2. I don't want a hide. I will say...

It shows they're not for Afghan translators getting to safety are they?

[Hugh_Lebowski]

7. It passed by one vote, which I suspect was quite purposeful ...

And the primary 'gist' of the bill was the Capitol Police funding.

So, no, I'm going to say it doesn't 'show' that.

[elleng]

9. Thanks.

[BlueLucy]

18. So are you saying..

It was more politically advantageous for them to defend their defund the police rhetoric than it was to show your support to Afghan translators?

[Hugh_Lebowski]

33. No, I'm saying they knew what the vote count would be in advance

Also, turns out the vote with the translator money wasn't the one-vote decision, I got them confused. The one with the translator money included was this one:

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-capitol-siege-bills-73c1d98b16dad647e671e9c125eab9d9

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress overwhelmingly passed emergency legislation Thursday that would bolster security at the Capitol, repay outstanding debts from the violent Jan. 6 insurrection and increase the number of visas for allies who worked alongside Americans in the Afghanistan war.

The $2.1 billion bill now goes to President Joe Biden for his signature. The Senate approved the legislation early Thursday afternoon, 98-0, and the House passed it immediately afterward, 416-11.

So, yeah. Entirely symbolic vote.

Fine by me.

You, I guess not though.

[George II]

53. Correct. The OP is about this one:

https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2021/roll250.xml

[lapucelle]

88. The initial house vote in May was the vote that passed the House by one vote.

After the Senate sent the bill back to the House in July, it included an amendment to fund the aid to evacuate the translators.

A vote came up on July 29 to suspend the rules and and agree to the Senate amendment. The House debated and then voted on the motion to suspend the rules. All six members of the squad voted nay.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3237/all-actions?overview=closed#tabs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The calculus behind the May vote might have been to be able to use either the talking point "I never voted to increase police funding (present) or "I voted against increased police funding" (nay).

Voting "no" vote in July meant that you were not in agreement to suspend the rules and accept the Senate amendment. without a new vote on the entire bill. All six voted not to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment.

[Tommymac]

82. Thank You

[George II]

52. I think that was a different vote, I think the one in the OP is #250:

https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2021/roll250.xml

[questionseverything]

11. They knew it would pass so it was a symbolic vote

Now the nine moderates currently threatening speaker pelosi and president Biden’s reconciliation bill might actually be able to screw that up

[BlueLucy]

13. I'm not at all in agreement with those 9 moderates either.

[BlueLucy]

14. Symbolic for what?

[questionseverything]

20. Because they wanted time to read the bill

And

Because if gave police more funding while not reining in police brutality

[George II]

57. The bill is 4,840 words, about 10-15 minutes of reading. Floor votes take about an hour these days.

[lapucelle]

81. There is a provision in the bill that requires Capitol Police officers use body-worn cameras.

In addition, the bill requires Capitol Police officers who interact with the public to use body-worn cameras

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3237/actions

[questionseverything]

85. Senate bill presented to the house 7-29 @ 3:18 pm

Passed by 4:15 pm

No one could possibly have read it

And body cams only work till they get “knocked off”

Obviously the reason for the rush was their month off in august

[lapucelle]

90. The only difference in the May House version and the July Senate version returned for the House vote

on July 29 appears to be the Senate amendments, one of which concerned the aid to the Afghan translators.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3237/amendments

[questionseverything]

91. How would a person know that w/o reading?

So we only approved money for 8,000 while the uk is starting with 20,000

[lapucelle]

96. The same way I did, by looking at it. And I don't have a staff helping me and the advantage

a mark up copy.

Did any of the "no" voters say they voted nay because they didn't have time to read the bill or the amendment?

[questionseverything]

97. Why don't you post the entire text of the bill so we all can see how quickly and easily it could be

Read?

Yes part of the reason they said they voted no was they had no time to read, understand changes

They were willing to stay and work on the bill but august recess won

[lapucelle]

101. I posted a link to the bill. Anyone can read it on the .gov site.

Here's a link to a pdf of the 13 page bill.

https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr3237/BILLS-117hr3237enr.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only "no" vote I can find who said he didn't have sufficient time to read the 13 page bill is Jamaal Bowman.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/29/politics/capitol-security-bill-senate/index.html

[questionseverything]

102. An amendment shouldn't be introduced and voted on within 57 minutes

That’s how we get legislation written by lobbyists

It passed 416-11 so I don’t understand the up roar over a couple of symbolic no votes

You must be pretty upset that the 9 “moderate “ democrats are trying to kill our reconciliation bill, huh?

[lapucelle]

105. Every Democrat and Independent in the Senate voted "yes" to the amendment.

So did Representative Jayapal and Representative Khanna.

Anyone who has concerns about or helpful suggestions on how House votes *should* be scheduled is free to write to Speaker Pelosi.

[questionseverything]

107. Read post 35

Because jayapal voted no with 5 other dems

I think you are confused with an earlier vote

[lapucelle]

108. Post 35? This post 35? With this link?

House passes $2 billion Capitol security bill in response to insurrection, clearing it for Biden’s signature
Updated 5:19 PM EDT, Thu July 29, 2021

The House voted 416 to 11 on Thursday to approve a roughly $2 billion Capitol Hill security spending bill in response to the deadly January 6 insurrection, clearing the measure for President Joe Biden’s signature.

The House vote came shortly after the Senate voted unanimously to pass the measure by a tally of 98-0.
The House voted 416 to 11 on Thursday to approve a roughly $2 billion Capitol Hill security spending bill in response to the deadly January 6 insurrection, clearing the measure for President Joe Biden’s signature.

The House vote came shortly after the Senate voted unanimously to pass the measure by a tally of 98-0.

snip===============================================================================

Six House Democrats and five Republicans voted no on the bill on Thursday. The Democrats who voted against the measure were Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Jamaal Bowman of New York, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Cori Bush of Missouri. The Republicans who voted against it were Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Bob Good of Virginia, Tom McClintock of California and Ralph Norman of South Carolina.

Bowman told CNN that he voted against the bill because he didn’t feel like he had enough time to review what was in it.

“We just got the bill text like a half an hour ago. Absolutely no time to read it, no time to understand it, no time to digest it, so that’s reason number one,” Bowman said.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/29/politics/capitol-security-bill-senate/index.html

[questionseverything]

110. Ok I got one name wrong but

Still waiting to know if you are this concerned with the reconciliation bill being sabotaged?

[Hugh_Lebowski]

30. Some of the explanation from Omar from the earlier House bill (before the translator $ was added)

“I am tired of the fact that any time where there is a failure in our system of policing, the first response is for us to give them more money, rather than investigate the failings and hold those responsible accountable,” Omar told The Intercept, explaining her vote. “I’ll continue to fight for structural change that actually centers people’s safety and humanity. That applies to us here in the Capitol, as well as my constituents in Minneapolis.”

[Skittles]

44. NOT the time to be pulling that bullshit

[Hugh_Lebowski]

45. I'm not a huge 'Squad Fan' to begin with ... not against them but I think they aren't always prudent

But to be fair this was before 'Afghan visas' was part of the bill, and they appear to have voted strategically to make sure the particular, earlier 'one-vote margin' House version of the Bill still passed.

So this isn't one of the (many) things one or more them have done that've gotten on my nerves

I'm not a 'defund the police' guy to begin with. Its terrible messaging.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

47. I do not buy this explanation

Link to tweet

[Cha]

94. I don't either.. Ouch there's a tweet on

there from someone in her District that's NOT favorable.

Rt TY

[Skittles]

16. symbolic vote indicating WHAT exactly

[Hugh_Lebowski]

31. See post 30, and post 33 :) nt

[Cha]

93. What are you Wagging your finger at?

[joetheman]

59. You must examine what else was in that bill and if other bills provided for help to translators.

Nothing happens in a vacuum.

[elleng]

3. Who within The Squad?

Voted WHICH way? Consciously voted AGAINST a program that assists Afghan translators who helped US and allied forces relocate???

[BlueLucy]

6. All of them.

Yes. You have that right.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

8. No, AOC and Rashida Talib voted 'present' not 'no', and the bill PASSED by one vote

So, frankly, I don't buy into your storyline.

[elleng]

10. THANK YOU!

[BlueLucy]

12. OK so those two voted present.

You don't have to buy anything. What I posted is a fact. Just because the bill passes doesn't mean we should not know how people voted and question.

[iemanja]

49. You forget

that favorite pols matter more than policy or principle.

[questionseverything]

17. It passed 416-11

The bill you are thinking of was an earlier house version

[Hugh_Lebowski]

22. Okay, my bad. Point remains the same ... symbolic votes are symbolic votes :) nt

[questionseverything]

25. I understand

The talking point the op is making is just not true so I feel like interjecting truth is important

[Hugh_Lebowski]

27. Truth is always good!!! (nt)

[luv2fly]

4. Their priorities are...

I am unsure so please tell us.

[stillcool]

5. whatever works for ya...

[WhiskeyGrinder]

15. What does "replenish the resources for the Capitol Police" mean? I know back in March they

were asking for a 20% budget increase from the $100 million+ they get for mostly traffic stops.

[questionseverything]

24. The "funny " part is no one knew at the time they voted

That’s one thing the squad was protesting

Go figure, they thought reading the bill was important

[fishwax]

19. they also voted to expand the visa program for refugees from Afghanistan

the spending bill they voted against is one that they voted against for reasons other than the funding of programs for Afghani translators, and it's a bill that everyone knew was going to pass without their protest vote.

[George II]

55. We're dealing with a country of 330 million people and some people's lives....

....not a time for "protest votes".

The bill in question DID include expanding the visa program for refugees from Afghanistan.

For an additional amount for “Refugee and Entrant Assistance”, $25,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2022, for necessary expenses for refugee and entrant assistance activities authorized by section 414 of the Immigration and Nationality Act: Provided, That such amounts shall be for such activities for Afghan individuals within the United States who have been granted special immigrant status as described in section 602(b)(8) of the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note): Provided further, That such amount is designated by the Congress as being for an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3237/text

[fishwax]

61. their nay votes had no sonsequence on those 330 million or any lives

The squad all voted in favor of expanding the visa program in July. Their opposition to this bill was (a) based on other factors and (b) inconsequential to the visa program because the bill passed, as everyone knew it would.

I am glad the bill passed. And I think that honest criticism of the squad for this, and other votes, is of course to be welcomed, as for all politicians. Distorting the record, though, serves only to divide democrats, and I think that's an unfortunate game for democrats to be playing, regardless of which wing of the party is doing it.

[George II]

62. The record isn't distorted. They voted against it along with 5 republicans. All others who voted...

...(there were 4 "not voting" ) voted for it.

It's "an unfortunate game for democrats to be playing"? The 416 who voted for the bill, including EVERY OTHER DEMOCRAT, aren't playing games. So who's playing the game here?

[fishwax]

63. the claim that they don't care about Afghan refugees is a distortion

But if you want to continue to engage in the politics of Democratic Party Division, then have it. I can't stop you.

[George II]

65. Their vote indicated the way they felt about the bill. 213 Democrats voted for it.

[fishwax]

68. of course it did, but the bill was about more than this single issue

and to conflate their opposition of the bill with their opposition to this issue is lazy and/or dishonest.

And to look at the tragedy of what is now happening in Afghanistan and see that as a fitting backdrop for these games of Divide the Democrats is something else entirely.

But, on the other hand, it's a volatile issue and a volatile moment, and shit's bound to happen as emotions run high, I suppose.

I just we as a party could direct our ire where it belongs.

[George II]

71. I direct my "ire" toward those who engage in, as you put it, "games of Divide the Democrats"...

On this bill, for example, 97.2% of Democrats voted for it, 2.7% voted against it. 97.2% united to vote for it.

[fishwax]

73. keep attacking and dividing all you want, George II -- as I said, I can't stop you

If you think that attacking members of the democratic caucus is the best use of your time and is a legitimate response to the events in Afghanistan, then you do you.

If you think that sort of thing supports the work of folks like Pelosi and Schumer, or that it increases the likelihood of democrats being successful in upcoming elections, I think you're mistaken, though.

[George II]

74. Keep attacking me all you want, I support the policies of my President and my Democratic Party.

[fishwax]

75. As do I

[George II]

77. So then why are you going after me?

[fishwax]

78. I'm just pointing out that I don't think attacking democrats is good for the democratic cause

I'm not sure what part you feel attacked by. As I said, I don't think it's a good strategy, but if you're gonna you're gonna, and I can't stop you.

[George II]

79. Perhaps you should be addressing your displeasure to other Democrats who are attacking Democrats....

...(with a capital D)

That's the point of this thread in the first place.

[fishwax]

80. That doesn't make any sense

This thread wasn't prompted by the squad attacking Democrats. If it was, it would address them actually attacking democrats. There is no such content in the OP.

[George II]

84. It was prompted by them voting against the position of President Biden and the Democratic Party....

I can't post any of their tweets or communication where they do attack Democrats.

What I can post is some rankings from 538:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-congress-votes/house/

Of the 223 Democratic members of the House, below is their ranking with respect to voting with Biden's agenda.

Totally objective:

204 Henry Cuellar
204 Sean Casten
204 Vicente Gonzalez
204 Jahana Hayes
204 Pramila Jayapal
204 Elaine Luria
204 Gwen Moore
204 Seth Moulton
204 Tom Malinowski
204 Katie Porter
204 Kurt Schrader
204 Bennie G. Thompson
216 Jamaal Bowman
217 Ron Kind
217 Ilhan Omar
217 Ayanna Pressley
220 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
220 Rashida Tlaib
222 Cori Bush
223 Jared Golden

[Budi]

23. K & R They proudly stood their ground & now they proudly own their vote.

Defund the Capitol Police..check

Defund resources for a program that assists Afghan translators who helped US and allied forces relocate...check

Priorities...check.

Sucks to be the Capitol Police & the Afghan translators, in this case.

Glad wiser heads prevailed.
Gratutide~

[Lancero]

26. It's a bill meant to support the Capitol Police. It should do just that...

No more, no less.

Frankly, I'd vote against the bill too if it started getting bogged down with requests for funding that are wholly unrelated to the bills intended purpose. If it's worth funding, make a bill for that - Don't treat it like it's a afterthought by co-opting a entirely unrelated funding effort.

[BlueLucy]

28. A lot of times that is the only way to get things passed.

Add things in it making it easier to vote for. We would never get anything passed if everything was stand alone votes.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

29. Agree! (nt)

[betsuni]

38. Why Bernie Sanders said, "Sometimes in a large bill you have to vote for things you don't like."

Part of the job.

[questionseverything]

48. It passed 416-11

So it’s the perfect time for a protest vote

They want to reign in police brutality, are you against that effort?

[Bettie]

32. Did the bill pass?

People keep telling me when right leaning reps vote against bills that pass..."well, Nancy Pelosi knows how to count votes, so they had permission".

But, when someone more liberal votes against a bill and it still passes...there are cries of how evil they are followed by wailing and rending of garments.

So, it passed. Why the histrionics now?

[luv2fly]

34. +1

[Hugh_Lebowski]

39. Look, I absolutely HATE the 'Defund the Police' nonsense ...

But you're still off-base here, IMHO.

There was NEVER any question whether 'things were going to get done'. These kinds of symbolic votes happen all the time.

And their objection was never about not caring about getting the Visas for the Afghani allies.

[Bettie]

40. So, when the "problem solvers" vote no on infrastructure

you'll be angry at their protest votes?

I'm guessing not. There will be some kind of excuse about how they have "concerns".

[George II]

56. I don't think I've ever seen that reason:

"well, Nancy Pelosi knows how to count votes, so they had permission" in all my years of following and being involved in politics.

[leftstreet]

86. +1

[marie999]

104. Because they should have voted for it.

[question everything]

35. Correct. Here is the source

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/29/politics/capitol-security-bill-senate/index.html

Six House Democrats and five Republicans voted no on the bill on Thursday. The Democrats who voted against the measure were Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Jamaal Bowman of New York, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Cori Bush of Missouri. The Republicans who voted against it were Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Bob Good of Virginia, Tom McClintock of California and Ralph Norman of South Carolina.

So don't try to alert for "promoting right wing agenda"

[Hugh_Lebowski]

36. Still totally symbolic and their issue was NOT with the Afghani Visas, so the OP premise is untrue

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress overwhelmingly passed emergency legislation Thursday that would bolster security at the Capitol, repay outstanding debts from the violent Jan. 6 insurrection and increase the number of visas for allies who worked alongside Americans in the Afghanistan war.

The $2.1 billion bill now goes to President Joe Biden for his signature. The Senate approved the legislation early Thursday afternoon, 98-0, and the House passed it immediately afterward, 416-11.

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-capitol-siege-bills-73c1d98b16dad647e671e9c125eab9d9

[George II]

64. They disagreed with the bill, that's why they voted "Nay". All other Democrats voted "Yea".

[Rustyeye77]

41. AFAIC, all ******* *****s

See , that’s how it works.

Someone who doesn’t agree will hit the alert and try to get you suspended or banned.

All because you might disagree with them.

I’ve contacted Elad about this and he’s checking to see who’s doing this.

[alittlelark]

42. Nice divisive post !!!

Good mix of divisive figures and obscure law making !

[George II]

54. What do you mean by "Obscure law making"? 416 Representatives didn't feel it was obscure.

[Cha]

95. The OP is Not the one who is being "Divisive"..

This is a Political Board.. Why should how pols Vote not be Discussed?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

46. Never forget how they voted.

Link to tweet

[NurseJackie]

69. I haven't forgotten. I'll never forget.

[AngryOldDem]

83. This is why the progressives will never gain traction.

Generally, I support them, but I can’t here. Sorry, folks.

[Cha]

89. No worries.. I Won't "Forget". TY Rt

[iemanja]

50. what reasons did they give?

[George II]

51. I think people are mixing up two votes. The vote was #250:

Details of the vote (for brevity only "nay" and "not voting" names below)

Yeas:

Democratic 213, republican 203

Nays:

Democratic 6 (Bowman, Bush, Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Pressley, Tlaib), republican 5 (Good, Massie, McClintock, Norman, Roy)

Not Voting:

Democratic 1 (David Scott), republican 3 (Babin, Higgins, Jordan)

[treestar]

58. And why would they vote against

replenishing resources for Capitol Police and National Guard?

[George II]

60. They have their own private security.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

66. That was Cori Bush ...

The Squad was against the general idea that whenever the police have a problem we just give them more money instead of dealing with the underlying issues or some such.

Not defending their logic only saying it's disingenuous to say they voted against the Afghan visas. There was previously a House version of the bill that was JUST that, and on that they voted Yes.

It's fair to complain about their 'defund the police' stance, which I disagree with as well. But their symbolic vote against the final bill (police money + visas) in no way undermined the Afghans getting their Visas nor did they oppose that part of it.

[George II]

67. AOC does too, and possibly others, but they're less visible (I'm not poring over their FEC filings)

[treestar]

112. This was not the police force, after 1/6, to take that stand against

Maybe they are trying to be consistent.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

113. Indeed, I find the Squad to be rather imprudent a sizable % of the time (nt)

[malaise]

70. Post Manchin's priorities

Do they include the right to vote in the USA?

[Celerity]

111. +1

[SYFROYH]

72. FWIW: Here is their joint statement about their vote.

https://bush.house.gov/media/press-releases/reps-bush-omar-pressley-statement-emergency-security-supplemental

Omar, Pressley, and Bush released a joint statement explaining their no votes:

On January 6th, some Republican Members of Congress and the former President incited an insurrection that they refuse to accept responsibility for and continue to deny to this day. A bill that pours $1.9 billion into increased police surveillance and force without addressing the underlying threats of organized and violent white supremacy, radicalization, and disinformation that led to this attack will not prevent it from happening again. Increasing law enforcement funds does not inherently protect or safeguard the Capitol Hill or surrounding D.C. community. In fact, this bill is being passed before we have any real investigation into the events of January 6th and the failures involved because Republicans have steadfastly obstructed the creation of a January 6th commission.

The bill also does far too little to address the unspeakable trauma of the countless officers, staff, and support workers who were on site that day – dedicating fifty times more money to the creation of a ‘quick reaction force’ than it does to counseling. We cannot support this increased funding while many of our communities continue to face police brutality while marching in the streets, and while questions about the disparate response between insurrectionists and those protesting in defense of Black lives go unanswered.

While we appreciate the efforts of our colleagues to put forth a supplemental that provides necessary pay to our essential workers, there must be a comprehensive investigation and response to the attack on our Capitol and our democracy, one that addresses the root cause of the insurrection: white supremacy. This bill prioritizes more money for a broken system that has long upheld and protected the white supremacist violence we saw on display that day.

We look forward to working towards systemic policy solutions that meet the scale and scope of the crises our communities and our nation face.

[Sympthsical]

76. You're using *this* moment to play Divide the Democrats?

Dude. Read the room.

[leftstreet]

87. Pelosi voted yes for all the military $$ Trump wanted

...and yet here we are, everyone questioning how these blank checks to the military didn't prevent the current debacle

singling out these squad people looks weird

[questionseverything]

92. The squad is a frequent target for a group of du ers

I am not sure why

I don’t know if it goes back to the Hillary/Bernie wars

Or

If it’s because they are all women of color

Or

If it’s because of their progressive policies

Or

If it is simply to divide the democratic vote

[Sympthsical]

99. I checked "All of the above" n/t

[leftstreet]

100. +1

[BradAllison]

106. Because people believe every district needs milquetoasts who don't advocate socialized medicine.

Otherwise Cletus and Bertha will see that meddling AOC being lied about again on Hannity or Ingraham and be "forced" to vote for Louis Gohmert and Ted Crud yet again down in Buttfuck, TX.

[Celerity]

109. +1

[Cha]

98. Thankfully We have Dems who DO Vote

FOR the Capitol Police to have more funding & Money for the Afghan Translators!

[Cha]

103. Oh and Thank Goodness Shontel Brown WON!