Action Alert! Call Your Reps And Senators About S1867 Today!

This is EVERYTHING about this bill!   Please please call the senators listed below…it’s in THEIR HANDS NOW… waiting on House committee members… PLEASE GET THIS OUT TO OTHERS ASAP!!!  WE MUST MAKE CALLS!

National Defense Authorization Act (actually should be titled The National Detention Detainment Act) for Fiscal Year 2012 that our senate got behind closed doors in secret meetings during Thanksgiving and then passed this last week (because the senators allowed this…except for 7 SENATORS ) Now this bill goes to committee in the SENATE and THE HOUSE! The Senate has gotten their list…House is still waiting!
This bill has taken away our rights under the Constitution to have a fair trial, to NOT have the military rounding us up and holding us indefinitely (even in prisons ABROAD) and for good measure the Senators decided to also revoke Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to LEGALIZE sodomy and have sex with animals (would that be Congress!?) I wish I was kidding… I am attaching the info on the repeal of the sodomy/bestiality, I am attaching a breakdown of a friend of mine, Rick, who is a master at research and actually found the Amendments 1031 and 1032 hidden on the site     (where they post bills) I am posting my friend’s comments on S1867 and his comments on the propaganda that our rotten to the core senators are putting out (this would include MIKE LEE, PAT TOOMEY, JIM DEMINT and MARCO RUBIO! Who voted AGAINST the UDALL amendment that protected US Citizens from being detained/ rounded up).
 Having more than ONE gun, having more than 7 days of food, having bumper stickers on your carthis bill is written for you to be deemed a terrorist based on suspicion and NOT PROOF, CONVICTION or CHARGED, on SUSPICION ONLY!!! HELD W/OUT TRIAL!!! from Rand Paul. MUST SEE VIDEOS BELOW!
I will attach Udall’s Argument on the Senate floor) and last but not least the ad for the ARMY asking for recruitments for the “internment, relocations camps for civilians” you must see. It’s all here in one long email…. READ THRU AND THEN CALL!!!! I have attached ALL THE NUMBERS FOR YOU! Copy and paste into a word doc, print and take with you and call when you can!!! Pass to others…have them call! PLEASE!!!
 Question to John Mica’s office (FL CONGRESSMAN) from Rick Haven.  S 1867 passed the senate last night 93 – 7 and now goes back to the House.    Most of the Tea Party folks see this as a very bad bill, and are calling Rubio’s vote treasonous!  I was at a presentation by Sheriff Mack last night in Jacksonville, and he said this is the worst possible of all bill that would destroy the freedom and liberty of American citizens and called all who support it traitors!  Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers had this to say about this bill yesterday afternoon;   Stewart Rhodes used the term “traitor” several times in this video.  What will John Mica do now?  ..

FROM John Mica’s office: 1867 doesn’t come to the House now. It goes to conference to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions. That includes the provisions you are concerned about. Just wanted to let you know that the Congressman voted in support of HR 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. However, the article was incorrect that the House legislation contained a similar provision. The only reference to Sec 1031 and 1032 in the House bill deals with the definition of a Guantanamo Detainees (1031) and an extension of authority to make rewards for combating terrorism (1032). We passed our House version (different from the Senate’s) and the Senate will pass theirs and any differences will be worked out in Conference Committee. Looks like is a little loose with the facts and needs to be more careful about what they put out.

Question to John Mica’s office (FL CONGRESSMAN)  How can we stop this bill from becoming law? FROM John Mica’s office Need to have folks contact the conferees and express their concerns

Question to John Mica’s office (FL CONGRESSMAN) If you could give me a list of those conferees and committees this will have to travel through and by.

FROM John Mica’s office No committees. Just conferees. I’ll see about getting you the list. … The House has not selected Conferees yet since the Senate just passed theirs last night. Here are the Senate Conferees:

Levin: (202) 224-6221; Lieberman: (202) 224-4041; Reed: (202) 224-4642; Akaka: (202) 224-6361; Nelson: NE (202) 224-6551; Webb: (202) 224-4024;

McCaskill: (202) 224-6154; Udall: CO (202) 224-5941; Hagan: (202) 224-6342; Begich: (202) 224-3004; Manchin: (202) 224-3954; Shaheen: (202) 224-2841;

Gillibrand: (202) 224-4451; Blumenthal: (202) 224-2823; McCain: (202) 224-2235; Inhofe: (202) 224-4721; Sessions: (202) 224-4124;

Chambliss: (202) 224-3521; Wicker: (202) 224-6253; Brown: MA (202) 224-4543; Portman: (202) 224-3353; Ayotte: (202) 224-3324;

Collins: (202) 224-2523; Graham: (202) 224-5972; Cornyn: (202) 224-2934; Vitter: (202) 224-4623

Need-to-know info  from Judge Napolitano – Constitutional Expert on Fox Business News on his show Freedom Watch – This was done BEFORE THE BILL PASSED!!! Click below (MUST SEE THESE VIDEOS!!!)   and   and

PLEASE PLEASE CALL THESE SENATORS listed above in red MON DEC 5 (the main line to the SENATE IS (202) 224-3121. Ask for your senator as well) . Once we find the HOUSE committee members we will get that out. Please call and email.   DO BOTH! WE MUST DO THIS OR THIS BILL PASSES!! Get this out to everyone!!! Strength in numbers!!! Please help stop this!!! It would not hurt to go ahead and call your Representative In the House. Main # is (202) 225 – 3121 or go to and go to the right hand corner and put in your zip! What I have attached below:

1.    Explanation on the Article 125 Sodomy /Bestiality now legal!

2.    Breakdown of the propaganda coming out of traitor Senators office.

3.    Article on the breakdown of the treasons Detainment Bill S1867

4.  The Udall Amendment (that Udall tried putting on to protect Americans it failed and who voted NOT to protect us)

5.  The ad from the Army for the internment/relocation facilities for Americans

6.  The overall vote for S1867 in the Senate (only 7 Senators voted NO)

7.  Article from our Neighbor Canada on this bill.

Government Senate Repeals Bans on Sodomy and Bestiality in the Military

The U.S. Senate voted Thursday to approve a defense authorization bill which included a provision that not only repealed the military ban on sodomy, but also repealed the ban on having sex with animals — or bestiality.

CNS News reported:

On Nov. 15, the Senate Armed Services Committee had unanimously approved S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes a provision to repeal Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

Article 125 of the UCMJ makes it illegal to engage in both sodomy with humans and sex with animals.

It states: “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

The vote to remove sodomy from military law comes less than a year after President Barack Obama’s repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy for gay soldiers.

Tony Perkins, President of the conservative Family Research Council, said there’s a definite link between the repeal of DADT and the repeal of the sodomy law.

“It’s all about using the military to advance this administration’s radical social agenda,” Perkins told CNS News. “Not only did they overturn Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but they had another problem, and that is, under military law sodomy is illegal, just as adultery is illegal, so they had to remove that prohibition against sodomy.”

This bill is nothing like came out of the House in May 2011 and then went to the Senate this past week – We need to contact our Representatives to not allow this to pass!  ~victoria

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2011

Posted on December 3, 2011 by Rick Haven

Many of you may have seen JR Sanchez’s e-mail from Rubio stating that many of us have misunderstood the provisions in Senate bill 1867.    Many thought the Patriot Act was a good idea in the beginning, but few agree today.  Rahm Emanuel has stated that, “You should never let a good crisis go to waste.”  Also remember that it will be judges that we will have no control over, giving their interpretation of this bill once it is passed.  It will be of little use when senators Rubio, McCain, Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint state, “That is not what I voted for.”

Let’s pick out the pieces from Rubio’s letter: Sec. 1031 says, “any person committing a belligerent act or directly supported such hostilities of such enemy forces.” Who gets to decide what hostilities, which belligerent act, and who is an enemy force.  Did the Founding Fathers think that within the “enumerated powers”, Art. I, Sect. 8,  “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations and among the several States and with the Indian Tribes”  would stretch into every corner of our lives?  Make us all wear seat belts and require the registration of all gun sales?  The clause in Sec. 1031 of S 1867 is separated by commas for a reason.  Have you seen Janet Napolitano’s criteria of a terrorist?  May have car bumper stickers that may be subversive to the Federal government, carry a copy of the Bible or the US Constitution.  I am current reading “Original Intent” by David Barton, and I always carry a hand gun and I am against abortion.  I am four out of a possible eight, and a terrorist in Napolitano’s view.

“Giving clarity to the military in regard to its authority to detain people who have committed substantially harmful acts against the United States (read government).” When do you think they will arrest Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dorn?  Would it be a far stretch that the Tea Party could be considered a substantial threat to the current government of the United States?  Who gets to decide what is a harmful act?

“This detention requirement is clearly limited by a clause that states that the requirement to detain does not extend to US citizens or lawful permanent residents.”   Sec. 1032 says, “The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.”  This is a suspension of habeas corpus.  The loophole here, this bill does not exclude civilian custody.  GW Bush tried to suspend habeas corpus in Oct. 2006 by the Military Commissions Act, HR 6166, because he thought he would have to bring prisoners from Guantanamo to Illinois.    Another web site at the time stated that Republican members of Congress flinched, choosing Bush over the Constitution.  They are doing it again.

“This bill does NOT overturn the Posse Comitatus Act; the military will not be patrolling the streets.” If the US military arrests anyone on American soil, they have violated Possé Comitatus.  This bill makes all of the United States of America a battle zone, and therefore the military may act in any capacity.  Sections 1036 and 1037 spell out how detainees will be subjected to military tribunals at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State.

Most of S 1867 is a military appropriations bill dealing with military contractors and buying a shopping list of military stores.  Why was section 1031 hidden in the Thomas registry for this bill until some of us figured out how to access it?  If any of these provisions are truly necessary, then put them in a stand-alone-bill.  The Military Defense Authorization Act that the House voted on in June 2011 didn’t look anything like what the Senate is voting on, and the entire section about “Detainees” doesn’t exist in the House bill.

While I was listening to a presentation by Sheriff Mack in Jacksonville on Thursday evening, the entire Senate voted 93 – 7 to pass this bill.  Sheriff Mack said that if this bill was to pass, it would be a “declaration of war” on the citizens of the United States.  Stewart Rhodes, founder of Oath Keepers has openly called all who voted in favor of this bill “traitors”.  Our own Kris Anne Hall (Constitutional Lawyer)  has called it a “Trojan Horse”.

The interpretation of this legislation will be made by an obscure court that will set the precedence for eternity.  Remember a simple statement in the Preamble of the US Constitution gave us the “General Welfare Clause” that has created the welfare state we currently have.  When are the courts going to “secure the Blessings of Liberty” also mentioned in the Preamble for the citizens of the United States of America?

I have exchanged several e-mails on Friday with John Mica’s chief-of-staff.  Senate bill 1867 now will go to a group of conferees made up from both the Senate and the House.  The House members have yet to be chosen, but the following list is of the Senators; Levin; Lieberman; Reed; Akaka; Nelson of NE; Webb; McCaskill; Udall of CO; Hagan; Begich; Manchin; Shaheen; Gillibrand; Blumenthal; McCain; Inhofe; Sessions; Chambliss; Wicker; Brown of MA; Portman; Ayotte; Collins; Graham; Cornyn; Vitter.  All of these voted for this bill; three Republicans (Rand Paul), three Democrats and Independent Bernie Sanders voted against this bill.


I won’t call anyone a liar, but I will never believe anything Marco Rubio ever says again…………Rick

Setting the Trap

by Justin Raimondo, November 30, 2011

| Print This | Share This | Antiwar Forum

Levin-McCain bill would create a presidential dictatorship. Where is the outrage? Buried in the annual defense appropriations bill is a provision that would give the President the power to use the military to intern anyone – including American citizens – indefinitely, and hold them without charges or trial, anywhere in the world, including on American soil. The provision essentially repeals the longstanding Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents the military from engaging in law enforcement on US territory – the greatest fear of the Founders. Approved by a Senate subcommittee in secret hearings, the provisions open the road to a military dictatorship in this country – and for that we can thank Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, who introduced the measure. Both the FBI and the Pentagon came out against the Levin-McCain monstrosity, and Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) introduced an amendment striking the provision: the amendment was defeated in the Senate, 37-61.
The mind reels. As the ACLU’s Chris Anders puts it: “I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?
 Why now, indeed – and the answer is not hard to fathom. With the US banking system making very loud creaking noises as the eurozone descends into the economic abyss, and a total meltdown staring us in the face, the Powers That Be want to make sure they have their hands on the reins of power – and on the whip they won’t hesitate to use. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) exults that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and anyone can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Graham doesn’t care about any of that sissy constitutional stuff, and never didthrow ‘em in the brig!
Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican from the “Live Free or Die” state, doesn’t care that she’s destroying the American republic and our constitutional liberties by voting for this draconian measure because, she says, “America is part of the battlefield.” Nothing illustrates the longstanding warning from antiwar advocates that “war is the health of the state” than this ominous development. The principle that war leads inevitably to the erosion and eventual destruction of our constitutional form of government is being dramatized on the floor of Congress even as I write these words.
At the Republican foreign policy debate held recently, Professor Gingrich lectured us on “the difference between national security requirements and criminal law requirements,” and, drawing on this spurious distinction, averred: “All of us will be in danger for the rest of our lives. This is not going to end in the short run. And we need to be prepared to protect ourselves from those who, if they could, would not just kill us individually, but would take out entire cities. For the rest of our lives we’ll be in thrall to Gingrich, Graham, Levin, and the rest of them, on the pretext that we’re about to be nuked by a bunch of marginal fanatics hiding in a cave somewhere. It’s a thin rationale indeed for setting the stage for martial law in the United States, but it couldn’t have come at a more convenient time for our rulers, as they face the prospect of civil disorder in the face of economic collapse. That the authoritarian strain in American politics is coming to the fore in this time of crisis should come as no surprise. Backed up against a wall, the ruling elite is baring its teeth, and the Constitution – which has long been a mere piece of moldering parchment rather than the law of the land – is easily disposed of.
Our cowardly Congress, which lives only to advance special interests and line its own pockets, is hardly a bulwark against this onslaught: indeed, they are the source of it. So where are the Tea Partiers, who warn against “Big Government” and denounce “RINOs” like Sen. Graham who don’t share their aversion to centralized authority? They’re busy campaigning for Gingrich, the “true conservative” and $1.6 million Fannie Mae “consultant,” who preaches the virtues of endless war. Besides, the Levin-McCain provisions will only be used against them damned Mooslims – right? Wrong but by the time these patriots realize how wrong they are, itll be too late. As Rep. Justin Amash, one of the few congressmen elected on the Tea Party wave who has a conscience (and a brain), put it, this bill, which is carefully crafted to mislead the public, is one of the most anti-liberty pieces of legislation in our lifetime. As the economy collapses – say, around next week sometime – and as people line up at the banks to get their money out, and discover the till is empty, as the food distribution system breaks down, and the mobs gather and swell, they’ll call the army out into the streets to keep order. And it will all be perfectly “legal.” Don’t tell me our sainted solons are cringing in fear of al-Qaeda, which is by now a mere shadow of a shadow: the real object of their fear is the American people and they have every reason to be afraid.
The “debate” in Congress over the Levin-McCain provisions is not really what it appears to be, as Marcy Wheeler points out in some depth. On the Senate floor, opponents of the provision, such as Dianne Feinstein, mentioned the dangers of the army patrolling the streets of American cities only in passing, if at all: their real objection is that the provisions impede the really existing “war on terrorism.” Wheeler argues that the Obama administration would be constrained from utilizing its network of informants if detainees were handled by the military. As she puts it: “Again, I suspect that’s the Administration objection. It allows them to do these things. But requires they do them with a paper trail Congress can audit. In short, it’s a future Fast and Furious scandal, the guaranteed exposure of all of their harebrained undercover operations, waiting to happen.
 The administration’s veto threat has nothing to do with protecting civil liberties: indeed, quite the opposite. As Sen. Levin noted in his remarks, a bit of politicking went on at the secret Senate hearing: The initial bill reported by the committee included language expressly precluding the detention of citizens or lawful resident aliens of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States. The Administration asked that this language be removed from the bill. (victorias noteto be clear that would be the OBAMA administration!)
  The real purpose of the Levin-McCain provisions is entirely unrelated to “terrorism,” either by al-Qaeda or any known domestic outfit. It was put in there to codify a number of important legal precedents, which make it possible for the President to declare an American citizen an enemy combatant and hold him or her indefinitely without charges. This is the final step in a process that will enable the President to establish a de facto military dictatorship: its the unitary presidency meets the global economic crisis.America is part of the battlefield, says Sen. Ayotte, quite accurately and Americans are the target. Resistance is terrorism: dissent is a crime, and youd better shut up and take it if you know whats good for you. Thats the message theyre sending and how, one wonders, will Americans respond?
  Tryptophaned into a submissive lethargy by large doses of turkey and stuffing, and living in constant fear of imminent destitution, they hardly notice this historic betrayal. The trap is set, baited, and ready to spring: one has to wonder, however, if this passivity will hold once those steel jaws bite. I bet they’re wondering in Washington, too. NOTES IN THE MARGIN We are headed straight for a military dictatorship in this country – but it isn’t too late to fight back. is in the front lines of the battle, educating the American people about the nature of the regime we live under and making the case for liberty and peace. Yet we can’t do it alone: we need your help to keep up the fight. The success of our winter fundraising drive is essential to our survival, so please give today– because the future of the country depends on it.

Read more by Justin Raimondo



This protected us…had they attached this to the S1867 bill. Here is Mark Udall’s argument to the President of the Senate. ~victoria comment

“Mr. President, I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect.  One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil.  Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil.  That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.

These detainee provisions are unnecessary, counterproductive and potentially harmful to our counterterrorism efforts.  And, Mr. President, I know I’ve said this a couple of times already, but it feels like they’re being rushed through in a manner that doesn’t serve us.  The Department of Defense has had little input, there have been no hearings and earlier this week the changes were presented to us in the Armed Services Committee just hours before we were asked to vote on them.

These are just too important a set of questions to let them pass without a thorough review and far greater understanding of their effect on our national security and our fight against terrorism.  It feels to me, to this senator, that we’re rushing hastily to address a solution in search of a problem.  And we ought to hear from the Department of Defense, the intelligence community, and our colleagues in other relevant committees before we act.  Do we really believe that this Congress – again let me underline that – after ten years of successfully prosecuting the war on terror – should substitute its views for those of our homeland security leadership without careful analysis?

Mr. President, I recently received a letter signed by 18 retired military leaders in opposition to these provisions.  The letter states that – quote – “mandating military custody would undermine legitimate law enforcement and intelligence operations crucial to our security at home and abroad.”  Mr. President, I couldn’t agree more.  And I’d ask unanimous consent that this letter be included in the record.

We are already trying and convicting terrorists in both civilian courts and under military commissions.  The provisions that are in this bill would require the DOD to shift significant resources away from its mission to act on all the fronts all over the world and it would become a police force and jailer.  This is not what they’re good at.  This is not what we want them to do, and I think it has dangerous potentially consequences because we have limited resources, limited manpower.

We wouldn’t lose anything by taking a little bit more time to discuss and debate these provisions.  But we could do real harm to our national security by allowing this language, un-scrutinized, to pass, and that’s precisely what our highest-ranking national security officers are warning us against doing.  This is a debate we need to have.  It’s a healthy debate, but we ought to be armed with all the facts and expertise before we move forward.  The least we can do is take our time, be diligent and hear from those who will be affected by these new limitation on our ability to prosecute terrorists.  And it concerns me, Mr. President, that we would tell our national security leadership, a bipartisan national security leadership, by the way, that we wouldn’t listen to them and that Congress knows better than they do.  It doesn’t strike me that that’s the best way to secure and protect the American people.

So, Mr. President, that’s why I have filed amendment 1107.  I think it’s a common-sense alternative that will protect our constitutional principles and beliefs, while also allowing us to keep our nation safe.  The amendment has a clear aim, to ensure that we follow a thorough process and hear all views before rushing forward with new laws that could be harmful to our national security.

Mr. President, what’s in the amendment?  It’s straightforward.  Specifically, the amendment would require the defense, intelligence and law enforcement agencies report to Congress with recommendations for any additional authorities or flexibility that they need to detain and prosecute terrorists.  In other words, let’s not put the cart before the horse or fix something that isn’t broken.  Let’s first hear from the stakeholders as to what laws they believe need to be changed to give them better tools to do their jobs.

My amendment would then ask for hearings to be held so we can fully understand the views of respected national security experts.  And moreover, it would require input from each of the relevant committees to ensure we have carefully considered the benefits and consequences of our actions.  The chairmen of our judiciary and intelligence committees have deep concerns about the detainee provisions in the pending legislation.  And of course, Mr. President, as we undergo this process, the existing laws that guide our actions today would remain in place.  My amendment is straightforward, it’s common sense, and it allows us to make sure we will win the war on terror.”

In other words…to be VERY CLEAR…the ones you see with a NAY beside their name voted to KEEP YOU DETAINED indefinitely and with no DUE RECOURSE or TRIAL…that would be imprisoned for whatever they want indefinitely with no explanation… GO THAT ?  R WE CLEAR NOW?  LOOK FOR YOUR 2 SENATORS! THIS IS THE UDALL AMENDMENT VOTE BELOW!  …NOT THE BILL…. The UDALL gave us protection from being detained indefinitely and rounded up without trial and due recourse!  ~victoria


Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennet (D-CO) Bingaman (D-NM) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Coons (D-DE) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin (D-IA) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Kirk (R-IL) Klobuchar (D-MN) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Paul (R-KY) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY) Tester (D-MT) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Webb (D-VA) Wyden (D-OR)



Alexander (R-TN) Ayotte (R-NH) Barrasso (R-WY) Blunt (R-MO) Boozman (R-AR) Brown (R-MA) Burr (R-NC) Casey (D-PA) Chambliss (R-GA) Coats (R-IN) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hagan (D-NC) Hatch (R-UT) Heller (R-NV) Hoeven (R-ND) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Johnson (R-WI) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lee (R-UT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (ID-CT) Lugar (R-IN) Manchin (D-WV) McCain (R-AZ) McCaskill (D-MO) McConnell (R-KY) Moran (R-KS) Nelson (D-NE) Portman (R-OH) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Rubio (R-FL) Sessions (R-AL) Shaheen (D-NH) Shelby (R-AL) Snowe (R-ME) Stabenow (D-MI) Thune (R-SD) Toomey (R-PA) Vitter (R-LA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wicker (R-MS)


Not Voting – 2

Begich (D-AK) Murkowski (R-AK)
OK BELOW IS THE FINAL VOTE ON S1867…National Defense Authorization Act that I have renamed the National Detention Detainment ACT (the vote above is the UDALL Amendment that gave us Protection) this below is the final vote on the whole bill And the UDALL amendment failed so we have NO PROTECTION!! ~victoria

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress – 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIST by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate



Grouped by Home State

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Yea Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Boozman (R-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-CO), Yea

Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea

Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Yea Coons (D-DE), Yea
Florida: Nelson (D-FL), Yea Rubio (R-FL), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Yea Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Yea Risch (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Indiana: Coats (R-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay  PATRIOT
Kansas: Moran (R-KS), Yea Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: McConnell (R-KY), Yea Paul (R-KY), Nay  PATRIOT

About luchadora41

Born-again Christian Zionist; Conservative/Tea Partier; Chippewa; pro-Constitution; anti-Sharia; proud of all who dare to fight for freedom; support our troops; dedicated to restoring America; happy to know Jesus!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s