Ironic or planned that this post follows your "Byrd death wish" post? Ahh..the hypocrisy of those Repugs.

Steve, I think that should be "implementation", not "implantation".

Otherwise, you are absolutely on the mark.

Over the next few years, we're going to collectively discover what some people already know: Al Franken is freaking brilliant.

He gets dismissed as just a comic, by people far less intelligent than him. Now that's funny.

"implantation"

Lol.

What was the rationalization for opposing this?

As we watch the Republican party become a regional entity, we will see more discomfort for GOP senators who have been passed by by a national narrative more in tune to creating law that works for all Americans, not just their corporate overlords!

McConnell, you idiot, voting against rape seems to be a no-brainer, especially for all your fellow "gentlemen" of the chamber! -Kevo

they basically voted voted to protect rapists and are now paying a political price for that.

I hope that is true, but the Republicans should already be paying a political price for being batshit crazy, and they are not.

al franken is almost enough to make me wish i lived in minnesota.

Franken's amendment is driving the Republicans crazy because they basically voted to protect rapists and are now paying a political price for that.

They are? Really? Forgive me if I'm not aware of any political consequence whatsoever for that vote, except that they get sneered at on lefty blogs and MSNBC prime time.

So when does this become effective and when will we see the contracts for Halliburton pulled?

What was the rationalization for opposing this?

I don't have the inside scoop, but I believe the concern was that some existing contracts would have to be voided immediately, before the private companies could alter their must-arbitrate clauses in their own employee contracts. Doesn't seem like the largest obstacle to me: either allow for a short implementation phase, or tell the defense companies: tough shit, do it before the bill becomes law.

I love this story, both from the policy perspective, from the political perspective, and from the not widely shared perspective that Al Franken is a smart, capable guy.

Long after Senator Franken has the last laugh , will there be any trees in the forest to hear if a republican has fallen ?

It's heartening, but also cause for concern in one respect. Why didn't the Senate Dems think of something similar to this and just as elementary, themselves, in the past? Why have had they let endless opportunities to craft similar amendments get by?

Because it's implicit that only Republicans can do this. It's a sandbox where only Republicans can kick anyone in the face. The Dems must play nice, and all of them do. And Franken doesn't, at least, for the time being, because he really isn't from their world.

I may be wrong, but if I'm right, this is a very sorry, dysfunctional, and unnatural state of affairs for one of the two most important legislative bodies in the nation.

Darn you, you pesky Democrats. How DARE you make me vote against something that will embarrass me?

Please....more of this!

The 1 percent club

Congratulations to Franken.
At least we know there exists one senator corporations don't own.
And one is better than none...

Franken not being collegial seems to be the new meme, replacing (or in addition to) "former clown". The McCain rant the other day was also directed at Al's lack of collegiality for objecting to Lieberman's extending his remarks.

I know I've said it before, but:

Franken/Grayson 2016!!

I have known for years that Al Franken is brilliant. He has written some books that are just insanely funny, while exposing the bad behavior of republicans. His books that I recommend most highly are Lies, and The Lying Liars Who Tell Them; The Truth, with jokes; Why Not Me? where he runs for President. He really goes after Billo, Rush, Coulter, Bush, Bush's cunt of a mother, Hannity, Jack Abramoff, Tom Delay and many more. They are a bit dated now, because he was going after DeLay and Abramoff right before they got nailed. We are going to see alot of excellent work from this Senator. He is going to make us very proud. He already is making me very proud. Well done Senator!

but I believe the concern was that some existing contracts would have to be voided immediately, before the private companies could alter their must-arbitrate clauses in their own employee contracts.

Pretty much every contract written has a clause that says that if one clause of this contract is deemed illegal or unenforceable, that should not void all of the other clauses. I would be willing to bet vast sums of money that all the employment contracts in question have such a clause, that you could read the Franken amendment as striking down the loss of right of redress, and the rest of the contract is still valid.

Don't rely on this post for legal advice. Check with your attorney. Don't swim for an hour after eating.

"Forgive me if I'm not aware of any political consequence whatsoever for that vote, except that they get sneered at on lefty blogs and MSNBC prime time." - Steve M.

You're right. They haven't suffered any consequences because republicans have no problem forcing rape victims to submit to arbitration in order to protect their corporate interests. The MSM, a GOP tool, also sees no issue here.

The real question is why the Democrats aren't making a bigger issue out of this.

So does this help the previous victims like Jamie Leigh Jones or is going forward ?

Have her rapists ever been identified or charged ?

Politics are great, but there are plenty of criminals running lose and it would be nice to know that something is being done to actually prevent the fuckers who have done this from doing it again.

I doubt many people are going to rejoice that they can get money from the company that hires known rapists. If anything this bill seems to promote the cover-up to a greater degree, now a crime will actually cost money.

"What was the rationalization for opposing this?"

It's precisely because so few people lay this out, and rarely explain the issue in any more detail than "Republicans support rape" that I'm skeptical about this take on things. If the issue really was so simple and morally straightforward, then I can't imagine that even most Senate Republican men wouldn't have voted for it, even out of craven political self-interest.

Franken is proving that a "clown" might not be an insult.

ScottW: As I've heard it explained, once a corporation signs a new federal contract, they are bound to this amendment for all their contracts. Which means, Jones will be able to proceed in court once H/KBR gets another job. That is part of the loophole on this one. (Again, as I've heard it explained.)

Which means, Jones will be able to proceed in court once H/KBR gets another job. TonyB

That's good to here.

I called my senator John Thune of SD to find out why he voted against this ammendment. He was on the floor addressing the Senate at the time (read: obstructing the healthcare bill) & was not available. But an aide named Jane Tschetter told me he voted against it because it was "poorly worded"!

The Republiscum were against it because it gets in the way of business as usual, which consists of shovelling vast sums of public money at Halliburton, KBR, and various other Republican supporters, in return for them shovelling a tiny portion of it back to Republican party coffers. Moreover, democrats were for it, so they had to be against it regardless of whether or not that made sense. Even worse, if was proposed by the guy who beat their guy after a long and bitter post-election dispute. The details are irrelevant: it could have been commended motherhood, outlawed abortion, cut taxes to zero, and named everything over 10 ft high after Reagan and they'd have still been against it.

Can someone please post a link or the names of the 30 Republicans who voted against this. I feel certain that my two Georgian senators have made the list.

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/meet-the-senators-who-vot_n_312976.html
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

http://www.republicansforrape.org/ is good for a laugh :o)

Franken is going to be a great substantive Senator, but Dems need someone with a more bland past to be doing things like this. Republicans are focusing on Franken because their base, being composed of Rush and Fox New fanboys, hates him, and his role in this rallies the base to ignore the substance. Republicans will use Franken for six years to gin up Drudge headlines and Fox News crawl crap.

Uncollegial.

Tell that to fucking Senator Frist and his liberals-are-vegetable-killers chorus.

Or, as John McCain would say, "My good friend Ted Kennedy would have opposed this bill because it didn't have bipartisan support. And because his nephew is a rapist."

"- make members of the opposition uncomfortable"

Uncomfortable? Easily cured; just take your head out of your ass. . .

Drew - Don't blame the Dems for over-simplifying and demonizing this.

The measure made other completely unreasonable demands on contractors -- such as following sexual harassment and discrimination laws. The Republican position is, in other words, "It's not that we want women to be raped, but we are not willing to accept sexual harrassment laws to do it." That's why you won't even see them defending their vote explicitly.

Their other argument is, "We don't support rape, but we think the free market can take care of it."

Their vote is indefensible; that's why they're not defending it.

I think they actually say, "The nerve of that clown," because each and every ReThugs thinks they are smarter than Franken, where in fact, each and every one of them is dumber than he is.

Did you see "Dr." Coburn saying people should pray that at least 1 Democrat couldn't make it to the Senate to vote?

Their knickers are in a knot because a DEMOCRAT put them in a tough position? These guys have been accusing Democrats of wanting to kill granny for months, and FRANKEN is the bad boy?

omg

N. Well's post of the ReThugs voting against this (and thanks for that, NW) reminds me how much I love to read "Sen. Crapo, R."

I suppose I really should go and read the text of this bill but I'm going to say ahead of time that this is probably entertaining politics to those who follow it but it will prove to be completely useless at avoiding this kind of corporate policy in the future. And nobody should harbor illusions that it will do anything about changing corporate or individual conduct.

Being frozen out of court is just one in a long line of procedural tactics that the deep-pocketed corporation will use to stall any resolution until hell freezes over.

Franken gets some cred, the opposite party is forced into an uncomfortable policy position which won't affect ANY contributions or votes... nothing changes.

Glorious info here. This interesting put up made me smile. Perhaps should you throw in a few footage it'll make the whole thing extra interesting. Anyway, in my language, there are not much good supply like this.