The 2008 US Presidential Election Thread

[7 Wishes]

I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it...

Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

Her words, not mine.

[7 Wishes]

Biden seems to have a slightly better grasp on the truth:

The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.

And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit.

The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he's part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive...

And yes, Cheney is a certifiable maniac. Talk about scary - that he has been next in line for 8 years. Palin is Alexander Hamilton by comparison.

[RossValoryRocks]

I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it...

Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

Her words, not mine.

Tell me how that says she is power hungry?

Tell me how that is any different from what I stated she meant?

You can't. I will parse all of Biden's comments to if you want for anything that can be taken out of context.

[7 Wishes]

I should have read the last five pages. I didn't know the point you were trying to make...I just know an alarm went off in my head when she said that.

[Lula]

You need to go back though and look through my posts. I and others here have slammed President Bush repeatedly when we disagreed with him and thought he was wrong.

NEVER in the thread, or anywhere else have you liberals ONCE slammed any democrat or other liberal type.

I don't have faith in Obama because I am an educated man, and see what history teaches. He will raise taxes which will thrash our economy, particularly with a democrat controlled congress.

I react to a candidate out of research on their positions, you react out of some kind of warped sense of the "I hate Bush" delusion.

Jana you really don't understand what Obama will do to this country, and are typically shortsighted as most liberals are these days.

I suggest you do some reading on the Great Depression and see the parallels with today.

But we'll all be poor together! Where's your community spirit?

glad i won't be alone. arnold, our governator has asked the feds for a few bucks to cover california for the next few months. my paycheck is at stake

[RossValoryRocks]

I should have read the last five pages. I didn't know the point you were trying to make...I just know an alarm went off in my head when she said that.

\

It's all semantics, you will see what you want, as will I.

The real truth of the matter is she could have chosen her words better, but I have no doubt she was not advocating making the VP a co-president (as it was ORIGINIALLY intended to be, prior to the 12th amendment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment). At that point the office became largely ceremonial.

[RossValoryRocks]

You need to go back though and look through my posts. I and others here have slammed President Bush repeatedly when we disagreed with him and thought he was wrong.

NEVER in the thread, or anywhere else have you liberals ONCE slammed any democrat or other liberal type.

I don't have faith in Obama because I am an educated man, and see what history teaches. He will raise taxes which will thrash our economy, particularly with a democrat controlled congress.

I react to a candidate out of research on their positions, you react out of some kind of warped sense of the "I hate Bush" delusion.

Jana you really don't understand what Obama will do to this country, and are typically shortsighted as most liberals are these days.

I suggest you do some reading on the Great Depression and see the parallels with today.

But we'll all be poor together! Where's your community spirit?

glad i won't be alone. arnold, our governator has asked the feds for a few bucks to cover california for the next few months. my paycheck is at stake

7 BILLION DOLLARS! WOW.

[Jana]

RussValoryRocks, maybe we can't stomach her being elected because she is absolutely unqualified for the job, period. What don't you get about that? Go back and READ my last post to you about Romney ten posts back and my "liberal" voting history. I think you missed it.

I'm not picking on her because she's a Republican. I respect Romney as a choice. If McCain dies, which there's a decent chance that could happen, she will be he president of the United States. I'm horrified by that thought. Why? BECAUSE SHE'S NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. She's not qualified to deal with Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan. She will have us in more wars. McCain screwed up. I would appreciate one Republican admitting he screwed up. I would respect that. A show of hand anyone? I THOUGHT NOT. You won't admit it. My Republican friends don't tell me she's qualified. They just say, oh, he won't die. That's not important. God help me with that thought process.

[Lula]

yeah, 7 billion that's just a little more than my paycheck. california is deep in the hole.

[RossValoryRocks]

RussValoryRocks, maybe we can't stomach her being elected because she is absolutely unqualified for the job, period. What don't you get about that? Go back and READ my last post to you about Romney six posts back and my "liberal" voting history. I think you missed it.

I'm not picking on her because she's a Republican. I respect Romney as a choice. If McCain dies, which there's a decent chance that could happen, she will be he president of the United States. I'm horrified by that thought. Why? BECAUSE SHE'S NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. She's not qualified to deal with Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan. She will have us in more wars. McCain screwed up. I would appreciate one Republican admitting he screwed up. I would respect that. My Republican friends don't tell me she's qualified. They just say, oh, he won't die. That's not important. God help me with that thought process.

And Obama is QUALIFIED?

Bullshit.

Not based on your criteria.

She has more experience than a man who got elected Senator then spent the next 2 years running for President.

But as I said, it doesn't matter...Obama is going to win.

[Lula]

you know jana, there have been a handful of repubs speaking out against palin. remember the kathleen parker article? and there is a bush speech writer... there are a few more, but i'm pretty brain dead right now. overall they like her. i'd probably like her too if she were different

[RossValoryRocks]

yeah, 7 billion that's just a little more than my paycheck. california is deep in the hole.

I wish I could understand how the richest state in the country is broke!

But I can't. California, if it was a country on it's own, would be the 10th largest (or something like that) based on GDP.

[The_Noble_Cause]

you know jana, there have been a handful of repubs speaking out against palin. remember the kathleen parker article? and there is a bush speech writer... there are a few more, but i'm pretty brain dead right now. overall they like her. i'd probably like her too if she were different

George Will did too.
McCain then dismissed him as a "Georgetown cocktail party person who quote calls himself a Conservative..."

[Jana]

Sarah Palin is dangerous. She is, to me, a warmonger. That's how I see her. And, sorry, she's not as smart as Obama. Spin it any way you want to. Or as she spins it, the "media elite" are after her. She can't even answer basic questions in an interview. McCAIN F____D UP. I've lost all respect that he would put the country in such a position. There were other more qualified female candidates.

[Jana]

By the way, off topic, Lula, your baby is beautiful. I love the name Wyatt.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Sarah Palin is dangerous. She is, to me, a warmonger. That's how I see her.

Palin, McCain, and FOX News have been very bellicose regarding the Russia- Georgia conflict, not to mention wrong.

[Lula]

jana!! you used the F word!!

has anyone ever said they think palin is as smart as obama? one of the things i really like about barack is his intelligence. the man is no slouch. i feel like he is way more in touch with the everyday lives and struggles of the american people. i'll be honest here, i really like the idea of a young (er) person as our president. the next prez will have truckloads of poo to clean up and will have a tough time restoring our world image. we might score a few points with the global community by simply electing obama.

[Lula]

By the way, off topic, Lula, your baby is beautiful. I love the name Wyatt.

thank you! he's 13 months now. his daddy is rockndeano, was he still here when you joined?

[The_Noble_Cause]

Of all the public servants that ran for the Dem nomination, Obama is easily the least qualified.
I will vote for Obama, but am truly embarassed that the primary voters went straight for the celebrity candidates.

[Jana]

Sorry, Lula, I lost it. I was referring to Obama's intellect because RVR was saying Palin was as qualfied as Obama. And, you're right, I think he will restore a lot of goodwill around the world.

When Palin was full of herself on Fox today complaining about Katie Couric, it just rubbed me the wrong way and then using her buzz words media elite, Washington elite, and maverick. Gosh, Hillary was out there taking potshots right and left. and she was answering every hard question on policy and issues. And here they're protecting her from interviews, the big, bad press, and then they complain about the treatment of her. Unprecedented for a VP nominee. Protect the little lady who would be VP, who could be President.
_______________________________________________________
Lula, no, your husband wasn't here when I joined, I don't think. But I see his name mentioned.

[The_Noble_Cause]

When Palin was full of herself on Fox today complaining about Katie Couric, it just rubbed me the wrong way and then using her buzz words media elite.

She can't help it. Crying about the "liberal media" is a GOP ceremonial rite of passage. Real or imagined, it's part of their culture.

[Jana]

Oh, now Sarah Palin comes out and apologizes for being annoyed with the media and not answering questions and being flippant. So NOW she gives Supreme Court rulings she disagrees with and can actually name some publications she reads. Hmmm, maybe she didn't answer any Supreme Court rulings she disagreed with because she didn't KNOW any, not because she was annoyed. She's not qualified to be VP or President of the U.S.

[Lula]

good ole sarah! but at least she's an expert on energy!!

[YoungJRNY]

Oh, now Sarah Palin comes out and apologizes for being annoyed with the media and not answering questions and being flippant. So NOW she gives Supreme Court rulings she disagrees with and can actually name some publications she reads. Hmmm, maybe she didn't answer any Supreme Court rulings she disagreed with because she didn't KNOW any, not because she was annoyed. She's not qualified to be VP or President of the U.S.

".. or President of the U.S."

That just scared the complete living feces out of me. Excuse me while I go into the corner of my bedroom in the fetal position.

[Lula]

hey didja know, joe six-pack has a cousin, joe lunchbucket. a relatively interesting article where is joe six-pack?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081003/ap_ ... e_six_pack

[Lula]

damn it joe, there ya go mixing up those articles!!! of course i wish he hadn't done that.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Oh, now Sarah Palin comes out and apologizes for being annoyed with the media and not answering questions and being flippant. So NOW she gives Supreme Court rulings she disagrees with and can actually name some publications she reads. Hmmm, maybe she didn't answer any Supreme Court rulings she disagreed with because she didn't KNOW any, not because she was annoyed. She's not qualified to be VP or President of the U.S.

My vote was never hers for the taking, but I don't know how any Conservative, with all their talk of "strict constitutional judges" could respect her after that.
A REAL maverick would drop her from the ticket instantly, admit his Rovian powerlust made him lose sight of what counts, and revert to his true choice of Joe Lieberman.

[donnaplease]

Strictly my opinion here, because I really haven't seen the interview from beginning to end, but I wonder if she had that 'deer in the headlights' look because she was trying to figure out how she was gonna be pinned down by that question. It seems that after the interview with Charlie Gibson, she could've been waiting for the next shoe to drop. She probably should've just answered the question and then dealt with whatever fallout would've come her way. But that's an odd question, dontcha think? What newspaper do you read?

I think she doesn't have all the answers. I think she has been thrust into a 'national' campaign with 3 other 'national' candidates, and she doesn't have the 'national' experience that they may have based on their time in the senate. I think with the right training she could be a formidable opponent for anyone (as she has proven in Alaska) and with her history of taking on Goliath she has a future in American politics. Now may not be the time for her, though, IDK.

What I am starting to see, and it scares me, is that in the future there will be no two-party system. It seems the media is turning into a propaganda vehicle, and mostly for the liberal/democratic party. I flipped the channel to several different stations after the debate Thursday night to see what others were saying (I'm normally a Fox News girl ) and found it very interesting that none of the stations were 'fair and balanced', including Fox. I think the liberal machine combined with the propanda machine will eventually wipe out the two-party system. Just my opinion, folks, please don't annihilate me for it.

This whole political process is disgusting.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Strictly my opinion here, because I really haven't seen the interview from beginning to end, but I wonder if she had that 'deer in the headlights' look because she was trying to figure out how she was gonna be pinned down by that question. It seems that after the interview with Charlie Gibson, she could've been waiting for the next shoe to drop. She probably should've just answered the question and then dealt with whatever fallout would've come her way. But that's an odd question, dontcha think? What newspaper do you read?

When the questions aren't too difficult or too 'gotcha' for her to answer, they are now deemed too odd.
You guys have an excuse for everything.
Couric even gave her 2-3 chances to clarify.
Considering the second Couric interview was requested by Palin she has no room to complain.

It seems the media is turning into a propaganda vehicle, and mostly for the liberal/democratic party. I flipped the channel to several different stations after the debate Thursday night to see what others were saying (I'm normally a Fox News girl ) and found it very interesting that none of the stations were 'fair and balanced', including Fox. I think the liberal machine combined with the propanda machine will eventually wipe out the two-party system. Just my opinion, folks, please don't annihilate me for it.

No idea what you're talking about.
Olbermann and Maddow are the only two candles in the darkness, as far as liberal anchored news goes.

[7 Wishes]

Wow, Lie Finder. You've found an article written by an African-American Republican that conveniently lays the blame at the hands of the Democrats.

Let's try examining the TRUTH, for a change.


* Were the Republicans responsible for (and did John McCain vote for) the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that allowed this deregulation that created this problem, way back in 1999? Yes.
* Does John McCain currently have Phil Gramm serving as his economic adviser on his campaign? Again, yes.
* Did the Republicans, in control of sending S190 to the floor of the Senate for a vote, fail to do so? Yes.
* Did the White House, putatively desiring to see the risks of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ameliorated, fail to take action when comprehensive regulatory legislation failed to emerge from Congress? Yes.
* Did McCain support reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Not in any way that mattered, and certainly not when it would have done any good.
* Did McCain presciently predict problems with either GSE? Nope. He simply regurgitated the findings of the report created by the OFHEO.
* Given a second opportunity in the current Congress to address reforming either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, did McCain act or even speak toward convincing his compatriots to assert more regulation in order to avoid disaster? Clearly not.

The clear indication is that this mess is primarily the result of the Republican love of deregulation. The Democrats, of course, deserve their fair share of approbation, having done nothing, themselves, to address the problem, either. But in the face of consistent finger-pointing laying the lion's share of the blame at the feet of Democrats, the facts of the situation contradict that assertion. This crisis was engineered by Republicans, permitted by Republicans, and now that the chickens have come home to roost should be owned up to by Republicans.


President Bush's "America's Home Ownership Challenge" pushed the private lending sector (as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to make more than 5.5 million new minority and low income mortgage loans. To meet his challenge to the private lending industry, twenty four of our largest banking and lending companies pledged to make 1.1 trillion dollars in low income and minority loans. Bush's "America's Home Ownership Challenge" pushed private lenders to "create more creative" loan products, and encouraged them to "loosen underwriting standards." In the Bush press release "A Home of Your Own EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL AMERICANS, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH JUNE 2002", the administration even pushed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to increase the capital available for such loans--

The government-sponsored corporations created to increase the liquidity of mortgage markets, so more capital would be available for mortgage loans, are supposed to lead the market in reaching underserved populations. While these corporations have increased their commitments to these efforts, they lag behind private lenders in this regard, according to government studies. The Administration will revisit the regulatory goals for these corporations’ purchases of affordable housing loans, which are set to expire in 2003. The federal government should demand more and should hold such publicly-chartered corporations accountable for better performance.

In this instance, "better performance" is seen as an increase in capital available for mortgage loans to underserved populations. That's the opposite of what should have been happening if Republicans were concerned about the fragility of the industry.

*

The Bush administration was on the forefront of pushing risky mortgages. From Bush Administration’s White House Press Release entitled, "Focusing on the Nation’s Priorities – Meeting America’s Housing Needs":

In 2002, the President issued America’s Homeownership Challenge to increase first-time minority homeowners by 5.5 million through 2010. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage program is an important tool for reaching that goal. In 2006, 31 percent of those using FHA mortgages were minorities purchasing their first home. The 2008 Budget continues Administration efforts to modernize FHA by improving its ability to reach traditionally underserved homebuyers (aka those who do not normally qualify for loans), such as low- and moderate-income families, individuals with blemished credit, and families who have little savings for a down payment.

It's a bit of a problem to claim that the Democrats were responsible for pushing risky loans and relaxed underwriting, when the Republican President, with the complicity of his party, demanded loans be extended to individuals with blemished credit, or who could not afford down payments.

*

While in Georgia in 2002, Bush made a speech in which he directly stated

One of the barriers to homeownership is the inability to make a downpayment. And if one of the goals is to increase homeownership, it makes sense to help people pay that downpayment.

... And let me talk about some of the progress which we have made to date, as an example for others to follow. First of all, government sponsored corporations that help create our mortgage system -- I introduced two of the leaders here today -- they call those people Fannie May and Freddie Mac, as well as the federal home loan banks, will increase their commitment to minority markets by more than $440 billion. (Applause.) I want to thank Leland and Franklin for that commitment. It's a commitment that conforms to their charters, as well, and also conforms to their hearts.

This means they will purchase more loans made by banks after Americans, Hispanics and other minorities, which will encourage homeownership. Freddie Mac will launch 25 initiatives to eliminate homeownership barriers. Under one of these, consumers with poor credit will be able to get a mortgage with an interest rate that automatically goes down after a period of consistent payments.

It was the Republican administration which directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to more aggressively serve risky markets, and threatened their charter if they did not do so.

*

On December 16, 2003, President Bush signed into law the American Dream Downpayment Act of 2003, which will help approximately 40,000 families a year with their down payment and closing costs, and further strengthen America’s housing market. This legislation complements the President’s aggressive housing agenda announced in 2002 to dismantle the barriers to homeownership.

(From White House Press Release "American Dream Downpayment Act of 2003 – Expanding Homeownership Opportunities for All).

The American Dream Downpayment Act of 2003 followed Bush's admonishment that capital must be made available to "low- and moderate-income families, individuals with blemished credit, and families who have little savings for a down payment."

*

The Republican administration had HUD offer "zero down payment" mortgages, and risky 3, 5, and 7-year ARMs.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES NEW HUD "ZERO DOWN PAYMENT" MORTGAGE Initiative Aimed at Removing Major Barrier to Homeownership LAS VEGAS - As part of President Bush's ongoing effort to help American families achieve the dream of homeownership, Federal Housing Commissioner John C. Weicher today announced that HUD is proposing to offer a "zero down payment" mortgage, the most significant initiative by the Federal Housing Administration in over a decade. This action would help remove the greatest barrier facing first-time homebuyers - the lack of funds for a down payment on a mortgage. Speaking at the National Association of Home Builders' annual convention, Commissioner Weicher indicated that the proposal, part of HUD's Fiscal Year 2005 budget request, would eliminate the statutory requirement of a minimum three percent down payment for FHA-insured single-family mortgages for first-time homebuyers.

John Weicher was a Bush appointee, and the elimination of the requirement for a 3% downpayment for a HUD/FHA loan was part of Bush's initiative.

*

Of course, these goals were reiterated in the 2004 GOP platform [warning: PDF]

The most significant barrier to homeownership is the down payment. We support efforts to reduce that barrier, like the American Dream Downpayment Act and Zero Downpayment Mortgages.

*

It was the Gramm Leach Bliley Act that allowed banks to deal in mortgage-backed securities. Without passage of the GLBA by a Republican-controlled Congress, the subprime mess couldn't have happened. Chief architect of the GLBA? John McCain's economic adviser, Phil Gramm. Yes, that Phil Gramm. The GLBA was passed on a vote split along party lines (John McCain voted "aye," by the way).

The GLBA eliminated regulatory oversight that was essential to prevent the sorts of naked fraud that have fueled the current crisis. As a result of the GLBA and Republican love of deregulation, the banking industry was allowed to "opt out" of regulation, something that SEC Chairman Chris Cox now blames for the current crisis--

“The last six months have made it abundantly clear that voluntary regulation does not work,” he said in a statement. The program “was fundamentally flawed from the beginning, because investment banks could opt in or out of supervision voluntarily. The fact that investment bank holding companies could withdraw from this voluntary supervision at their discretion diminished the perceived mandate” of the program, and “weakened its effectiveness,” he added.

...In 1999, the lawmakers adopted the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which broke down the Depression-era restrictions between investment banks and commercial banks. As part of a political compromise, the law gave the commission the authority to regulate the securities and brokerage operations of the investment banks, but not their holding companies.

...In 2004, at the urging of the investment banks, the commission adopted a voluntary program. In exchange for the relaxation of capital requirements by the commission, the banks agreed to submit to supervision of their holding companies by the agency.

With the economy facing a recession, Congress looked to stimulate the economy by stimulating the housing market. Bush often pointed to the increase in home ownership as an indication that he had, in fact, done exactly that. Mortgage-backed securities were in such demand because they allowed banks and lenders to turn an illiquid asset - mortgages-- into a liquid asset by bundling the mortgages and selling them as securities. Many people thought that they were great securities to buy because they were secured by collateral -- the homes -- and if the debt went bad, the collateral could be sold. As a result, demand for these "products" exceeded supply. What did the Republican administration do? Pushed aggressively for ways to increase the supply, including forcing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to offer risky loans to people with bad credit. And with Republicans in Congress, effective regulation and oversight of the markets was made "voluntary"-- in other words, nonexistent.

Additionally, there are a lot of claims that the Republicans attempted to push through legislation requiring oversight of the subprime market, and that Democrats stymied the bill. A corollary to that claim is that McCain cosponsored the legislation, and sounded the clarion bell on the impending crisis. We should take a moment to evaluate both claims.

The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (S190) was introduced in the Senate on Jan 26, 2005, sponsored by Chuck Hagel and co-sponsored by Elizabeth Dole and John Sununu. John McCain was not a co-sponsor at that time. After some discussion in the Republican-controlled committee, the bill was tabled for revision. In other words, in a Republican controlled Congress, in a Republican controlled committee, the bill died, and was never reconsidered.

17 months later, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) issued the results of their 27 month long investigation of Fannie Mae. It was widely reported and was scathing in its criticism of Fannie Mae. News reports picked up the criticism the following day. The day after that, May 25, 2006, John McCain (in an act of "prescience") regurgitated some of the findings of the report, and signed on as a co-sponsor to the defunct bill. That's the last McCain talked about reforming Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

And what would the reform instituted by S190 have consisted of? S190 would have been reconciled with the almost identical HR1461 before being enacted, if it had become law. What would that have meant? S190 was the stronger of the two bills, but in reconciliation with HR1461, it's entirely possible that the result would have been a weakening of regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Nevertheless, as the American Enterprise Institute noted:

The bill that emerged from the Senate Banking Committee is exactly what the White House wants, and it is doubtful that this administration--and this particularly determined president--will let the opportunity pass. An administration that has gained some measure of tort reform, approval of the Central American Free Trade Agreement, bankruptcy reform, and an energy bill--none of which received significant bipartisan support--is unlikely to shrink from pushing through Congress a bill that achieves one of its most important government reform priorities.

...After the administration and the Fed have declared that the GSEs’ portfolios are a dangerous source of taxpayer and systemic risk, the administration can hardly do nothing if Congress fails to act. In this respect, the administration always has a card to play--it can always use the Treasury’s authority to restrict the GSEs’ issuance of debt. The GSEs must realize this and must see that the only effective way to prevent the use of this authority in a wholesale manner is to reach a legislative compromise of some kind.

Sadly, the AEI was absolutely incorrect on this. The White House refused to press the issue, and the bill was allowed to die in committee, despite Republican control of its fate.

S190 was resurrected in the 110th Congress by Chuck Hagel as S1100. Co sponsoring the bill were Sen. Elizabeth Dole [R-NC], Sen. Mel Martinez [R-FL], and Sen. John Sununu [R-NH]. S1100 was introduced on April 12, 2007.

John McCain did not support S1100, nor has he (before or since) introduced any legislation to address the issue.

So let's have the rundown, here.