Blogs Cliopatria The Anti-Anti-Lynching Senators ...
Jun 14, 2005The Anti-Anti-Lynching Senators ...
Update: Thanks to Rob McDougall in comments, here's a list of additional Senators who apparently did not support the anti-lynching resolution of apology: Robert Bennett (R-Ut.), Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Michael Crapo (R-Id.), Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.), Chuck Grassley (R-Ia.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Orrin Hatch (R-Ut.), John Kyl (R-Ariz.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Ak.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), John Sununu (R-N.H.), Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.), and George Voinovich (R-Oh.).
Further Update: Because the Senate did not have a recorded vote on the resolution, the process of trying to identify those who did not support it has been on-going and the lists continue to shift. Law Dork called the offices of all Senators who were not on record as co-sponsors of the resolution and now gives us a list of those whose offices either did not claim to support the resolution or gave mushy answers (such as,"Of course, he must have supported it. It passed unanimously, didn't it?" That's evasive because the resolution was adopted by unanimous consent and there were only about a half-dozen Senators on the floor at the time.) After the telephone calls, Law Dork's list of non-supporters is: Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Michael Crapo (R-Id.), Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.), Orrin Hatch (R-Ut.), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tx.), Trent Lott (R-Miss.), Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), John Sununu (R-N.H.), Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.), and George Voinovich (R-Oh.).
comments powered by Disqus
More Comments:
Van L. Hayhow - 6/15/2005
Thanks Ralph.
Ralph E. Luker - 6/15/2005
There's all kinds of reasons to be confused, Van, because of conflicting accounts. An AP account this morning says that the resolution had 80 co-sponsors at the time it was brought up. Five more Senators signed on as co-sponsors before it was adopted by unanimous consent. The AP report gives the names of 15 Republicans who did not co-sponsor the resolution. So, yes, I saw the 94 or 96 figure, but it never could have been that high.
Van L. Hayhow - 6/15/2005
I'm confused. I thought I read that 96 senators co-sponsored the measure. As there are only 100 senators, how can there be more than 4 who opposed it? Or did I get the number of co-sponsers wrong?
Rob MacDougall - 6/14/2005
It looks like the exact number of Senators not signing on is still in some dispute. dailykos.com has a list of 20; Law Dork has added some names to that original six.
News
- Health Researchers Show Segregation 100 Years Ago Harmed Black Health, and Effects Continue Today
- Understanding the Leading Thinkers of the New American Right
- Want to Understand the Internet? Consider the "Great Stink" of 1858 London
- As More Schools Ban "Maus," Art Spiegelman Fears Worse to Come
- PEN Condemns Censorship in Removal of Coates's Memoir from AP Course
- Should Medicine Discontinue Using Terminology Associated with Nazi Doctors?
- Michael Honey: Eig's MLK Bio Needed to Engage King's Belief in Labor Solidarity
- Blair L.M. Kelley Tells Black Working Class History Through Family
- Review: J.T. Roane Tells Black Philadelphia's History from the Margins
- Cash Reparations to Japanese Internees Helped Rebuild Autonomy and Dignity






