Rand Paul has been a very vocal opponent of sending aid to Egypt while roads and bridges in the United States, and particularly Kentucky, are in need of repair or replacement. And now it looks like he might get a floor vote on one of two possible measures to cut off that aid. But, one source says, this might hurt McConnell.
The Senate might vote this week on a proposal from Sen. Rand Paul that would cut U.S. aid to Egypt, sources said....
Democrats believe a vote on Egypt would be difficult for Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a long-time defender of foreign aid. A McConnell spokesman declined comment. When asked several weeks ago about his position on assistance to Egypt, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the Obama administration is taking a look at aid but declined further comment. The administration has delayed a sale of four fighter jets to Egypt in recent days, however....
Top Senate foreign policy voices like Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) have called for a suspension of aid to Egypt in the wake of the ouster of President Mohamed Morsi by the Egyptian military. They argue that a coup occurred in Egypt, a designation that would result in a loss of aid from the U.S. and one that the Obama administration has declined to make.
In otherwords the democrats who control the agenda and determine which bills get voted on and which don't, have calculated that allowing Rand's bills to get a vote might hurt Mitch McConnell and so they are playing THAT game.
It's all politics all the time.
It is interesting as to who you think is pulling the strings on this. The fact that you think the Dem Party is dictating a vote when Senator Paul can merely withdrawl the proposal.
It is obvious that if Paul allows this to play out, then he is testing McConnell's resolve and commitments that McConnell has made to Paul in exchange for his near future, very vocal endorsement of Mitch in the upcoming elections.
My guess is that Paul (and the majority party will be all to eager to assist) is going to get a vote on a number of proposals on which Paul thinks McConnell is on the wrong side in order to extract a very public refersal of McConnells previous positions on issues that are going to be important to Paul in 2016.
After all, Paul can't be seen enthusiastically endorsing a status quo candidate without some give and take.
Isn't that how the game is suppose to be played?
God Bless.
Posted by: Mr. Scott Ryan | July 30, 2013 at 11:42 AM