[B Knotts]

Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Campbell (R-CO), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Nay
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Not Voting
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Not Voting
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay

Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Nay
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay

[rwfromkansas]

That's more than I expected.

[Zack Nguyen]

"In South Dakota, we've never had a single same sex marriage and we won't have any," he said. "It's prohibited by South Dakota law as it is now in 38 other states. There is no confusion. There is no ambiguity."

We should all remember these words. When homosexual marriage comes to South Dakota (if the USSC makes it a Consitutional right), then we ought to all remember that these words came from an alleged leader who is supposed to have vision.

[Antoninus]

Shocking, simply shocking:

[BlueNgold]

Thank you John McCain and the Dems in the Senate for denying me my chance to be heard on this issue.

[Recovering_Democrat]

TWO COWARDS

The two cowards in the Senate, afraid to take an official stand on the amendment to preserve traditional marriage, chat about how cool it is to be metrosexual. Notice the glint of jealousy in the Frenchie's eyes.

[k2blader]

It's good this is on the record now.

Fewer Republicans voted against it than I would have guessed (Yay!). I didn't realize McCain was pro-homomarriage.

Figures that Kerry and Edwards skipped the vote.

[southernnorthcarolina]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here as to what exactly the Senate was voting on, and how many votes were needed for passage. Let me give it a try, in the secure knowledge that someone will correct me if I'm wrong:

The vote was for cloture, and it failed 48-50. A vote on cloture is a vote to shut off debate, and proceed to the main question. A cloture vote requires 60 for passage; thus the motion failed by 12 votes. The vote against cloture effectively prevented the question itself from coming to the floor.

Does anyone disagree with the above? Corrections cheerfully accepted; I've been wrong before.

Now, some more subjective opinions:

Some Senators may choose to hide behind the technical fact that they didn't vote for gay marriage per se, but only against shutting off debate. But I'm sure ratings groups right (such as the ACU) and left (such as the ADA) will count this vote as pro- or anti-gay marriage.

I'm sure that a couple of "nay" votes on the cloture question were from the right, or from a libertarian perspective (maybe Sununu's vote?), but most were from the left.

The Administration "won" here, by getting the supporters of gay marriage on the record (out of the closet, so to speak). The bill itself was never going to win, and if it had, it never would have been ratified.

Personally, I think it's God-awful constitutional law, but I'd have voted for cloture (and the bill itself) in a sort of "send 'em a message" mode. A bit hypocritical of me, I suppose, but that's how both sides are playing the game these days.

[Freemyland]

Does anyone have the text of the proposed amendment? Does it outlaw gay marriage entirely, and ban any government from recognizing same, or does it simply state that the US Constitution shall not be construed to contain the right to gay marriage? The second option would stop federal judges from creating the right, while leaving the issue to the several states.

[thoughtomator]

There are other ways to solve this problem. A Constitutional Amendment was never the best idea.

[YOUGOTIT]

Again the Senate has proven that they no longer support the American people. The anti-Americans in the US Senate remind one of the Imperial Senate of Rome - Anti-Country and self-preserving. The only way to fix the problem is the repeal the XVII Amendment to the Constitution and once again have the Senators appointed by the State Legislators, as the original Constitution called for. This is a club of elitist who think they are better that the people they serve and do not give a crap about the wishes of the American people.

REPEAL THE XVII AMENDMENT – Get some real Americans in the US Senate.

[Destro]

"I would argue that the future of our country hangs in the balance because the future of marriage hangs in the balance," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a leader in the fight to approve the measure. "Isn't that the ultimate homeland security, standing up and defending marriage?"

What demogoguery!! If that was the case ban marriages and jail Brittney Spear.

[Merdoug]

When are you Republicans going to realize that the GOP isn't conservative? geeze! Some of you people are pathetic! Just wagging your tail and following obediantly to the voting booth and voting for the same old lying weasels every four years who claim to be conservative but are nothing but spineless power-hungry money-takers. And NOW the GOP is noble and support your agenda since they ALMOST passed the amendment! HA! HA! "They'll take it on the campaign". Yeah. "We WOULD'DA dun it if not for those waskally liberals!" The GOP and the Dems are in bed together and they are LAUGHING at you right now!

[freddiedavis]

don't we just love divided government

[concerned about politics]

We'll find out soon enough who voted for pushing dysfunctional sex fetishes and who voted for the American family and their children.
We'll know who was anti-family within 24 hours. The Republicans voting for all fetish marriage will pay for this. All the foot licker's, boy molesters, polygamists, animal chasers and tree humpers will be getting in line. What's Constitutional for one demented fetish is constitutional for all, and these Republicans will be the ones to blame for not stopping it.

[concerned about politics]

Both men skipped the vote.

Because they're both pro-fetish. They didn't want the American people to know, not until after the election, then they'll push for hate speech legislation to silence any descent.

[INSENSITIVE GUY]

All this tripe about we should'nt tamper with the constitution!SO WHAT!!!It ain't the Bible so don't worry about it.This country is faced with and will be faced with serious problems concerning moral deterioration.I don't care if you ad 100 new amendments,if there is a problem to be addressed then deal with it by any means necessary.

[INSENSITIVE GUY]

All this tripe about we should'nt tamper with the constitution!SO WHAT!!!It ain't the Bible so don't worry about it.This country is faced with and will be faced with serious problems concerning moral deterioration.I don't care if you ad 100 new amendments,if there is a problem to be addressed then deal with it by any means necessary.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

What almost amuses me is how the media is acting like this was a defeat for the proposed amendment itself. The vote was only for cloture, in order to bring the question to the floor for a vote.

Well, 50 Senators were sufficiently afraid of the question to vote nay on cloture. Fine, says I! Let us continue the debate on the chamber floor. Let those opposed to the historical definition of marriage hold forth on why two persons with the same genitalia should be allowed the benefits of matrimony. Or better yet, why polygamy should remain outlawed. Or why two men and a llama should not enjoy conubial bliss without governmental interference.

But then, the DemocRats are the party that doesn't know what the definition of 'is' is. Or that oral sex is sex. Or the the Constitution is the Founding document, not some 'living, breathing' thing that they can take out to slaughter and skin for their amusement.

Sorry, I ramble on...

[pickemuphere]

"I would argue that the future of our country hangs in the balance because the future of marriage hangs in the balance," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a leader in the fight to approve the measure. "Isn't that the ultimate homeland security, standing up and defending marriage?"

Oh for godssakes, Rick, quit being such a drama queen. The actual military and economic defense of this country dwarfs the prospect of a couple of gays getting married. Get to the eminent business of the people and stop fussing over this non-issue. If worse comes to worse, let the states make up their own minds.