Today the House is scheduled to debate and vote on two measures regarding our Time Limited Scope Limited Kinetic Military Action in Libya. The first is House Joint Resolution 68, authorizing the limited use of the United States Armed Forces in support of the NATO mission in Libya. It would provide some breathing room for the president to continue “leading from behind” at least for the next year. It was introduced by Alcee Hastings (D-FL 23) who has been on C-SPAN all morning speaking on the subject. (Wait a minute… isn’t Hastings busy with something else these days?)
The second item on the agenda goes in pretty much the opposite direction. House Resolution 2278, “to limit the use of funds appropriated to the DoD for United States Armed Forces in support of NATO Operation Unified Protector with respect to Libya.” That one was introduced by Tom Rooney. It pretty much speaks for itself and it has attracted a diverse group of supporters, including Ron Paul who is pretty much against any use of the military, so no surprise there.
I checked with on aide on the Hill this morning off the record and was told that while an exact nose count isn’t available, they expect the Hastings resolution to fail and the Rooney bill to pass. Of course, it’s still largely symbolic as getting a similar measure off the ground in the Senate would be a herculean task.
While we wait, the editorial board of the New York Times is suddenly jumping on board the Stay the Course train?
House Republicans are gearing up to vote, likely Friday, on whether to authorize continued United States support for NATO-led military operations over Libya. There are two main proposals — and a clear choice to be made. We fear they are leaning in a wrongheaded and dangerous direction.
One measure, sponsored by Representative Thomas Rooney and apparently backed by the House leadership, would allow financing only for American surveillance, search-and-rescue missions, planning and aerial refueling. Republicans say that if it passes, the Pentagon would have to halt drone strikes and attacks on Libyan air defenses…
It is hard to view this bill as anything but a partisan play to embarrass the president. The one sure victor would be Libya’s strongman, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, who would see it as a sign that NATO’s resolve is faltering and another reason to keep brutalizing his people.
Well, you know what a bunch of bloody handed hawks they have at the New York Times, so no surprise there. Particularly after the way they’ve supported all the other wars for the last few decades.
We’ll keep you updated as the votes come in.
UPDATE: The first vote on the Hastings resolution to support the Presidents actions in Libya with the UN has failed by 295 – 123. It received the support of
less than one dozen eight Republicans and roughly 100 115 Democrats. Next up is debate on defunding military operations. (Drones, missiles, etc.)
UPDATE 2: Entered corrected totals of those supporting the resolution.
UPDATE 3: You asked for the list of Republicans who voted in favor and we have an *unofficial* report from our source on the House floor. Here is the list they provided.
8 Rs voted for HJRes68 authorizing limited Libya ops: Dent, Dreier, S.King, P.King, Kinzinger, McCotter, Rivera, Rogers (MI)
Will get more confirmation as it comes in.
UPDATE 4: The update you didn’t want to see. The vote on the second order of business, defunding offensive military action in Libya, FAILED in the House by a vote of 180 yes, 238 nay. There were, at last count, 89 Republicans who voted against defunding. It’s going to take us a while to get the full list, but we’ll have it as soon as I can. This one is on the WHIP. We were told earlier that it should have been close, but enough to make it over the line.
UPDATE 5: It’s a long list, so follow this link and you’ll see all of the no votes.