Daniel noted something about the ALAWON posting regarding the failure of the Reed amendment to increase funding for America’s libraries: "I highlight with considerable displeasure the facts that (1) Of the four NONVOTING members, three were Democratic Presidential Hopefuls: Edwards (D-NC); Graham (D-FL); Lieberman (D-CT). (2) Given the vote of Yeas 47, Neas 49 IF all three Senators had been present and voted yes, library funding could have been increased in a time of near total fiscal starvation.
"Just another example of how much better Democratic leaders benefit America than Republicans. Not that I’m a fan of most Republicans. I realize that there was a debate last night and I don’t know the exact time of the Senate vote, but couldn’t working Senators have appeared by video link while serving their country?"
Deeper meanings
“What if” is a mug’s game at best. IF the three missing Dems had been there, AND the one missing Repub had been there, the vote would have been a tie.
One should look at this in the socio-cultural context of the times. American politicians are so interchangeable from pursuing policies in such a way that they attempt to offend no one, that the American voting population is evenly split along party lines, and this is now being reflected in votes in Congress. But, then, perhaps it has always been so. Anybody know how they voted for library funding when Franklin was trying to get the system established?