SENATORS VOTE STRAIGHT ALONG PARTY LINES ON DEFUNDING BILL

Sens. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio

WASHINGTON POST

The Senate voted along party lines Friday to approve a short-term spending bill that restores funding for the new federal health-care law and sends it back to the House, where its fate remains uncertain.

Final passage came at the end of a series of four votes that had senators  end debate on the bill, approve a procedural change regarding spending, add an amendment that restored funding for the health-care law and then decide on final passage. The vote to end debate — formally known as cloture — and the final passage vote were seen as most critical, so here’s our look at what happened:

ON THE CLOTURE VOTE (to end formal debate on the spending bill):
Final tally: 79 to 19.
How many Democrats voted yes?: 54.
How many Republicans voted yes?: 23.
How many Republicans voted no?: 19.
How many Democrats voted no?: 0.
How many senators didn’t vote?: 2

.
Which Republicans voted no?: Sens. Mike Crapo (Idaho), Ted Cruz (Tex.), Mike Enzi (Wyo.), Deb Fischer (Neb.), Charles Grassley (Iowa), Dean Heller (Nev.), James Inhofe (Okla.), Mike Lee (Utah), Jerry Moran (Kan.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Rob Portman (Ohio), James Risch (Idaho), Pat Roberts (Kan.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Jeff Sessions (Ala.), Richard Shelby (Ala.), Pat Toomey (Pa.), David Vitter (La.).
Which senators didn’t vote?: Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) (who is attending his son’s wedding in Arizona) and Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah).

Votes Notes: Seen through the lens of raw politics, this vote is a new way to measure the ideological and tactical divide among the chamber’s 46 Senate Republicans.
For GOP senators, the cloture vote was less about proceeding to final passage of the bill and more about which camp they chose to join. There’s the camp led by Cruz and Lee that sought to use all procedural means necessary to defund the health-care law, or at least slow consideration of the Senate spending bill. This group also is working closely with conservative House Republicans on what they might be able to do over the weekend to amend the bill and send it back to the Senate.

Then there’s the group led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, John Cornyn (R-Tex.), who believe it makes more sense to quickly send the spending measure back to the GOP-controlled House, where it can be amended again with changes amenable to Republican lawmakers.
Indications early Friday suggested that the Cruz-Lee camp would earn as many as 20 votes — and that would have happened if Flake had been in Washington.

As The Post’s Paul Kane noted, when you take away the five top-ranking Republican leaders, the rank and file was basically split down the middle. Put another way, Cruz basically fought Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to a draw on this issue.

There was no policy at stake in this vote. It was procedural. And as some Republicans privately argue, had there been actual policy at stake, Cruz would probably have received far less support. But policy is not where his wing of the party’s power is centered. (Just ask yourself what bills DeMint was ever responsible for passing as a senator.) It’s politics where their weight is felt. This vote reinforced that muscle.

All three of the GOP senators most often mentioned as potential 2016 candidates voted “no.” In addition to Cruz, Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Rand Paul (Ky.) each voted against cloture. That’s a pretty hefty cross-section of the potential 2016 field right there.

ON FINAL PASSAGE OF THE SPENDING BILL:
Vote tally: 54 to 44.
How many Democrats voted yes?: 54.
How many Republicans voted yes?: 0.
How many Democrats voted no?: 0.
How many Republicans voted no?: 44.

MARCO RUBIO, THE NEXT GOP HOPE, HAS A GLASS OF WATER

WASH POST POLITICAL FIX

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is trying to turn water into water bottles. Literally.
In the 30-plus hours since Rubio’s awkward swig of water toward the end of his much-hyped response to President Obama’s State of the Union, the Florida senator has swiftly moved to turn an unexpected glitch to his advantage.
Let’s be clear: Rubio’s apparent bout of dry mouth, which seemed to get worse and worse until he suddenly reached for water minutes later was, well, awkward. Really awkward. And it stole some attention away from the words he was speaking in one of the biggest speeches of his career.
But the aftermath of the episode has demonstrated Rubio’s political savvy. In his Wednesday interviews, the Republican took it all in stride. Rubio’s message was that he too was chuckling about the incident.
“I figured I was better off taking that water and taking the hit for it than being unable to pronounce my words at the end of it,” he told Fox News. On CBS, he said with a chuckle: “It had been a long day of work, had already taped an 18-minute speech in Spanish, so I’m just glad the water was nearby. I don’t know what I would have done without it.”
He’s also been raising money off of Tuesday night, offering water bottles branded with his name for donations of $25 or more. The fundraising email his PAC sent out singled out the “liberals and the pundits” who have been drawing attention to the water bottle, a clear effort to resonate with the conservative base.

And finally, Rubio’s been laughing at himself via Twitter.
Rubio is the Republican Party’s marquee figure right now, and as such, everything he does – both good and bad – will be scrutinized extra closely. If he ends up running for president, we’ll look back at Tuesday night as an early test of his ability to cope with unanticipated developments.
So far, he’s holding his own. Politicians are going to mess up every now and again. Period. It’s just going to happen. The talented ones can turn an unfortunate incident on its head, show some humility, humanity, and humor, and ultimately put it behind them.
After Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) delivered a widely panned response to Obama’s first speech before a joint session of Congress in 2009, he never really engaged the public in its aftermath the way Rubio is doing now. That speech migh not have damaged Jindal’s long-term political prospects, but it followed him for a while in a way that could have been avoided had he reacted differently afterward.

Part of Rubio’s swift political rise is due to the relatable personality he projects. He’ll chat in detail about rap music, likes movies you might find in a college freshman’s collection, and has demonstrated a sense of humor. In other words, he hasn’t been seen as a distant politician with interests that don’t align with everyday Americans.
Tuesday’s speech plays right into this narrative. Rubio found himself in an uncomfortable position a lot of people could probably picture themselves in. And ultimately, he was a good sport about it.
Rubio had a close-up view last year of how opponents successfully fueled the narrative that Mitt Romney lacked personality and charisma and never could quite shake off the perception that he was awkward. He looks determined not to let anything like that happen to him.