I Guess We Didn't Lose the Supermajority

Joecoolyo

Joecoolyo

99% Lightspeed
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
9,908
Location
茨城県
Check it out

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A modest job-creation bill advanced in the Senate on Monday as the chamber's newest Republican bucked his party and sided with Democrats on a $15 billion package of tax cuts and highway spending.

Republican Scott Brown joined four other Republicans, 55 Democrats and two independents to overcome a procedural hurdle that sets up a final vote later this week.

Brown was widely hailed as a conservative hero after his surprise victory in Massachusetts last month gave Republicans enough seats to block most Democratic legislation.

His election prompted President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats to call for increased bipartisanship, and an earlier version of the bill was written with Republican input.

But key Republicans withdrew their support after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scaled it back and its prospects for passage were uncertain.

Obama called the vote an "important step forward" and vowed to work with both major parties to pass legislation.

"The American people want to see Washington put aside partisan differences and make progress on jobs," he said.

Brown said the bill was not perfect but would help put people back to work.

"I hope my vote today is a strong step toward restoring bipartisanship in Washington," he said in a statement.

The bill includes a tax credit for businesses that hire unemployed workers, subsidies for state and local construction bonds and money to shore up a highway-construction fund.

CRACKDOWN ON TAX SHELTERS

The bill also includes a crackdown on offshore tax shelters. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that it would lead to $8.7 billion in savings over the coming decade, but that does not take into account the money that would be used for highway construction.

It would create or save 1.3 million jobs, largely through highway construction and other transportation projects, according to Democratic Senator Benjamin Cardin.

Obama and his fellow Democrats say their top priority this year is to bring down the nation's 9.7 percent unemployment rate before the November congressional elections.

But they also face a growing voter backlash for the hundreds of billions of dollars they approved last year to blunt the impact of the worst recession in 70 years.

Reid plans to pass a series of smaller jobs bills to keep their job-creation efforts in the news while also avoiding the sticker shock of the $155 billion measure passed by the House in December.

Up next: a package of expired tax provisions, an extension of soon-to-expire unemployment benefits, and another provision aimed at helping small businesses, Reid said.

He said these will be open to Republican input.

"I hope this is the beginning of a new day here in the Senate. whether this new day was created by the new senator from Massachusetts or for some other reason, I'm very happy we were able to get this done," he said.

The Senate bills must be reconciled with the House bill, which focuses on construction spending and aid to states, before Obama can sign it into law.
Click to expand...

Where do you think we'll go from here?
 
So, the importance of having 60 votes was overstated, the power of 59 was understated, and this huge breakdown for Democrats was just a talking point? Who would've thunk it.
 
*removed*

seriously, this is special expect to see the coming decades hyperpolarized
 
That's fantastic news, I guess.

Here's hoping to the rapid passage of a decent health care package put into law...
 
Technically, you've still lost the Supermajority - it just doesn't matter right now.
 
I should also point out that I at the very least have more sympathy for the Republicans then the Democrats.
 
Why should this vote be unusual?? It squares perfectly with current American opinions: most Americans favor job creation and oppose the current health care bill--specifically, most Americans say health care does need reform, but they say to Obama:

 
BasketCase said:
Why should this vote be unusual?? It squares perfectly with current American opinions: most Americans favor job creation and oppose the current health care bill--specifically, most Americans say health care does need reform, but they say to Obama:
Click to expand...



You are wrong. A majority of Americans believe that the health care system needs reform; the real argument is what kind of reform is necessary.
 
OMG! The Democrats actually managed to pass something! This calls for massive celebration!

TBH, I would've preferred it if no Republicans had supported this. They now have something to point at when the Democrats accuse them of failing to participate in bipartisanship.

And, if some Republicans supported it, that would indicate to me, as a first impression, that the bill was not very good (although the details in the OP article seem okay, I guess).
 
I think that this is a major score for Brown. He immediately comes off as reasonable. This means that when he refuses to sign a bill, people will think it's for a good reason. It's a good way to keep his name in print.
 
Camikaze said:
TBH, I would've preferred it if no Republicans had supported this. They now have something to point at when the Democrats accuse them of failing to participate in bipartisanship.
Click to expand...
It's the Democrats who aren't participating in bipartisanship.

A bunch of people on this web site think "bipartisan" means the Republicans agree to all the crap the Democrats put up for a vote. Not true. Bipartisan means BOTH PARTIES concede things to EACH OTHER. And until Brown was elected, the Democrats were conceding absolutely nothing.

On the flip side, there are a number of Democrats in Congress who oppose bipartisanship. They're the radical ones. And, ironically, they're the ones who torpedoed health care reform. Why? Because it wasn't radical enough for them (the death of the public option was the proverbial straw that broke their backs)
 
BasketCase said:
It's the Democrats who aren't participating in bipartisanship.

A bunch of people on this web site think "bipartisan" means the Republicans agree to all the crap the Democrats put up for a vote. Not true. Bipartisan means BOTH PARTIES concede things to EACH OTHER. And until Brown was elected, the Democrats were conceding absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...

I find this funny, because it is pretty much what I would say, with the notable difference of switching the 'Republicans' and 'Democrats' around.

On the flip side, there are a number of Democrats in Congress who oppose bipartisanship. They're the radical ones. And, ironically, they're the ones who torpedoed health care reform. Why? Because it wasn't radical enough for them (the death of the public option was the proverbial straw that broke their backs)
Click to expand...

Some Democrats don't want to participate in bipartisanship because it means the complete death of their agenda. Health care is a great example of this. It was compromised away (and within the party itself, it has to be added), with the Republicans giving absolutely nothing despite the compromises. And then how could more left-wing Democrats support it when it was not something that they wanted? It seems to be forgotten bipartisanship does not mean 'go to the right', but that the left-wing should have an equal say as the right-wing. The Republicans idea of true bipartisanship that they would vote for, in the situation, was the scrapping of the entire plan.
 
TheAlamo said:


You are wrong. A majority of Americans believe that the health care system needs reform; the real argument is what kind of reform is necessary.
Click to expand...

That's what BasketCase already said. Many American's want health care reform, but the way to go about it is the big issue. About the chart numbers though they may not be fully accurate as the chart is a little old.
 
Miles Teg said:
So, the importance of having 60 votes was overstated, the power of 59 was understated, and this huge breakdown for Democrats was just a talking point? Who would've thunk it.
Click to expand...

Counterclaw said:
Technically, you've still lost the Supermajority - it just doesn't matter right now.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean anything literally, I just wanted a creative title was all. Instead of something boring, such as just stating the article title er something.

bombshoo said:
Is OT so far left that we refer to us collectively as democrats?
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to include the entire OT in the we, just the democrats on the forum.
 
How many millions of people are we going to have doing shovel ready transportation construction jobs?

Obama has saved or created a bazillion jobs since he took office. Tru story.
 
BasketCase said:
It's the Democrats who aren't participating in bipartisanship.

A bunch of people on this web site think "bipartisan" means the Republicans agree to all the crap the Democrats put up for a vote. Not true. Bipartisan means BOTH PARTIES concede things to EACH OTHER. And until Brown was elected, the Democrats were conceding absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...

ABORTIONS ? stripped
PUBLIC OPTION ? stripped
CUT COST MEDICARE ? stripped
NEW TAX for INSURANCE companies ? stripped
DEATH PANEL ? teabagged

Now that Dems no longer have super majority who knows what they will conceed to the Republicans ? Republicans already have offshore drilling, nuclear powerplants, more tax cuts, bigger military budget, more stimulous money. Dems have even put Bush tax cuts back on the table FFS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NinjaCow64
Republican Bidens and the Failure of the Democratic Party
21 22 23
Replies
450
Views
13K
Crezth
Crezth
Crezth
  • Locked
Why Should the security of Ukraine cause the U.S. government to shut down?
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
5K
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
amadeus
The retconning of the President
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
Hygro
Hygro
Broken_Erika
US Debt Ceiling
7 8 9
Replies
178
Views
7K
Farm Boy
Farm Boy
P
Another Stupid Letter to the Editor
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Hygro
Hygro
Top Bottom