I will not pretend outrage at yesterday’s votes in the Senate on tax cuts. We all knew that the Republicans would defeat both proposals through misuse of the filibuster, the same way they have obstructed the majority of legislation to come before the Senate in the last four years. However, the outrage I feel at the members of my own party, who betrayed the voters who elected them and goose-stepped with the Republicans is no pretense.
…The Democratic plans — to renew low tax rates for individuals with income up to $200,000 and for those making up to $1 million — failed in procedural votes, as Republicans said low tax rates for the wealthiest should also be extended.
No Republicans backed the Democratic proposals, and a few Democrats voted against them.
Saturday’s rare Senate votes were the latest skirmish in the battle over the tax cuts, which expire at the end of the year.
Obama and other Democratic leaders want to extend only the cuts for low- and middle-income Americans, contending the tax breaks for the wealthy would add too much to the yawning U.S. budget deficit.
Republicans, who dismissed Saturday’s vote as a political stunt because the measures had been expected to fail, argue that raising taxes for the rich is a mistake that would cost jobs because wealthy Americans provide employment.
"Those provisions should have passed," Obama told reporters. "I continue to believe that it makes no sense to hold tax cuts for the middle class hostage to permanent tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans — especially when those high-income tax cuts would cost an additional $700 billion that we don’t have and would add to our deficit."
He said negotiators needed to "redouble" their efforts to ensure middle-class Americans did not face higher taxes on January 1.
A White House official said Obama told Democratic congressional leaders on Saturday he was open to compromise but would oppose even a temporary extension if it did not include an extension of benefits for the unemployed and extension of other tax cuts that benefit middle-class families.
CONSENSUS WITHIN DAYS?
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in between the votes, said he hoped to come to a consensus on the tax issue by the middle of next week but was not specific. He said he wanted the Senate to adjourn by December 17… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Reuters>
Here are the scum who voted against America or did not vote. Bear in mind that. in a cloture motion, not voting is just a cowardly way to vote no without having the cojones to go on the record.
This was the measure similar to what the House passed.
NAYs —36
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brown (R-MA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kirk (R-IL)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-NE)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Thune (R-SD)
Webb (D-VA)
Wicker (R-MS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
This the measure that extended the cuts to people with incomes nup to $1 million.
NAYs —37
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brown (R-MA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kirk (R-IL)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Thune (R-SD)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wicker (R-MS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I smell a big cave-in coming, and I have to admit that there is a position to be made for trading tax cuts for the rich for an extension of unemployment benefits, because of the pain to working families such a deal would avert. What I am about to say may seem heartless, because of that pain.
Do you remember why we do not give in to terrorist demands? rIf we do, it encourages the terrorists to continue with more crimes against us. Well I have long said that Al Dubya if a far greater threat to America than Al Qaeda ever was. Republicans have consistently proven me right about that. If Democrats allow to give in to this Republican terrorism, we are just encouraging them to continue the terror against America. With empathy for those it will hurt, I say stand fast. Do NOT give in. The hardest hit if the tax cuts for the poor and middle classes do not pass are the poorest taxpayers, as the lowest rate will increase 50% from 10% to 15%. I fall in that bracket, so I shall share the pain of doing the right thing.
18 Responses to “We All Knew This Was Coming”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Tom we all knew this was going to be the outcome because the dogs know that come January they will have the votes in the senate to pass whatever the hell they want unless Biden continues the super majority cloture rule, which I think he should do.
If Reid has any, and I mean any testosterone at all he will keep the senate in session until the very last day of December. And keep bringing up the extension of unemployment benefits until it passes then move separately to the tax issue forcing them to just expire on the last day f his term. If they are going to force the nation into open class warfare and violent food riots and the use f the stateside stationed regiments of the 101st against the population then at least the supposedly liberals controlling the government should do all they can to ward off what is going to rapidly become the inevitable Christmas present for the USof A.
Reid says he wants to be home bu the 17th, so I think Reid and testosterone are mutually exclusive terms.
from the beginning there was never a chance this was going to be anything else.
the result of the next issue will be the same.
There is little doubt about that.
Doing “the right thing” won’t do a thing toward proving any points. Fact is, certain members of congress, of whom 44% are millionaires, are not going to push through anything short of the rich (which is some of that 44%) continuing to collect their fucking welfare.
Has anyone else noticed that suddenly a whole lot of Congress is trying to re-define middle class as anyone making up to $1,000,000 per year? But they don’t’ want to touch the low threshold of “middle class” which is…what, $40,000/year for a family of 4, and good f’ing luck living on that. This is class warfare, nothing more, nothing less, and we in the lower class, and lower-middle of the middle class are going to get screwed if the wealthy don’t get their monetary baby bottle to suck on for the next generation again. They’ll get their baby bottle, and we’ll at least be able to not share a bigger burden of filling that baby bottle…yet. Yet.
That’s just the reality of it, from the signals I’m seeing.
Bee, I don’t think that was an attempt to redefine the middle class to $1 million per year. I took it as a way to show that the Republicans care only for millionaires and billionaires. Otherwise, I fully agree
What really ticks me off is that they won’t even let the tax cuts expire for those making over a million dollars! Come on, if they’re so darned worried about the deficit, that would provide quite a bit of money to help cover the gap. People with million dollar incomes can spare an extra 5% in taxes and live quite comfortably. I could see them voting down the $200k/$250k family option because in some parts of the country that IS middle class. But no one could say millionnaires are middle class. I can’t stand any of them and am disappointed in Obama so far for caving on everything the GOP wants. You’re right, you can’t keep encouraging them or they will keep doing this forever.
That’s pretty much the way I see it, Mimi.
We knew they were going to cave in they always do. R’s said from the beginning if there is any reconciling it will come from the Dems. They think they are in charge and the Dems still don’t have the spine to deal with them. Come on, look at Reid and Obama, pitiful!
Pitiful indeed. Where are their cojones?
To start winning the class war, just(ly) DEM DO NOTHING (Why “Change” NOW?)! Let all Bushist tax Cuts AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRE!! Otherwise, it’s mere JACKASS Warfare where we, the people Lose, AGAIN!!!
You might try making your statements in plain language. Then folks might understand you. So far, you only offend.
This is also the fault of Blue Dog DINOs in the Senate. The Democrats could have easily dumped the filibuster. But they didn’t.
So it could be argued that this is all the Democrats fault. No wonder over 50% of Blue Dog DINO incumbents lost in last month’s election, while over 95% of Progressive Democratic Incumbents won their races!
Kevin, I agree. That’s why I highlighted the Democrats who voted with the Republicans in red. If memory serves, we lost 24 Bush Dogs and 4 progressives.
I’m afraid that the Dems and Obama should have called their bluff and let all the tax cuts expire. Then in January, they block any tax cuts that involves over $1million. That’s the only compromise that’s even semi-reasonable.
Sigh. Unfortunately, the Dems will cave and the richest of the rich will get richer.
Marva, I agree. I still say let them expire before giving in.
McConnell tips his hand. Bastard held up unemployment benefits awhile back, now open to compromise if ALL tax cuts are extended.
Pelosi insisted on a 2/3 majority vote (rules suspension) knowing there weren’t 290 votes, it got 258. It would have passed had she not insisted on rules suspension.
We could choose to believe Pelosi and Obama are good but naive people continually getting Charley Brown’d by the Republican Lucy’s – or accept the likelihood that unemployment is a bargaining chip and Obama will get what he wants – across the board tax cuts the same way he got the HCR and financial packages he and Wall St wanted.
Oso, at the time they took that vote, rules suspension was the only way they could get the vote in under the deadline. Pelosi wanted to take the vote to put Republicans on record for voting against it, knowing that it did not matter if it passed the House, because McConnell would block it in the Senate if it did.