Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Senate. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Senate. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Chủ Nhật, 28 tháng 4, 2013

Manchin works to get Senate vote on gun checks- California weighs ban on lead bullets for hunting

  • Toomey_Manchin.jpg

    FILE: April 10, 2013: Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., left, and Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., announce a deal on gun-control legislation, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, D.C.AP

West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin said Sunday he’s not finished with his effort to expand background checks for gun buyers, despite the proposal’s defeat and other key senators appearing to now move beyond the issue.

Manchin told “Fox News Sunday” that he’s going to rework the proposal to get it back to the Senate floor.

“We’re going to work this bill with all of our hearts,” he told Fox News.

Manchin was joined by Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey in crafting the background check proposal, in part to get bipartisan support for the largely Democratic gun-control plan, following a mass shooting in December 2012 in which 20 first-graders were killed.

However, the proposal to expand the check to online sales and gun shows was shelved earlier this month when it got just 54 of the required 60 Senate votes.

On Friday, Toomey said he had no plans to revive the proposal.

"My own view is very simple: The Senate has had its vote. We've seen the outcome of that vote. I am not aware of any reason to believe that if we had the vote again that we'd have a different outcome," he said, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Manchin told Fox: “I don’t think he’s done.”

He also said he has spoken with fellow gun owners who appear to support legislation that would keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the severe mentally ill.

Manchin said “law-abiding citizens” support background checks, and he urged Americans to read the proposal, then tell him what parts they don’t like.  

Senate Majority Harry Reid said days after the defeat of the Manchin-Toomey proposal that he has “hit pause” on efforts to pass comprehensive gun-control legislation. 

He said last week the proposal remains a work in progress but no action is being taken now.


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 16 tháng 4, 2013

IMMIGRATION OVERHAUL: Senate Bill Aims to Boost Security, Legalize Millions

A bipartisan Senate immigration bill would put the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally on a 13-year path to U.S. citizenship that would cost $2,000 in fines plus additional fees, and would begin only once steps have been taken to secure the border, according to an outline of the measure released Monday.

The sweeping legislation also would remake the nation's inefficient legal immigration system, creating new immigration opportunities for tens of thousands of high- and low-skilled workers, as well as a new "merit visa" aimed at people with talents to bring to the U.S. as well as employment or family ties. Senators planned to formally introduce the bill on Tuesday, but after the tragedy at the Boston Marathon a planned press event was delayed until later in the week.

Employers would face tough new requirements to check the legal status of all workers. The bill would institute a fundamental shift in an immigration system long focused on family ties, placing more importance on prospective immigrants' skills and employment potential.

Billions of dollars would be poured into border security, and millions of people who've been waiting overseas for years, sometimes decades, in legal immigration backlogs would see their cases speeded up.

Overall, the changes represent the most dramatic overhaul to U.S. immigration law in more than a quarter-century, and also would usher in major shifts to the U.S. employment landscape.

"I've always said that Americans will be commonsense, practical and balanced toward legal immigration and the 11 million who are here, provided that they are convinced that there won't be future flows of illegal immigration, and that has been the philosophy I think that's guided our group," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "We've put together a proposal that pretty much does that."

Schumer and another leader of the group, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., were to meet with President Barack Obama Tuesday to brief him on the legislation, a top second-term priority for the president.

The bill is the result of months of secretive negotiations among eight lawmakers, equally divided between the two parties. In addition to Schumer and McCain, they are Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado, working with Republicans Marco Rubio of Florida, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Jeff Flake of Arizona.

Because of the makeup of the group, including conservatives and liberals, the legislation is a painstaking attempt to balance a focus on border security and legal enforcement sought by Republicans in the group, with Democratic priorities including making citizenship widely accessible. Crafting the bill was a time-consuming process of seeking compromise and bringing together traditionally opposed groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO, and the United Farm Workers and American Farm Bureau Federation.

Its release is a major achievement on a polarizing issue, but even harder work lies ahead now that legislative language will become public for other lawmakers and groups on all sides to examine and react to.

"It's only the first step," McCain said. "There's a lot of hard things to do yet."

The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold hearings on the bill beginning Friday and likely move to amend and vote on it in May, with action on the Senate floor expected later in the summer. The Republican-controlled House also must act, and opposition from some conservatives there is likely to be fierce.

"The Senate proposal issues an open invitation to enter the country illegally," Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said on the House floor Monday. "Millions more will do so before the border is secure. The Senate proposal will dramatically increase illegal immigration. "

Under the bill, immigrants here illegally could gain a provisional legal status six months after enactment as long as they meet certain criteria, and if the Homeland Security Department has moved forward on plans to secure the border. They would remain in that provisional status for 10 years, able to work legally but barred from federal benefits like welfare or health care. After 10 years they could seek green cards conferring permanent legal status, and three years after that they could petition for citizenship.

They would have to pay a total of $2,000 in fines along the way, and at least hundreds more in fees, though that number has not been determined.

People brought here illegally as youths would have a faster path: they could get green cards in five years and would become eligible for citizenship immediately thereafter.

U.S. citizens would no longer be able to sponsor their siblings for eventual U.S. citizenship, a change activist groups have opposed. Also eliminated would be the government's Diversity Visa Lottery Program, which randomly awards 55,000 visas to immigrants from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States.

Those are among several changes aimed at rebalancing an immigration system that now awards around 15 percent of green cards to people with employment ties, and the majority to people with family ties; to one that awards 45 percent to 50 percent of green cards based on employment ties.  Green cards are visas that make someone a lawful permanent resident and qualifies them to apply for citizenship.

The bill changes the waiting period a green card holder has to undergo before applying to citizenship from five years to three years.

There would be no limit in the number of green cards awarded to people of extraordinary ability in science, arts, education, business or athletics, or to outstanding professors, doctors and others. A new startup visa would be created for foreign entrepreneurs trying to come here to start their own companies.

The bill would create a new "merit-based visa" five years after enactment, beginning at 120,000 visas a year, and awarding points based on talent, employment and family ties.

Visas for highly skilled workers greatly in demand by technology companies would nearly double, from 65,000 a year to 110,000 a year, plus 25,000 more reserved for people with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics from U.S. schools. Low-skilled workers would be able to come in for jobs in construction, long-term care and other industries, ultimately up to 200,000 a year. A new agriculture visa program would bring farm workers to the U.S., and farm workers already here illegally would get a faster path to citizenship than others, able to seek a green card in five years, an effort to create a stable agricultural workforce.

The bill is titled the "Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013."

On border security, as previously reported by The Associated Press and others, the bill aims for 100 percent surveillance of the border and seeks to ensure that 90 percent of attempted border crossers are caught or turn back, tasking the Homeland Security Department with developing plans within six months for making this happen. If the 90 percent rate of apprehensions isn't achieved in high-risk border sectors within five years, a commission made of border state officials would make recommendations on how to achieve it.

After 10 years, people granted "registered provisional immigrant status" could apply for green cards granting them permanent residency -- and the ability to seek citizenship -- if certain conditions are met, including the new security and fencing plans have been completed and a mandatory employment verification system is in place and used by all employers. A new system must also be in place at airports and seaports to keep track of who is exiting the country.

In addition, the bill provides funding for 3,500 more customs agents nationwide and authorizes the National Guard to be deployed to the border to construct fencing and deploy surveillance equipment, among other tasks. Funding for border crossing prosecutions would be boosted.


View the original article here

Thứ Hai, 15 tháng 4, 2013

GUN BILL HURDLE: Senate Bill Backers Try to Ease 'Registry' Fears

As debate begins this week on sweeping firearms legislation, supporters are running into renewed concern from conservatives that the bill could lead to a gun "registry" despite adamant pledges to prohibit this. 

Fear of a national registry has remained even after two influential senators last week proposed a compromise on background checks. The proposal, which will be voted on as an amendment, would expand background checks to gun shows and Internet sales while exempting personal transactions like those among family members. 

The provision, meant to ease concerns about the checks becoming too pervasive, also included language to bar the creation of a federal registry. 

But the language was not enough. Some gun-rights supporters continue to worry about a slippery-slope scenario, where a background check expansion sets the stage for a national registry -- which could then be exploited to seize weapons from individuals. Despite the fact that licensed dealers already keep records of their sales and a national registry has not yet been created, the Second Amendment nightmare scenario has lived on. 

"Once you get these lists out there, once you have a gun dealer keeping lists for lots of other people, the only way that works, frankly I think, is if you keep the paper," Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., told Fox News on Monday. "And if you keep the paper, eventually, somebody's going to ask for it." 

Concerns about gun seizures were stoked most recently after a New York gun owner had his weapons mistakenly seized. They were later ordered to be returned. 

Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who drafted the background check amendment, insist a registry is expressly prohibited. 

The language of the proposal says the Justice Department "may not consolidate or centralize the records" on firearms sales or possession. It goes on to say nothing in the proposal would allow the establishment of a "federal firearms registry." 

Manchin, speaking on CBS' "Face the Nation," reiterated that sellers can do a background check and keep a record -- but the proposal would prohibit a national registry, punishing anybody who tries creating one with up to 15 years imprisonment. 

Despite the assurances, some lawmakers were skeptical. 

"It has been said on the floor recently that background check legislation cannot lead to gun registries because federal law prohibits that. But current federal law can be changed," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said last week, calling recordkeeping a "step toward registration." 

He cited testimony that gun registration is important to ensuring a system of universal background checks works. 

Those concerns were echoed Monday by Blunt, who said he plans to oppose the bill. He cited reports last week that said 185,000 people in his state were affected after a list of concealed-weapon permit holders was given to federal officials. 

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., also said in a statement last week that the Manchin-Toomey proposal "prioritizes collecting records over protecting citizens." 

David Addington, with the conservative Heritage Foundation, argued that while the new proposal prohibits a federal registry, it also includes language that could create wiggle room for the Justice Department. 

Yet supporters of new gun legislation are slowly peeling off votes in favor of the bill. The Senate voted 68-31 last week to advance to debate, easily clearing the 60-vote threshold. 

The bill will have to clear that bar once more before earning a final vote -- and some of those who voted "yes" last week could vote "no" the second time around. 

But over the weekend, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he was "very favorably disposed" to the Manchin-Toomey amendment. 

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., as well as Toomey, have also signaled support from the Republican side. 

Democrats have a 55-vote majority in the Senate, including two independents who typically caucus with Democrats. If all those Democrats vote for the bill, they would still need five Republicans. 

But Democrats could lose a handful of their own -- for instance, two Democrats facing reelection next year opposed last week's motion -- which would require even more Republican support. 

It's not yet clear whether Democrats can garner enough of it. Another prominent Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced Monday that he will oppose the Toomey-Manchin amendment. 

"Instead of expanding a broken background check system, let's fix it," he said.


View the original article here

Thứ Năm, 28 tháng 3, 2013

Ashley Judd not running for Senate

  • AshleyJuddnotrunning.jpg

    March 18, 2013: Ashley Judd arrives at the LA premiere of "Olympus Has Fallen" at the ArcLight Theatre in Los Angeles.AP/Invision

Actress Ashley Judd announced Wednesday she won't run for U.S. Senate in Kentucky against Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, saying she had given serious thought to a campaign but decided her responsibilities and energy need to be focused on her family.

The former Kentucky resident tweeted her decision.

"Regretfully, I am currently unable to consider a campaign for the Senate. I have spoken to so many Kentuckians over these last few months who expressed their desire for a fighter for the people & new leader," Judd wrote.

"While that won't be me at this time, I will continue to work as hard as I can to ensure the needs of Kentucky families are met by returning this Senate seat to whom it rightfully belongs: the people & their needs, dreams, and great potential. Thanks for even considering me as that person & know how much I love our Commonwealth. Thank you!"

Her publicist Cara Tripicchio confirmed Judd's decision.

The 44-year-old Judd had hinted last week that she was nearing a decision about the race.

Now living in suburban Nashville, Tenn., Judd has said little publicly about her intentions. However, she has been meeting with several Democratic leaders, including Gov. Steve Beshear, to discuss a possible run.

Defeating McConnell would be the Democrats' biggest prize of the 2014 election. His seat is one of 14 that Republicans are defending while Democrats try to hold onto 21, hoping to retain or add to their 55-45 edge.

The star of such films as "Double Jeopardy" and "Kiss the Girls" is known for her liberal political views and she would have been running in a largely conservative state where Republicans hold both Senate seats and five of the six seats in the U.S. House.

Former State Treasurer Jonathan Miller, a Judd supporter, said she would have been a strong candidate.

"As a Kentuckian and someone who was really enthusiastic about her as a candidate, this wasn't the news I was hoping for," Miller said. "But as her friend, from the first time we talked about the race last summer, I was very candid about the grueling nature of politics. It's become a very unpleasant business and running against Mitch McConnell would be an extraordinarily difficult and grueling experience."

McConnell, who spent some $20 million on his last election and who has already raised $10 million for the next one, had already been taunting would-be Democratic challengers in a comical online video intended to raise second thoughts about taking on a politician known as brawler. The video plays on the fact that Judd lives in Tennessee.

Republican-leaning group American Crossroads in its own online video also plays on the Tennessee angle and ties her closely to President Barack Obama, who is unpopular in Kentucky.

University of Louisville political scientist Laurie Rhodebeck said Judd certainly wasn't frightened out of the race.

"She doesn't strike me as a shrinking violet," Rhodebeck said. "I think the real issue would be how much disruption she wanted in her life. This was the kind of thing that she would have to throw herself into 100 percent in order to make it worthwhile."

Judd and three-time Indianapolis 500 winner Dario Franchitti separated early this year after marrying in his native Scotland in 2001.

Judd's decision not to enter the race leaves the Democratic Party in search of a candidate. Many of Kentucky's top Democrats, including Beshear, have said they won't run. However, a rising star within the party, Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes, hasn't ruled the race out. Grimes declined comment Wednesday evening through her spokeswoman, Lynn Sowards Zellen.


View the original article here

Thứ Sáu, 22 tháng 3, 2013

'DRAIN ON INNOVATION': Senate Push to Repeal Key ObamaCare Tax Grows

  • meddevicetax12.jpg

    June 15, 2007: A patient is put through a cat scan machine in Kingston, N.Y.AP

The Senate gave sweeping bipartisan approval Thursday to a proposal by Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., to put senators on record in favor of repealing a tax on medical devices – a key part of President Obama’s controversial health care law.

The Hatch-Klobuchar amendment to the GOP budget plan is the latest effort to roll back the tax that applies to a range of medical products, from surgical tools to heart devices. It’s among several taxes in Obama’s 2010 health care overhaul.

The amendment passed the Senate by a vote of 79 to 20.

“Today, bipartisan members of the Senate spoke loudly and clearly that this tax on medical devices simply must go.  It is a drain on innovation, on job creation and on our ability to provide ground breaking medical technologies to patients,” Hatch said in a statement.

The Affordable Care Act levies a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices with the goal of raising nearly $30 billion over the next decade.

Manufacturers say the impact of the tax is far greater than meets the eye -- the 2.3 percent tax is on gross sales, meaning it's a much greater percentage of net income. 

The Obama administration has defended the medical device tax, saying companies actually stand to benefit from the law. Though the 2.3 percent tax hits the industry, the department argues that the millions of new health care customers insured as a result of the law will increase the demand in hospitals to order more equipment -- in turn boosting medical device companies' profits. 

Last year the White House threatened to veto a House bill that would have repealed the tax, citing concerns that the House proposal would offset the lost revenue from the tax by cutting down on subsidies for some families. 

This, they said, would effectively "raise taxes on middle-class and low-income families." 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 19 tháng 3, 2013

GUN BAN SHELVED: Senate Dems Drop Ban on Assault Weapons From Bill

  • feinstein_dianne_012413.jpg

    FILE: Jan. 24, 2013: Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., to introduce legislation on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.AP

The leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate on Tuesday dropped a proposed assault weapons ban from the chamber’s gun-control package – dealing a blow to supporters of the ban, though it could still come up for a vote. 

The sponsor of the measure, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed that Reid told her the proposed ban would not be in the initial package. Feinstein said she's "disappointed" with the decision, and is expected to nevertheless offer it as an amendment. 

But the move by Reid to cut it from the main bill signals a lack of congressional support for a proposal that would not only revive, but strengthen, the decade-long ban that expired in 2004. 

The proposed ban passed was passed last week by the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with three other measures. The others dealt with providing more school safety aid, expanding federal background checks on potential gun buyers and helping authorities prosecute illegal gun traffickers.

Feinstein has led the gun-control charge since President Obama called for federal legislation in the wake of the Newtown and other mass shootings. 

The assault weapons ban was the most controversial of the major proposals to restrict guns that have been advanced by Obama and Senate Democrats. Because of that, it had been expected that the assault weapons measure would be left out of the initial package the Senate considers, with Democrats hoping the Senate could in turn amass the strongest possible vote for the overall legislation.

There are 53 Democrats in the Senate, plus two independents who usually vote with them. 

Having a separate vote on assault weapons might free moderate Democratic senators facing re-election next year in Republican-leaning states to vote against the assault weapons measure, but then support the remaining overall package of gun curbs.

Gun control supporters consider a strong Senate vote important because the Republican-run House has shown little enthusiasm for most of Obama's proposals.

Feinstein said Reid told her there would be two additional votes. One would be on her assault weapons ban, which also includes a ban on ammunition magazines that carry more than 10 rounds. The second would just be on prohibiting the high-capacity magazine clips.

Many Democrats think the ban on large-capacity magazines has a better chance of getting 60 votes than the assault weapons ban.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

KNIVES ON PLANES: Senate Candidate Strikes Chord With TSA Challenge

  • Markey_TSA.jpg

    FILE: March 4, 2013: Democratic U.S. Senate hopeful and Rep. Edward Markey speaks to supporters outside the Statehouse in Boston, Mass.AP

With a Swiss Army knife in hand, Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Ed Markey visited Boston’s Logan Airport last week to make a very public showing of his efforts stop the federal government from allowing airline passengers to bring small, folding knives on board.

Markey, who has held his House seat since 1976 and now is running for Senate, appears to dug up potential political gold. By railing against the TSA rule change, he's also aligning with the unions and other security advocates in a state -- and city -- where two of the planes hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001, departed.

"On 9/11, we learned that in the confines of an airline cabin, even a small knife can lead to devastating consequences," Markey said Tuesday, flanked by pilots and flight attendants. 

Though Markey argues he is already a well-known Transportation Security Administration bulldog and wouldn’t use this for political gain, political observers say he has a sixth sense for such issues and has picked yet another. The position also could help him draw away support from his union-backed Democratic opponent. 

“This is an easy lay up,” David Heller, Democratic political strategist and president of Main Street Communications, said Monday. “Nobody will push back on this.”

Markey is trying to stop the TSA from allowing passengers next month to carry the knives, as well as miniature, souvenir baseball bats and such sporting goods as ski poles and hockey sticks, onto airplanes cabins.

Knives with blades shorter than 2.36 inches and no wider than one-half inch would be permitted, but box cutters like those used by the 9/11 hijackers still are banned. TSA chief John Pistole announced the changes earlier this month as an effort to help agents search for explosives and other, more dangerous items and said the changes will take effect April 25.

Meanwhile, Markey appears determined to add to his early lead in his primary race for the Senate seat formerly held by now-Secretary of State John Kerry -- and to avoid a special election upset like the one in 2010.

He already has a 29-point lead against his lone Democratic opponent, fellow Massachusetts Rep. Stephen Lynch, according a poll earlier this month by The Boston Herald and the University of Massachusetts Lowell.

The winner of the party’s April 30 primary is the likely favorite to win the June 25 general election, considering Massachusetts is a solidly Democratic state -- though former Sen. Scott Brown proved in 2010 that a Republican can win a Senate seat in the Bay State.

In the Republican primary, former U.S. attorney for Massachusetts Michael Sullivan appears to be leading the two other candidates, state Rep. Daniel Winslow and investment executive and former Navy SEAL Gabriel Gomez, according to a recent straw poll.

Sullivan, who helped prosecute “shoe bomber” Richard Reid -- who in December 2001 attempted to blown up a U.S. commercial flight -- also opposes the TSA change.

“It makes no sense to me that TSA would consider the knives to be non-threatening, while box-cutters continue to pose concerns,” he said in a statement Friday. “TSA should reverse this policy decision immediately."

Markey -- who in 2005 unsuccessfully opposed a TSA effort to allow small scissors and other sharp objects on board – also has introduced House legislation to override the agency.

And he has garnered support from several of the country’s biggest pilot, flight attendant and air marshal unions for blocking the policy change, which also is being opposed by two major airlines.

Lynch, who on 9/11 won the Democratic primary for his House seat, reportedly opposed the TSA change, too.  However, his campaign office could not be reached for comment Monday.

Lynch, a former ironworker and union official, also has received several endorsement from organized labor -- including ones from the national Ironworkers union and the Massachusetts Nurses Association-National Nurses United, the state’s largest nurses union.

However, he lost the key Service Employees International Union endorsement last week to Markey.

Beyond what strategists have said about Markey’s efforts, his congressional staff has privately said he has seized on a potent issue. 

Still, Markey must defend against being portrayed as a career Washington politician.

Heller doesn’t foresee another special election disaster for Massachusetts Democrats like the one in 2010 when state Attorney General Martha Coakley lost the general election to Brown.

“Markey will have more time and a way less formidable Republican challenger,” he said. “If Markey doesn’t win double digits, something went terribly wrong.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Thứ Hai, 4 tháng 3, 2013

Senate confirms Hagel as Defense secretary- OPINION: 7 things at the top of Hagel's 'to do' list

The Senate approved Chuck Hagel's nomination for Defense secretary Tuesday, ending a contentious battle that exposed deep divisions over the president's Pentagon pick. 

After Republicans blocked the nomination earlier this month, they ultimately allowed for an up-or-down vote on Tuesday. The margin was historically close, with 58 senators supporting him and 41 opposing in the end. 

Though Hagel is himself a former Republican senator, the resistance to his nomination showed an unusual level of distrust among many senators toward the man chosen to lead the Defense Department -- at a time when the country is trying to wind down the Afghanistan war, while assessing emerging threats from Iran, Syria and elsewhere in the turbulent Middle East and North Africa. 

Republicans had earlier held up the nomination largely over demands for more information from the Obama administration on the Sept. 11 Libya attacks. 

But they also raised serious and recurring concerns about Hagel's record of past statements and votes on everything from Israel to Iran to nuclear weapons. 

Sen. John McCain, a leading Republican, clashed with his onetime friend over his opposition to President George W. Bush's decision to send an extra 30,000 troops to Iraq in 2007 at a point when the war seemed in danger of being lost. Hagel, who voted to authorize military force in Iraq, later opposed the conflict, comparing it to Vietnam and arguing that it shifted the focus from Afghanistan. 

McCain called Hagel unqualified for the Pentagon job even though he once described him as fit for a Cabinet post. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asked what the delaying tactics had done for "my Republican colleagues." 

"Twelve days later, nothing. Nothing has changed," the Democrat said on the Senate floor. "Sen. Hagel's exemplary record of service to his country remains untarnished." 

Reid blamed partisanship over Obama's second-term national security team for the delay. Both Reid and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Democrat, warned that it was imperative to act just days before automatic, across-the-board budget cuts hit the Pentagon. 

Hagel will succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and join Obama's retooled national security team. Hagel's nomination bitterly split the Senate, with Republicans turning on their former party colleague and Democrats standing by Obama's nominee. 

Republicans also challenged Hagel about a May 2012 study that he co-authored for the advocacy group Global Zero, which called for an 80 percent reduction of U.S. nuclear weapons and the eventual elimination of all the world's nuclear arms. 

The group argued that with the Cold War over, the United States can reduce its total nuclear arsenal to 900 without sacrificing security. Currently, the U.S. and Russia have about 5,000 warheads each, either deployed or in reserve. Both countries are on track to reduce their deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 by 2018, the number set in the New START treaty that the Senate ratified in December 2010. 

In an echo of the 2012 presidential campaign, Hagel faced an onslaught of criticism by well-funded, Republican-leaning outside groups that labeled the former senator "anti-Israel" and pressured senators to oppose the nomination. The groups ran television and print ads criticizing Hagel. 

Opponents were particularly incensed by Hagel's use of the term "Jewish lobby" to refer to pro-Israel groups. He apologized, saying he should have used another term and should not have said those groups have intimidated members of the Senate into favoring actions contrary to U.S. interests. 

The nominee spent weeks reaching out to members of the Senate, meeting individually with lawmakers to address their concerns and seeking to reassure them about his policies. 

Hagel's halting and inconsistent performance during some eight hours of testimony at this confirmation hearing last month undercut his cause, but it wasn't a fatal blow. 

There was no erosion in Democratic support for the president's choice and Hagel had the backing of three Republicans -- Sens. Thad Cochran, Mike Johanns and Richard Shelby. Other Republicans were reluctant to block a president's Cabinet choice from getting a yes or no vote, fearing the precedent. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here