While that is technically true it is not given or set in stone rule of when the Speaker might or could vote. The Speaker could vote in this or any other legislation if The Speaker chose to do so.

Normally, the Speaker votes only when his or her vote would be decisive, and on matters of great importance (such as constitutional amendments).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives

"Obama Staff "Literally Reviewing FISA as we speak"

by thereisnospoon

Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:42:42 PM PDT

I just called Senator Obama's office. A very courteous staffer answered the phone immediately.

I mentioned that I was a precinct captain for the Obama campaign in California, that I was a caucus captain in Nevada who broke the story about the caucus shenanigans by the Clinton campaign.

I explained that I was extremely concerned about the FISA compromise currently being rammed through the House, and that it was very, very important to me that Senator Obama use his leverage to make a public stand against this capitulation.

The response was somewhat heartening:

"We hear you loud and clear. The staff are literally reviewing the FISA issue as we speak. You'll be hearing from us soon."

thereisnospoon's diary :: ::

Hopefully, this means good news and that the cavalry is on the way. If anyone else wants to call and put more pressure on, the number is (202) 224-2854.

If Senator Obama does take a strong, public stand and stop this debacle in its tracks, I'm in for another $100 to his campaign.

Who's with me?

Update: it also occurred to me that Senator Clinton earned not a few votes from committed supporters, and wields more than a smidgen of influence. If you wish to contact her, her numbers are 212.688.6262 (NY) and 202.224.4451 (DC).

"

so take it easy greenwald and others. don't say something now, inanger you will regret tomorrow. If barack is your guy, have some faith in the man. He has not lead his movement astray yet, other than small missteps. If he is your guy, show him some respect.

If he's not. Screw you fascists. keep dreaming. your wedges will nto work

I am a Hillary supporter and have contacted her already. My comments to her below...

"What are YOU doing to stop telecom immunity. I supported YOU. I donated money for YOU. I was a caucaus delegate for YOU. I BELIEVED in you... Where are you and what are you doing to stop this injustice?"

She doesn't get a pass anymore than Obama. Again, I ask, "Why vote for a Democrat when you're really voting for a Republican?"

If Obama cannot stand on this issue, then I am not voting for him. The same would be true if Hillary were the nominee.

You have to say something, cowards. You can't touch my posts. Whine cry and complain. ENjoy yoru sad existance fascists. It's all you got,

Now giggle like elementary school girls, because you got someone's dander up. Congradulations children.

I'm starting to think you're actually a troll here

You're kidding. What was your first clue?

-- Paul Daniel Ash

Well, I'm sure it wasn't the desperate need for a dictionary ... ;-)

What is wrong with you people? It's for our own good that the House isn't debating this bill. Why aren't you more grateful?

Debate, hearings, a long drawn-out discussion, and all of that sort of thing would only serve to confuse and upset liberty-loving Americans, as newspaper articles reluctantly starting covering the issue again and weirdo online activists, columnists, and agitators started mouthing off and confusing the issue with a great burdensome load of facts.

The American people want simple, invisible decisions that we can put in the hands of our elected leaders and then safely ignore. This whole idea that the people in charge of the process need to have our input is absurd. What, do you think you can just boss them around? What are they, your servants? The very idea!

And if there are any American people who don't want simple, pleasant decisions rolling out of Congress without a lot of headache, then they're gravely mistaken. What is freedom if it doesn't mean freedom from having to deal with all of this crap?

You agitators should be ashamed of yourselves, causing all this trouble. More gratitude, less attitude!

When the MCA was passed, I felt I was basically told to shut up on DailyKos (thank you, Dem from CT) when I protested the lack of leadership from Democrats in Congress on this issue. I am so dismayed that yet again the Democrats are folding on this issue.

I could not get through to the Obama campaign by phone, so I sent this email to the campaign. I hope that if enough similar emails are received, the Senator will step forward and provide leadership on this vital issue.

"I am a good Democrat and happy to support Senator Obama for president. I think he has the opportunity and skills to turn this country around. However, I am very disturbed to find that he is ducking the obligation to address and OPPOSE the FISA act pending before Congress which will provide blanket immunity to the telecom companies. One of the worst features of the Bush era was the reckless disregard for the rule of law. If a Democratic-controlled Congress allows the telecom companies to get off scot free, it will confirm that big companies can buy off Congress and shrub off established law. If the president does it, it's legal? That was Nixon, it should not be Obama. Senator Obama is now the de facto legal of the Democratic Party. He could end this with one word, one phone call. If he does not do so, he will have failed the citizens of this country before he has even begun."

Sincerely, Dan Carmell, San Leandro, California

Just a small correction: The Speaker doesn't vote unless there's a tie (or to create a tie if she wants the bill to fail). It's a longstanding tradition in the House, and actually consistent with Roberts Rules of Order, for those who care about such trivia.

Either way, her statement is awful. I hope Feingold or someone else filibusters this to death in the Senate.