Commentators disagree whether a recent vote on a Senate measure to reject part of the Bush administration's mercury rule should be viewed as a sign of strength or weakness for progressives in environmental fights to come. The vote in question was on ">S. J. Res. 20, a joint resolution under the Congressional Review Act to reject part of the Environmental Protection Agency's mercury rule. Even if the resolution had passed the Senate, it would almost surely have been rejected by the House, and it would have surely been vetoed had both chambers passed it. In fact, the only time the Congressional Review Act was successfully used was to reject the Clinton administration's ergonomic rules, which both a GOP-dominated Congress and the incoming Bush administration wanted to stop. Facing both stiff opposition in the House and the threat of a White House veto, the resolution of disapproval was rejected by the Senate on a 47-51 vote. National Journal's CongressDaily reported that supporters of the resolution viewed the vote as a signal of their ability to marshal the 41 votes needed to sustain a filibuster against the administration's proposed Clear Skies legislation. From this perspective, the 47 votes in favor of the resolution amount to a success. Others consider the vote a failure, both as a thwarted strategy against the mercury rule and as a weakening in the environmental ranks. According to BushGreenWatch, the vote was a "severe setback" to environmental health particularly notable because six Democrats voted against the resolution. Nine Republicans, however, did vote for the resolution -- including Susan Collins (R-ME), co-sponsor of the measure.