June 18th, 2009
04:17 PM ET
9 years ago

War funding bill survives procedural vote... barely

WASHINGTON (CNN) - A $106 billion war spending bill has narrowly survived a nail-biter of a vote in the Senate. Democrats needed 60 votes to waive a budget rule and allow them to attach $1 billion in funding for the so-called "Cash For Clunkers" program, aimed at reviving the auto industry.

The motion to waive the rule passed 60-36, but only after Democrat Maria Cantwell of Washington state switched her vote from "no" to "yes." Democrats also needed help from five Republicans: Sens. Bond, Cochran, Collins, Enzi and Voinovich switched sides to support the Cash for Clunkers funding.

The final vote on the supplemental spending bill is expected to easily get majority approval and go to the president.

Party Switchers:
Democrats against: Nelson (NE)
Republicans in favor: Bond, Cochran, Collins, Voinovich

Filed under: Senate
soundoff (29 Responses)
  1. Too True For You

    So now we can expect Rush to excommunicate Bond, Cochran, Collins, Enzi and Voinovich, with Steele and the right wing lynch mob right behind him.

    June 18, 2009 04:18 pm at 4:18 pm |
  2. Dawn in Pa

    Gee, money to pay for that supid war... the Demacrats put in cash for clunkers, just like they put into another bill to carry handguns into National Parks...

    They can have my clunker, a 1996 Plymouth Neon.... that has the paint peeling off and a few dents from shopping carts...

    June 18, 2009 04:23 pm at 4:23 pm |
  3. bsmith171

    obama: end the wars.

    June 18, 2009 04:27 pm at 4:27 pm |
  4. Lynn

    Always an editorial in your headlines, CNN..."barely"??

    June 18, 2009 04:33 pm at 4:33 pm |
  5. Paul from Phoenix

    I thought Obama promised that he would pull the troops out immediately? Huh. I am curious if the $106 billion must go to Iraq, Afghanistan, or if it can be spent on either/both.

    June 18, 2009 04:33 pm at 4:33 pm |
  6. G

    Another $1 billion of spending?????

    No fiscal responsibility. I used to think Bush and the Republicans were bad but Obama and the Dems have been an order of magnitude worse. We need Pelosi and Obama out of office, we need a third party option that believes in fiscal responsibility. President Obama will bankrupt our nation.

    June 18, 2009 04:37 pm at 4:37 pm |
  7. Larry

    Another $106 billion? Where is this money coming from?

    It's time to end these useless wars and bring our people home.

    And I'm fed up with our young people dying needlessly!

    June 18, 2009 04:39 pm at 4:39 pm |
  8. skyhawkdriver

    More of the same old same old..does the cash for clunkers cover the poor saps who bought toyota pick ups..only to find the frames were made by dodge and they are rotting out??..and how much of a pompous self rightous dimwit is barbara boxer??..demanding to be called senator at the hearings..go back to cali and juice up on more botox..what an embarrasment..more pork for everyone

    June 18, 2009 04:41 pm at 4:41 pm |
  9. Right Leaning Independent

    Dems are like drunken sailors spending all the money from folks on "Main Street" while claiming to be trying to help them. For all of the working folks, there goes more of our money down the drain....

    June 18, 2009 04:41 pm at 4:41 pm |
  10. Shibumi

    @ Larry.....You'll be able to see where the money is coming from. Just monitor how your take home pay is shrinking for the next 10 years.
    Bo Bo........One and Done.

    June 18, 2009 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  11. Dan

    GOP Philosophy:

    Attack ! Attack !! Attack !!!

    1. Attack Iran and North Korea, They are manufacturing Nukes.
    2. Attack Somalia they are Supporting Pirates.
    3. Attack Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Saudi Arabia because they have Al Quida Pockets.
    4. Attack Cuba and Valenzuela because they are Communist.

    Attack the Whole World, it will make America Safe.

    June 18, 2009 04:47 pm at 4:47 pm |
  12. RNC = DNC = politics as usual

    I remember Obama fans getting in my face about Obama being a "peace" president. So he will certainly veto this war spending bill right? Let's see if he does.

    Billions in spending, billions to Israel, 1000's of troops left in Iraq permanently. Yes permanently sorta like McCain was accused of wanting. And he is in CHARGE NOW.

    Remind me WHY Obama is a peace president? People are dying NOW – our troops too. And he is NOW in CHARGE.

    We have been lied to.

    June 18, 2009 04:50 pm at 4:50 pm |
  13. Terry

    There are other values besides accounting value. Cash for clunkers is a terrible program, but it is better than doing nothing. The planet is inevitably heading for a climate catastrophe. Reducing emissions and getting some more efficient vehicles on the road is a good thing.

    A better thing, of course, would be if we had converted to renewable energy and more efficient vehicles when Jimmy Carter asked us to back in 1978 – 30 years ago. However, we replaced him with Reagan who still thought it was 1928.

    We have painted ourselves into a corner, folks. There is no pleasant way out of this mess. It is my fault and yours. We voted for the people who made unrealistic promises and we kept our eyes closed.

    June 18, 2009 04:55 pm at 4:55 pm |
  14. Melissa

    Hey, Rethugs, Obama has to finish the war that you bloody thugs started. Thats why he needs the money. It takes money to pull the troops back in a manner that YOU INSIST must be done.

    Stop the two faced idiocy.

    June 18, 2009 05:01 pm at 5:01 pm |
  15. Dawn in Pa

    Mmmm, The Republicans are whinning about the War budget, Lets see you add up the seven years we have been fighting in two wars, handing Pakistan a blank check and maybe some other Country.. ADD them up, at least it would in the Budget. Bush never had the war in the Budget so REPUBLICANS TELL ME EXACTLY WHERE THE MONEY CAME FROM.... Jerks...

    If the Republicans can place when the Credit card reform the ok to carry loaded handguns into National Parks, then I guess they can have cash for clunkers. Like I said they can have mine....for about three hundred dollars, because that is what it is worth....

    June 18, 2009 05:01 pm at 5:01 pm |
  16. kevin

    Something is weird here ...
    It seems that a war funding headline got mixed up with a cash for clunkers bill.

    Oh and for the poeple you dont like the C4C Bill.

    Its estimated to save 1 million barrels of oil per year.
    Thats a million less we have to but from the Saudi King.

    Oh thats right though, you are republicans.... you publically say dont dont want to be addicated to oil, but privatly you do what ever the Oil comapnies want.

    Oil comapnies are the ONLY ones that benefit from the Republican energy policies.

    June 18, 2009 05:03 pm at 5:03 pm |
  17. Steve (the real one)

    And the beat goes on. Where is all the whining people who cried out bout the war when Bush was in office! I see the dems are still following a ton of Busgh policies! What no stones?? Your boys are in charge of the House, Senate and WH. Stop the funds, stop the war ...REAL easy! Where's the liberal outrage? Why so silent now?? Liberal outrage has now turned into liberal excuses!!!.

    June 18, 2009 05:03 pm at 5:03 pm |
  18. Sniffit

    @ Bizarro world Sniffit, who said "So Dan, you blame this on the GOP even though only 4 voted for it and all but one Dem did?"

    Meh...blame aside...the GOP doesn't have to vote for anything whatsoever, no matter how blatanlty necessary it is, if it thinks the measure will be unpopular. They can sit back and let the Dems do all the governing and bear all the burdens and risks associated with it because the Dems have a supermajority. The reality is, this would have passed with 100% GOPer votes if the POTUS was a GOPer and they controlled Congress. All the tally of GOPer votes is good for these days is gauging how cowardly and petulant they've decided to behave on a particular issue.

    June 18, 2009 05:05 pm at 5:05 pm |
  19. phoenix86

    Melissa and other Obamabots,

    Please educate yourselfs on the details of the bills in question rather than shout out uninformed opinions or mimic moveon.org.

    I think you would be surprised at what you have been defending.

    Then again, maybe you all are really just mentally challenged.

    June 18, 2009 05:06 pm at 5:06 pm |
  20. Steve (the real one)


    That all you got.?? I read this 2-3 weeks ago!!
    1. When did we attack NK? Keep in mind they were just as crazy when Clinton was in office! What did he do? He sent Albright over who danced with and toasted Kim! Nothing changed!
    2. When did "Black Hawk Down" in Somali happen? 1993. Who was President? Clinton!
    Dan's liberal philosophy?? Lie, Lie, Lie until becomes the truth!

    June 18, 2009 05:12 pm at 5:12 pm |
  21. Peoples Voice

    How can the Republicans vote against our troops. They are the most unpatriotic, sloven, knuckle-draggers I've ever seen.

    They'll send our children to war, but refuse to vote money for them. Shame , shame, shame.

    June 18, 2009 05:23 pm at 5:23 pm |
  22. Derrick

    regarding the appology issued by the U.S. Senate for the wrongs of slavery; in 1988 Congress passed and President Reagan signed legislation which apologized for the internment on behalf of the U.S. government. The legislation stated that government actions were based on "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership".....Later, About $1.6 billion in reparations were later disbursed by the U.S. government to surviving internees and their heirs.....So after 144 years descendents of African slaves finally get an official appology but, since they are 3rd tier humans, no reparations are required......

    June 18, 2009 05:28 pm at 5:28 pm |
  23. Mississippi Mike

    The problem with this bill is that it has so many non-war related crap in it that it doesn't really represent a "war funding bill" as much as another round of Stimulus Bill crap.

    June 18, 2009 05:28 pm at 5:28 pm |
  24. GI Joe

    Hmm – seems the neo-cons don't want to support our troops.

    June 18, 2009 05:28 pm at 5:28 pm |
  25. Zero.

    Why do CNN keep lying. Why do they cover up for Obama.

    June 18, 2009 05:36 pm at 5:36 pm |
1 2