ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Susan Collins

NEWS FLASH

Lieberman And Collins Reintroduce Domestic Benefits Bill For Federal Employees | Today, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) introduced the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2011, a bill that would provide Federal benefits to same sex domestic partners of Federal employees. Under the measure, same-sex domestic partners of federal employees living together in a committed relationship “would be eligible for health benefits, long-term care, Family and Medical Leave, and federal retirement benefits, among others.” The Act would help the more than 30,000 employees with same-sex partners, allow the Federal government to compete with the many private companies that already offer benefits, and increase costs by “only 0.4 percent of total health care expenditures, a tiny fraction that is consistent with the experience of thousands of private employers,” one study found.

NEWS FLASH

Snowe: No Medicare Or Social Security Cuts In Debt Deal | Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME) said she will not support any debt deal that includes cuts to the two social safety net programs, citing “strong bipartisan support.” “There are solvency problems with both programs. They have to be addressed but not as part of the debt reduction talks,” Snowe told the Bangor Daily News. It’s unclear how she would square that position with her support for a balanced budget amendment. But Snowe added, “There are a lot of tax credits that are not needed and should be repealed” — a position with which Maine’s other Republican senator, Susan Collins, agreed. “We spend billions of dollars a year in subsidies that go to some very wealthy corporate farmers,” Collins said.

Economy

Senate Republicans Who Voted To Create CFPB Now Refuse To Confirm Its Director Without Changes

House Republicans this week passed a trio of bills aimed at reducing the independence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) that was created by the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. These changes — including replacing the Bureau’s Director with a five-person commission — would strike at the heart of the Bureau’s independence.

Not to be outdone, Senate Republicans sent a letter to President Obama this week saying that they will not vote to confirm a Director for the Bureau — who is supposed to be in place by July 21 — unless several changes are made to the Bureau’s structure:

As presently organized, far too much power will be vested in the CFPB director without any effective checks and balances. Accordingly, we will not support the consideration of any nominee, regardless of party affiliation, to be the CFPB director until the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is reformed.

For starters, the notion that the CFPB has some unprecedented amount of power is absurd. Plenty of agencies are run by a single director, and the CFPB’s rules can already be vetoed by a two-thirds vote of the Financial Stability Oversight Council, which is tasked with policing systemic risk in the financial system.

Interestingly enough, two of the letter’s signatories — Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) — voted for the Dodd-Frank law, complete with the CFPB in its current form. In fact, during the Dodd-Frank debate, Snowe helped Democrats defeat a Republican proposal that would have scrapped the CFPB in favor of a consumer protection council.

Both Snowe and Collins have been running to their right recently, with Snowe in particular tacking that way in anticipation of a 2012 primary challenger. Yesterday, in fact, Snowe blocked a small business bill that she authored, throwing a fit over not receiving a vote on an amendment she authored with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) that would block federal agencies from implementing regulations. She had previously called for a “clean” version of the small business bill to be passed.

The practical upshot of Senate Republicans refusing to confirm a nominee is that President Obama will have no choice but to make a recess appointment. But not every Senate Republican appears to be on-board with the GOP push to kneecap the CFPB, as both Sens. Scott Brown (R-MA) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) did not sign the letter to Obama.

Politics

(Corrected) Senators: ‘Women Will Die’ Without Planned Parenthood Funding

As the fight over funding the federal government heats up in Congress, one sticking point is sure to be Title X money for Planned Parenthood, which House Republicans voted to eliminate earlier this month. In the Senate, Republicans Scott Brown (MA) and Lisa Murkowski (AK) have broken with their party in support of continued funding for Planned Parenthood, noting it is one of the nation’s largest and most effective providers of womens’ health services. In an interview this weekend with the Anchorage Daily News, Murkowski A letter sent to Vice President Biden recently signed by 20 Democratic senators explained the stakes :

“More fundamentally, without the care Planned Parenthood provides — without access to Pap smears, pelvic exams and breast exams — women will die,” the senators said.

Indeed, one in five women in the U.S. have used one of Planned Parenthood’s 800 health centers, where the organization provides nearly one million Pap tests and more than 830,000 breast exams each year. The organization also administers nearly four million STD tests every year, including those for HIV. Just three percent of the organization’s work is related to abortions.

Meanwhile, The Hill reports that a number of moderate Republicans are signaling willingness to re-instate funds to Planned Parenthood. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) called “the outright elimination” of funding “a step too far,” while a spokesperson for her colleague Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) called the House vote “unwise.” Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) said he “has always supported Planned Parenthood and family planning efforts.”

The three senators didn’t say how they would vote on a measure to defund Planned Parenthood, and Brown and Murkowski have both voted for the House-passed full-year government funding bill that contained a provision eliminating funds for the organization. As CAP’s Matt Yglesias wrote of Brown’s statement in support of the group, “If he’s voting to defund Planned Parenthood, then all the statements in the world don’t mean a thing.”

Update

An earlier version of this post incorrectly attributed the quote to Murkowski, instead of the letter from the 20 senators. We apologize for the error and have corrected it.

LGBT

Defense Bill Falls 57-40, But Lieberman And Collins Pledge To Introduce Stand-Alone Repeal Measure

This evening, moments after the Senate failed to invoke cloture and proceed to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — the measure which contains the amendment to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell — Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) announced that they would offer a stand-alone DADT measure. Lieberman also said that he has a commitment from Reid to bring up the bill before the end of the year.

The vote on the National Defense Authorization Act failed after days of negotiations between Collins and Reid on the number of amendments that would be offered under a “reasonable” framework of debate. Talks appeared to break down this afternoon as Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took to the floor without first notifying Collins. Reid addressed the negotiations of the last several days, claiming that Republicans kept changing the goal posts. He had offered Collins 15 amendments — 10 from Republicans and 5 from Democrats — with an hour of debate for each, but she insisted on more time.

Following Reid’s remarks, Collins took to the floor and explained that she felt “perplexed” by Reid’s motion. She claimed that the two had been close to a deal and that he was now reneging on that agreement by filling up the tree, a technique that takes-up all the available slots for amendments on legislation in order to block competing amendments. Her main complaint appeared to be that Republicans would not be able to choose their own “relevant amendments” to the bill, while Reid insisted that both parties had to reach an agreement on “what some of the amendments would be.” During the roll-call, Collins initially voted against cloture but then suddenly changed her vote after talking to Sens. Lieberman and Claire McCaskill (D-MO). Unfortunately, she was unable to bring along Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) or other moderate Republicans who had signaled that they would proceed to the measure. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) was the only Democrat to vote “no,” while Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) missed the vote but announced that she would have voted to proceed to the measure.

Watch a compilation of today’s floor activity:

It’s unclear when the Senate will bring up the stand-alone measure, but Lieberman told reporters that the legislation will mirror the language in the Defense Authorization Bill and could be brought up as soon as today.

Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) also took to the Senate floor to condemn the Senate’s failure and reiterated his pledge to work through the holidays to pass the bill before the end of the year. “I’m willing to stay through the holidays to debate it as a stand-alone measure,” he said. “The vote that we just had means that we won’t have a debate on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Update

Greg Sargent explains why Reid brought the measure to the floor:

Reid concluded that even if Collins was sincere in her promise to vote for repeal if given the four days of debate, there was no way to prevent the proceedings from taking longer, the aide says. Reid decided that the cloture vote, the 30 hours of required post-cloture debate, and procedural tricks mounted by conservative Senators who adamantly oppose repeal would have dragged the process on far longer.

It would have been much more than four days,” the aide says. “Her suggestions were flat out unworkable given how the Senate really operates. You can talk about four days until the cows come home. That has very little meaning for Coburn and DeMint and others who have become very skilled at grinding this place to a halt.”


Update

,Lieberman tweets on the stand-alone measure:

@JoeLieberman: Reid told me he will “Rule14″ the free-standing #DADT repeal so it skips cmte and can come directly to the Senate floor.


Update

,Statement from the White House:

A minority of Senators were willing to block this important legislation largely because they oppose the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ As Commander in Chief, I have pledged to repeal this discriminatory law, a step supported by the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and informed by a comprehensive study that shows overwhelming majorities of our armed forces are prepared to serve with Americans who are openly gay or lesbian. [...] While today’s vote was disappointing, it must not be the end of our efforts. I urge the Senate to revisit these important issues during the lame duck session.


Update

[/

LGBT

Today In Recap: From ‘Likely’ DADT Vote To Vote Delayed

Earlier this evening, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) — the moderate Republican whose vote to proceed to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was supposed to create a domino effect that would have brought along the support of Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AR) and Scott Brown (D-MA) and given Democrats the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster — told reporters that she would not vote for cloture until Congress reached an agreement for extending the Bush tax cuts. Consequently, Reid has postponed the vote to later in the week.

And while the tax negotiations remain at a standstill, earlier today, advocates of DADT repeal seemed hopeful that a compromise could still be brokered with Collins. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) — a sponsor of repeal — and Reid, both disputed morning reports that Collins was unrealistically expecting an open amendment process and stressed that she was acting in good faith and seemed interested in reaching a “fair” time agreement with Democrats. “There was some stuff in the paper today that mean it — that said she couldn’t make up her mind what she wanted to do. That’s really not true,” Reid explained to reporters this afternoon. “She had made up her mind what she wanted to do. I just thought it was too much time,” he said.

Indeed, the Washington Posts’ Jonathan Capehart published a column just minutes before Collins pulled out of the deal, suggesting that Reid and Collins were just a couple of hours apart. While she had agreed to Reid’s “offer of 15 amendments — 10 for Republicans and 5 for Democrats,” she wanted “two hours of debate (one hour for Democrats and one hour for Republicans) for each amendment.” Publicly, Reid had only offered one hour of debate for each amendment, with additional time for some amendments.

It’s unclear what happened between now and then, but Reid’s team is disputing Capehart’s characterization, saying “If a little more time on each amendment was all she’s asking, Senator Reid would have shaken her hand and called it a deal by now.” And Collins told reporters that she needed more debate time and the ability for Republicans “pick our own amendments as opposed to the Majority Leader.” She also reverted back to the GOP argument that the tax extensions would have to come first. “Everyone on the Republican side wants to see the tax package completed first,” she said. “So I have urged the majority leader to postpone the vote…so that we could get the tax bill considered first — which I believe could be on the floor tomorrow — and completed by Saturday, and then move immediately to the DOD bill, but under a fair agreement.”

Whether or not Reid and Collins can agree on what constitutes “fair” and move to the defense bill will also now depend on the progress of the tax compromise, which seems to have stalled. But what’s certain is that postponing the vote will buy lawmakers more time to try and reach an agreement and possibly rope in those Republicans who would consider voting to proceed but remain committed to first tackling taxes.

LGBT

Plan B: Democrats Transferring ‘Must Pass’ Provisions Out Of Defense Bill, Into Continuing Resolution

Greg Sargent is reporting that Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) are having a difficult time agreeing to a “fair” process for consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act, which Collins says she supports. But she’s demanding a completely open amendment process that would allow Republicans to hijack the debate and offer non-germane amendments:

In private discussions between Collins and Reid this morning, and between their staffs over the weekend, Collins has demanded that Reid allow what’s known as “unlimited debate” on the bill in order for her to vote for repeal, the aide close to the talks says.

Reid has rejected this demand, the aide continues. The problem is that this could allow any Senator to hijack the proceedings by introducing a “non-germane amendment,” thus holding the floor.

Reid does not think Collins herself intends to do this, the aide continues. Rather, he worries that another GOP Senator who strongly opposes repeal, such as Tom Coburn or Jim DeMint, could take advantage of unlimited debate in this fashion to run out the clock.

“He can’t trust Coburn or DeMint,” the aide says. “He can’t agree to that deal.”

Reid has offered Collins a total of 15 amendments in order to get her to vote Yes — 10 for Repubicans and five for Democrats, the aide continues. Reid views this as a reasonable offer, because previous debates on defense authorization bills have had roughly this number of amendments offered, the aide adds.

But as of now, Collins has indicated this offer is “unsatisafctory,” the aide says. A Collins spokesperson denied this account in an email, but declined to elaborate.

As of this writing, Reid still intends to bring the NDAA to a vote, which advocates of repeal say will likely fail without the support of Collins. And in a move that could be interpreted as a recognition of this reality, negotiators are moving some of the must-pass military authorizations out of the NDAA and into the continuing resolution. From CQ’s John M. Donnelly:

A draft continuing resolution in the House contains several provisions that echo “must-pass” portions of the troubled defense authorization bill, setting up a backup plan in the increasingly likely event that Congress fails to clear the annual defense policy measure for the first time in nearly half a century.

The draft continuing resolution, or CR, would ensure enactment of several critical provisions that usually ensure the defense authorization bill becomes law. Those provisions include items required for military pay and bonuses, compensation for civilian employees serving in Iraq and Afghanistan and authorities needed for overseas contingency operations.

With this session of Congress quickly nearing its end, time has nearly run out for debating the defense authorization bill (S 3454) — a process that typically takes a couple of weeks. If the bill dies, so does this year’s effort to repeal the “don’t ask don’t tell” law (PL 103-160) that bars openly gay people from serving in the U.S. military.

Asked whether the inclusion of the military pay and other provisions was a tacit admission that the defense policy bill won’t move ahead, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., who sits on both the Armed Service and Appropriations panels, acknowledged the bill is facing long odds.

“I’m concerned about the calendar running out,” he said Tuesday. “I don’t know if you can get it done even if you went right to Jan. 5 and worked every day.”

Meanwhile, some advocates are urging Reid to hold on bringing the authorization until he works out a compromise with the moderate senators and then stay in session past Christmas to pass the measure. One aid told Steve Benen that Collins is “basically asking for a unicorn for Christmas. We can’t give her a unicorn.” But why not? Should the negotiations for a fair time and amendment process with Collins fail, why can’t Reid highlight the absurdity of her request and then grant it, keeping the Senate in session until January 2nd to extend Republicans every opportunity to play games with military priorities?

Update

Sen. Lieberman just released the following statement, responding to the Collins reports:

“Senator Collins has been working in good faith to achieve an agreement on the process to move forward with the defense bill that contains the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ I categorically reject reports by uninformed staffers who have suggested otherwise. As she always does, Senator Collins is working diligently and across party lines to find solutions to the challenges that confront our country. I call on those responsible for such baseless allegations to stop immediately and instead work to get to an agreement to bring this critical bill to the floor for Senate action.

“We are making progress toward an agreement to move forward on the defense bill that includes the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and I remain confident that we can reach an agreement, which is necessary before any vote on the motion to reconsider is taken. I am working closely with Senator Reid and Senator Collins and other members who want to reach a fair and reasonable agreement to move the defense authorization bill that that is so essential to the needs of our troops, veterans, and their families.

“It is now more clear than ever that we have 60 or more votes in support of repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ so it is vitally important to reach agreement on the right process to move forward.”

LGBT

Collins And Brown Announce Support For Repeal, Day Two Of Hearings In 9 Minutes

Moments ago, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) joined Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) in announcing that she would vote to proceed to the National Defense Authorization Act — the legislation that contains Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal — under an open amendment process. Collins added that she would vote for the legislation “once the tax issue is resolved.” Brown did not overtly attach any conditions to his vote, stating simply, “I accept the findings of the report and support repeal based on the Secretary’s recommendations that repeal will be implemented only when the battle effectiveness of the forces is assured and proper preparations have been completed.”

During the second day of hearings, the Service Chiefs disagreed on whether to proceed with immediate repeal during a time of war, but all concurred their respective branches could implement repeal and that Congress should act to prevent the court from ordering the military to lift the ban without a proper implementation process. The Service Chiefs also hinted that they could support eventual repeal and said they trusted Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to consider their views before ordering the Armed Forces to lift the ban.

Below are highlights from today’s hearings:

Meanwhile, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) signaled that he would disregard the opinion of the military leadership and suggested “he could move to prevent floor debate on the 2011 defense authorization bill, which contains the repeal provision.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has not yet announced how he intends to proceed with the measure or if he’ll bring the bill to the floor under an open amendment process.

Security

The DREAM Act’s Republican Landscape

Last night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced that he will introduce the DREAM Act after Thanksgiving. In a press release, Reid stated, “Last time we sought to bring up this bill, all Republicans blocked our effort, even though many have been supporters of the DREAM Act in the past. I hope that our Republican colleagues will join me, Sen. Durbin and Democrats in passing this important piece of legislation, now that we have a stand-alone version and that political season is over.”

Without the support of at least a handful of Republicans, the DREAM Act doesn’t stand a chance. Though the majority of Democrats support the legislation, Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Ben Nelson (D-NE), and Jon Tester (D-MT) have all either voted against the DREAM Act at some point in their careers or expressed reservations about the legislation. However, in the past, the DREAM Act has enjoyed the support of a handful of Republicans. Immigration reform used to be a bipartisan issue. Where these Republicans seem to stand now is outlined below:

LEANING YES:

Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN): Lugar and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced the DREAM Act on March 26, 2009. Although Lugar voted against moving on the Department of Defense (DOD) bill which included the DREAM Act as an amendment, his senior adviser explained that the lawmaker objected to “a vote on proceeding to the defense bill in a very politically charged and unusual way. The DREAM Act deserves a proper debate on its merits.”

Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT): Bennett voted to proceed with debate on the DREAM Act in 2007. Bennett was stripped of his party’s nomination earlier this year and will be leaving the Senate in a month. Essentially, he has nothing to lose by sticking to his guns.

TOSS-UPS:

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME): Snowe voted to proceed with debate on the DREAM Act in 2007. Snowe justified voting against the DOD bill in September by saying that “the Senate should have the ability to debate more than the three amendments the Majority Leader is allowing.” Snowe is up for reelection in 2012 and could always choose to stick with her party to play it safe.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): Like her colleague, Collins voted in favor of the DREAM Act in 2007. Before voting against proceeding with the DOD bill, Collins explained, “I find myself on the horns of a dilemma, I support the provisions in this bill. I think it is the right thing to do. I think it is only fair… But I cannot vote to proceed to this bill under a situation that is going to shut down the debate and preclude Republican amendments.” Although she is not up for reelection any time soon, like her colleague (Snowe), Collins is feeling pressure to move farther to the right.

Sen. George LeMieux (R-FL): LeMieux’s predecessor, Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL) was a strong proponent of immigration reform and the DREAM Act. Since Rubio will replace him in 2011, LeMieux doesn’t have to worry about getting reelected. Yet, he is “mulling” a 2012 Senate bid. He has also expressed some hesitation about the bill, saying, “It’s a very difficult situation for kids who are brought to this country and it’s no fault of their own. I understand that and I am sympathetic, but to attach this to this [DOD reauthorization] bill without trying to fix our broken immigration system is disingenous and irresponsible.”

Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH):Voinovich voted against proceeding with the DREAM Act in 2007. However, he has been a strong proponent of AgJOBS, a bill that would put undocumented agriculture workers on a path to legalization and has often been perceived as a swing-vote on immigration bills. He is also retiring from the Senate at the end of the year.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK):Murkowski voted against proceeding with the DREAM Act in 2007. However, she voted in support of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. After a tough reelection race, it looks like she will be returning to the Senate to serve another a term. And chances are she’s not to happy with the Republican establishment after losing the Republican primary to Joe Miller.

LONG-SHOTS:

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX): Hutchison voted in favor of the DREAM Act in 2007. However, since then, she has moved farther to the right on the immigration issue. She faces a tough primary in 2012.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX):Cornyn did not support the DREAM Act in 2007. Though he supported comprehensive immigration reform which included the DREAM Act in 2007, it doesn’t sound like he’s up for it in 2010. “This is getting to be a joke. No one believes that there is enough time that we could do a responsible job,” said Cornyn on the DREAM Act in July. According to him, the Senate should approach the issue in “a responsible, reasonable way and not just try to play to the peanut gallery and act like we’re going to do something we’re not.”

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ): Kyl has supported immigration reform in the past, but voted against the DREAM Act in 2007. Like many of his colleagues, his immigration position has hardened and shifted to an enforcement-only approach.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA): Brown replaced the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), a champion of immigrant rights and a tireless advocate for immigration reform. Though there is a lot a pressure on him to take a pro-immigrant stance, so far, he has stuck to his anti-immigrant guns. He recently lashed out at Harvard University, stating “They should embrace young people who want to serve their country, rather than promoting a plan that provides amnesty to students who are in this country illegally.”

DEFINITE NO:

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT): Hatch has supported both the DREAM Act and immigration reform in the past. However, he is facing a tough reelection in 2012 and has already seen his colleague, Bennett, go down in flames. Given the political climate he’s facing in Utah, my guess is he’ll vote no.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA): Grassley voted in support of immigration reform in 2006, but against the DREAM Act in 2007. Over the past three years, his position on immigration has moved so far to the right, it is nearly unrecognizable.

LGBT

Lieberman And Collins Urge Pentagon To Release Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Study ‘As Soon As Possible’

Politico’s Josh Gerstein reports that Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) have sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates urging the Pentagon to release the Working Group’s study of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell “as soon as possible”:

Some of our colleagues in the Senate share our view about the importance of passing a defense bill, but they are awaiting the release of the working group’s report before agreeing to begin debate on the bill. We are hopeful that release of the report and the opportunity for our colleagues to review its findings and recommendations will help inform their understanding and alleviate some concerns that they may have regarding the military’s capacity to implement repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in a manner that is consistent with our armed forces’ standards of readiness and effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention. Given the limited amount of time remaining in the 111th Congress, the soonest possible release of the working group’s report could therefore be instrumental in allowing the defense bill to move forward.

Indeed, my colleagues Jeff Krehely and Crosby Burns have released this list of 10 lawmakers “who have said they are waiting to hear from the troops and military leaders before deciding on DADT repeal.” These include: Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) and Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH). These senators should be held to task once the report comes out and forced to take a position on repeal.

Gates has urged the Senate to pass repeal in the lame duck session but at least two separate Pentagon spokespeople have thus far suggested that the study will not be released before December 1. On Friday, DoD spokesman Geoff Morrell suggested “the full report will be made public for all to review early next month.” Earlier in the week, Pentagon spokesman Col. David Lapan also said he was “not aware that there’s been any effort to speed it up.”

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up