Dec 092010
The Democratic Caucus of the House of Representatives has just met and the majority voted not to accept, without modification, Obama’s surrender to Republicans on income tax cuts and estate tax giveaways for millionaires and billionaires.
We do not know whether Pelosi will bring it to the floor as is. If she does, it will likely be passed by a minority of Democrats and a majority of Republicans, a sad epitaph. She should not do so. If she does not, we’ll need to wait to see what changes are made.
Stay tuned.
Update: Pelosi says she will not bring it to the floor, as is.
20 Responses to “Breaking: House Democratic Caucus Rejects Bad Deal”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
W00T! How ya liking that shit Obama? 😆 Made my morning when CNN sent me this news a short while ago.
I’m holding off celebration until I see what develops!
Wow, interesting development. I’ll be interested to see what changes they insist on. Hmmm. Maybe Obama planned this all along…pretending to capitulate knowing the Dems would reject it and insist on changes? Maybe he is more clever than we think? 😉 Just a thought. Anyway, he could go back to the GOP and say “I can’t get this passed as is, we have to extend the unemployment further or we have to tax the millionaires” or something like that. Hmmmm.
Mimi, in my opinion, no way. Had he campaigned half as hard for single payer as he has for this, we’d have a real public option.
Looks like the negotiations are still ongoing. To quote an old baseball player, “It’s not over until it’s over”. It will be interesting to see if the final deal is better or worse. Maybe the republicans will take their ball and go home. Should be interesting. 😈
I’m watching it closely.
That’s great news!
It is. 🙂
The thugs set the rules of the game and i am pleased that at least one portion of one branch of the government is still standing in what has turned into a two year long cage match.
What changes other than decoupling would you like to see Tom? First I would like the cap removed or changed on SS and the 2% tax cut reinstated.
Pelosi hold your ground let the thugs take responsibility come Jan 5!
Decoupling, as you said, changing the estate tax to a lower limit and higher percent, extent unemployment for two years instead of one, include the 99ers, forget the tax holiday on FICA, raise the FICA cap, treat hedge funds managers as regular income, and make the 98% cut permanent. If they got all that, I’d back down on a two year extension of the 2% cut.
Popcorn for EVERYONE! This is going to be interesting.
Popcorn, hell! This rates a pizza! 😀
I’m not holding my breath, they’re politicians afterall… but maybe this past mid-term sent Pelosi et al a strong message. A lot of disgruntled democrats never showed up to vote…
Maybe…. 🙂
Welcome Nancylynn! 🙂
I hear you.I hate to say it, but the democrats who did not show up to vote deserve the screwing they are getting.
I’m glad someone has some balls -go Nancy!
Actually, Oregon’s Pete DeFazio is the gonad king on this one.
I would rather see the tax rates for people making less than $100,000 cut by 2% instead of the SS tax. If anything SS tax should be extended by removing the cap, not reducing the withholding rate. However, the SS tax cut does help people at the bottom of the wage curve because they do not pay federal income tax, but still pay SS tax. Reducing SS tax helps them when a federal income tax cut does not. But, I think the republicans see it as a wedge into the SS system rather than help for the poorest people.
That’s the problem with it, Jerry.
Memo to Pres. Obama:
If you don’t change the direction you’re going, you’ll get to exactly where you’re headed. Time to change direction, Mr. President.
That said, two counterpoints in Obama’s favor: The leadership in Congress bears a good deal of the blame for refusing to bring this up to a vote BEFORE the election, as the White House wanted. Both Pelosi and Reid caved because their caucuses who worried dealing with it in October would jeopardize their re-election chances – despite polls even back then showing Americans wanted to drop tax cuts for the rich.
And w/e Obama’s faults are, he at least takes seriously the concept that he is president of everyone – not just Democrats. That’s the polar opposite of Teapublicans, who listen only to ideologues and view anyone against them as un-American.
I agree that it was Congress (mainly the blue dogs) who balked on holding a vote before the election, and believe that, if they had, they would have lost fewer seats, but I don’t necessarily see that as a point in Obama’s favor.
If he sees himself as the president of everyone, why is he showing preference to the 2% over the 98%?