Did Frist's Anti-Poker Bill Hand The Senate To Democrats?

I've been tossing out accusations about various Republican constituencies lately.

Here's another one.

The reaction to the poker bill, if my blog is any indication (and I think it's some indication), was overwhelmingly negative as far as actual vote-moving impact. I mean, while some may support it, or be willing to acquiesce in it, almost no votes were gained that way -- but many votes were lost.

Now, Allen lost by 7000 votes (out of two million cast) and Burns lost by 4000 or so (out of... I don't know how many votes. It's Montana. I'm guessing 5000 total votes in the state? Do they allow chickens to vote?)

The poker thing alone could have moved that many votes.

There's a reason to allow actual debate and voting on bills -- to find out if they're actually wanted by the public. You know -- democracy and all that.

I think Bill Frist's stealthy insertion of the provision into a national security bill prevented anyone from finding out just how unpopular this ban was.

And now we know we could not afford to lose a single Republican-leaning vote. Not a one.

posted by Ace at 03:13 PM

| Access Comments