The purpose of the bill was to temporarily suspend the debt ceiling and withhold the pay of members of Congress until a budget could be passed.
The vote largely followed party lines with Democrats overwhelmingly supporting it and many Republicans in opposition to the bill. The amendment was rejected by the Senate on June 18, , with a vote of 39 - The purpose of the amendment was to require the completion of miles of fence described in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of before registered provisional immigrant status may be granted.
It would also require miles of fence be completed before the status of registered provisional immigrants may be changed to permanent resident status. The vote followed party lines. King voted for S. The bill was passed by the Senate on February 12, , with a vote of 78 - The purpose of the bill was to combat violence against women, from domestic violence to international trafficking in persons.
All 22 dissenting votes were cast by Republicans. Senate Maine on November 6, Incumbents are bolded and underlined. The results have been certified.
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. Zak Ringelstein advanced from the Democratic primary for U. Senate Maine on June 12, There were no incumbents in this race.
Eric Brakey advanced from the Republican primary for U. King ran in the election for the U. Senate , representing Maine. King sought the nomination as an Independent. Health Care. Jobs and the Economy. National Security. Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer.
Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.
Source: Follow the Money. During the Election Angus King won election to the U. Senate, below are his major donors by industry and organization. The Personal Gain Index U. Congress is a two-part measurement that illustrates the extent to which members of the U.
Congress have prospered during their tenure as public servants. It consists of two different metrics:. Based on congressional financial disclosure forms and calculations made available by OpenSecrets. King ranked as the 13th most wealthy senator in Between and , the average annual percentage increase for a member of Congress was Filings required by the Federal Election Commission report on the industries that give to each candidate.
Using campaign filings and information calculated by OpenSecrets. King received the most donations from individuals and PACs employed by the Retired industry. From , He said he was fully vaccinated. Based on an analysis of bill sponsorship by GovTrack , King was a " centrist Independent " as of July 22, This was the same rating King received in June The website OpenCongress tracks the voting records of each member to determine with whom he or she votes most and least often.
The results include a member from each party. This amounts to 1. Each year National Journal publishes an analysis of how liberally or conservatively each member of Congress voted in the previous year. Click the link above for the full ratings of all members of Congress. King ranked 43rd in the liberal rankings in What's on my ballot? Elections in How to vote How to run for office Ballot measures. Who represents me? Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine and Republican Sen.
Mississippi Sen. Senators eye push to expand broadband in underserved areas August 1, GMT. Angus King of Maine and Democratic Sen. Maine senators join push to help intelligence workers July 21, GMT. Maine lab gets grant to use mice in cancer research July 1, GMT. Maine senator wants reforms for drug sentencing rules April 4, GMT. Maine Sen. Maine senators join push for tax relief for brewers December 4, GMT. Connect with the definitive source for global and local news.
The Associated Press. You don't have to worry about the party's major contributors being mad at you. It's a luxury in-- in that sense. Angus King: Yeah and I just try to look for common sense - solutions.
In Washington, King caucuses with the Democrats, but a GovTrack ranking has him as the 42nd most liberal—or 58th most conservative—senator. And as an independent, he's able to avoid the devils deals that come with party politics.
Jon Wertheim: I've heard this described almost as a locker room in sports, where you're told you can't give the other side a victory. Angus King: Well, the impact is to divide us into-- into-- distrustful, armed camps where it's-- everything is a zero sum game. We-- we win, and they lose, or vice versa.
Do you think you're gonna have pressure to-- have an R or D next to your name? Angus King: I don't think so. I'll-- I'll vote with you on organizing the Senate but I'm gonna make my own calls on-- on other issues. And you gotta leave me alone. And he said, "Don't worry, we will.
One I was gonna vote with him anyway, and the other I said no. Now, it-- I gotta be honest, because my Republican friends are watching this, and they're gonna say, "He's really a Democrat, come on. King has stopped flying since the pandemic, instead he drives the nine hours between D. When he returns to Washington on January 20 after this recess, it may barely look recognizable. New president. And after last week's Georgia run-off, new party controlling the Senate. Jon Wertheim: Does a unified government, same party, House, Senate, White House, does that help or hinder this healing we've been talking about?
Angus King: If the Democrats had 60 and could literally pass whatever they wanted, that would be an entirely different situation. It's still gonna require-- bipartisan work. Jon Wertheim: Seems to me positioning yourself between the yard lines now is-- is suddenly a fairly healthy place to be.
Angus King: Compromise is the essence of-- of human experience. And by the way, the constitution itself is full of compromises. The-- the U. Senate was a product of a compromise. And Senator King has advice for how his colleagues on the left might deal with the plus million Americans who voted for Trump. Angus King: There's a term I've always liked called "eloquent listening. I mean, it's a very complicated matter, but we can't just dismiss it Jon Wertheim: Are you concerned that some of your colleagues on the left are going to govern with-- with an element of-- of retribution?
That crassly, you know, karma is a you know what, and after four years of a president they've reviled and of Republican senators they think have been enabling, and an assault on your place of work this week, that-- this pendulum's gonna whip back in the other direction. Angus King: You can't just say, you know, "No harm, no foul," and pretend nothing ever happened. On the other hand, to-- to be motivated by retribution or-- or some element of-- of vengeance or some-- I-- I-- I don't think that's productive.
Jon Wertheim: How do you thread that needle? You don't want people to feel unheard, but you also don't want to give credence to what isn't factually true. King: I think it's really important because the alternative to extended deterrence is proliferation. I think extended deterrence is a very important concept.
So I believe that the idea of the American nuclear umbrella is very important to both international stability, in terms of some limitation on regional conflict, but also in terms of proliferation. You know, you emphasized in your remarks the importance of kind of addressing the concerns from China. So Dan Leone has asked for your view on that partnership in the naval propulsion piece. King: Well, before I answer that, let me mention something about China and the Pacific that I think is important.
To me, one of the most serious strategic gaps, if you will, for the U. Our principal strategy in the Pacific is one of force projection, based largely upon carriers. If there is a strategic problem that the U. But I wanted to mention that before we get too much further into the discussion. On the way in this morning, I listened to the French ambassador very unhappy about what went on. But clearly it was — it probably could have been handled better in terms of communication, although whenever the French were told, they would have been mad as hell when it — you know, if it would have been two months ago or a year ago or last week.
She says: North Korea continues to develop its nuclear and missile programs while the U. This sort of fits also in your discussion about where the various threats lie. What is your comment on this? Do you have any thoughts on how North Korea fits into this picture of deterrence, arms control, proliferation? What is it North Korea wants?
And to me, the best route is via direct talks between South Korea and North Korea. And if they can come to some reasonable uneasy status quo that will reassure the North Korean regime, then perhaps that would lead to the possibility of some level of denuclearization.
You raised part of this in terms of nuclear command and control. Do you see it principally as a cyber threat to NC3? Do you see those issues as closely connected or intertwined? And how might you think about cyberattacks that could implicate somehow our NC3 systems in terms of what they would represent in terms of the type of attack they would be?
Our commission, which was a very interesting one. It was appointed — it was created in the National Defense Act of And it has a really interesting structure — four members of Congress, four members from the executive, and six private sector individuals. And we just — we had our 47th meeting last night, as a matter of fact. This has been a very hands-on commission, really thoughtfully trying to approach this problem.
The short answer to your question is cyber is absolutely the — to me — the most serious risk in terms of command and control. Because the adversaries are working all the time to try to undermine it. I once did a calculation that Putin can hire 8, hackers for the price of one jet fighter. And it also can be enormously debilitating. And so, you know, we can — we can talk about focusing on command and control and the security of that system.
But what if — you know, what if the whole grid goes down? I mean, I assume there are generators and those kinds of things. But the opportunities for cyber mischief are only limited by our imagination. Well, again, sort of looking about the intersection of these various threats and challenges, Brian Rozinski asks a question. He says: The Biden administration has argued that we can no longer look at nuclear weapons in a vacuum, that China and Russia see nuclear weapons as part of an integrated toolkit.
How well equipped do you think Congress is to take a similarly integrated approach to deterrence, both in terms of thinking about adversaries and challenges in this way but also in terms of managing and supporting the investments that need to be made in an integrated strategy?
How would that affect —. So can the Congress adapt? Yes, I think so. I certainly hope so. You know, she and I have worked together very closely. I agree with the question and I agree with the approach of the administration. They are moving between two systems and challenging my technical capacity.
So the question has to do with whether or not you support any changes to declaratory policy, particularly in the form of no first use or sole purpose. And that is — kind of how do you feel about that? Do you have any expectations or opinions on that topic?
But again, I was — I was thinking about this as we were preparing for this discussion. Part of deterrence is making your adversary nervous. You want your adversary to be a little unsure of what the policy is going to be and therefore err on the side of caution.
0コメント