Showing posts with label job bill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label job bill. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

38 Senate Republicans vote to filibuster a deficit-reducing jobs bill.

By Pat Garofalo Today, the Senate invoked cloture on a bill that provides states with $26 billion in funding for Medicaid and to prevent mass layoffs of teachers. These two streams of funding have been added to — and then cut from — bill after bill, because conservatives objected to their cost. Initially, the bill that was voted on today added $5 billion to the deficit, but it was tweaked to include larger spending offsets. And according to the Congressional Budget Office, it now decreases the deficit by $1.3 billion over ten years through cuts to food stamps and closing corporate tax loopholes. Two Republicans — Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) — voted to invoke cloture and end the ongoing filibuster. The rest of the Republican caucus, however, voted no. That’s 38 Republican senators who voted against a deficit reducing

jobs bill. (Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) didn’t vote.) The Wonk Room explains how this vote clearly puts the lie to the notion that Republicans really want small spending measures to pass, but only if they’re “paid for.”

Friday, June 25, 2010

House Democrats Mulling Standalone Jobs Bill After Senate Failure

ANDREW TAYLOR and STEPHEN OHLEMACHER |

WASHINGTON — The demise of Democrats' jobs-agenda legislation means that unemployment benefits will phase out for more than 200,000 people a week. Governors who had counted on fresh federal aid will now have to consider more budget cuts, tax increases and layoffs of state workers.

Democratic officials said the House may try to revive the long-stalled jobless aid bill next week as a stand-alone bill shorn of controversial tax and spending provisions that prompted Senate Republicans to filibuster it on Thursday.

But the Senate may not have enough time to clear the measure for President Barack Obama's desk before leaving Washington for the Fourth of July recess. The impasse has meant that more than 1.2 million people have lost unemployment benefits averaging $300 a week.

The aides required anonymity to speak freely about internal party strategy.

Stymied by Republicans, Democrats are at a loss as they struggle to help pump up the economy in the run-up to congressional elections this fall.

Senate Democrats cut billions from the bill in an attempt to attract enough Republican votes to overcome a filibuster. But the 57-41 vote Thursday fell three votes short of the 60 required to crack a GOP filibuster.

"Democrats have given Republicans every chance to say 'yes' to this bill and support economic recovery for our middle class," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "But they made a choice to say 'no' yet again."

President Barack Obama will keep pressing Congress to pass the bill, his spokesman said. But Democrats haven't shown they can come up with the votes.

That's leading Democrats to consider breaking the jobless aid measure from the catchall bill and try to pass it as a stand-alone $33 billion measure next week before leaving Washington for a weeklong Independence Day recess. Key Senate Republicans, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, are pressing the idea.

But a Reid spokesman said the majority leader is committed to passing a Wall Street reform bill next week and predicted Republicans would block any move to do a stand-alone jobless aid bill after that measure passes.

The stand-alone approach proved to be the way forward for a measure to temporarily spare doctors from a 21 percent cut in Medicare payments, which Obama signed Friday.

The Medicare funding had been a part of the larger bill to provide extended unemployment benefits for laid-off workers and provide states with billions of dollars to avert layoffs. When it became clear Senate Republicans would block the larger bill, Democrats begrudgingly voted for the smaller Medicare fix.

"It is clear that Senate Republicans have no intention of passing any jobs legislation, whether it is tied to physician payments or not," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Congressional Democrats began the year with an aggressive agenda of passing a series of bills designed to create jobs. One has become law, offering tax breaks to companies that hire unemployed workers. Others stalled as lawmakers, after hearing from angry voters, became wary of adding to the national debt, which stands at $13 trillion.

"The debt is out of control," said Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass.

Republicans said the bill would have expanded government, not boosted the economy.

"The only thing Republicans have opposed in this debate are job-killing taxes and adding to the national debt," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "What we're not willing to do is use worthwhile programs as an excuse to burden our children and our grandchildren with an even bigger national debt than we've already got."

The rejected bill would have provided $16 billion in new aid to states, preserving the jobs of thousands of state and local government workers and providing what White House officials called an insurance policy against a double-dip recession. It also included dozens of tax breaks sought by business lobbyists and tax increases on domestically produced oil and on investment fund managers.

Sen. Max Baucus, the bill's chief author, said Friday that Democrats may wait a week or two before attempting again to push the bill through.

"There 's a lot of people not getting their unemployment checks. There's going to be consequences of that," he said, adding that could put additional pressure on Republicans to support the bill.

Baucus said "we'll wait and work on other legislation in the interim. ... There were some bitter partisan feelings when we left. Maybe a little cooling off will help."

The legislation had been sharply pared back after weeks of negotiations with GOP moderates Snowe and Collins, but they were not persuaded to support the measure. The latest draft would have added $33 billion to the deficit.

The Medicare bill signed by Obama delays cuts in payments to doctors until the end of November – after congressional elections – when lawmakers hope the political climate is better for passing a more permanent, and expensive, solution.

There was some urgency to approve the funding because Medicare announced last week it would begin processing claims it had already received for June at the lower rate. Lawmakers said some doctors have already stopped seeing new Medicare patients because of the cuts.

The bill increases payments to providers by 2.2 percent. The legislation, which costs about $6.5 billion, is paid for with a series of health care and pension changes that both Democrats and Republicans agreed to.

The Medicare cuts were required under a 1990s budget-cutting law that Congress has routinely waived. The latest extension expired May 31 after concerns about adding to the budget deficit held up the larger bill that also included unemployment benefits.

Obama praised Congress for passing the measure, while urging lawmakers to work on a more permanent solution.

M.C.L Comment: When I hear people like A.B. Stoddard talk as if there is a massive surge for the Republicans I gotta ask her based on what? Going back when Barack Obama was president elect Obama, the Republicans told the American public what they plans were and it's saying no to everything.

And the Republicans show how petty they are for example look at Pay as you go Republicans were for it but once President Obama signed on for it, the Republicans turned around and went against it. What the Republicans are doing is very well should be the final nail for them, they slow walking things up in hopes things get worst between now and election eve night.

The Republicans are willingly let this country go into the seventh level of hell to help them win elections and for that people should vote more of them out.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

GOP's Brown branded turncoat for jobs bill vote

By GLEN JOHNSON

BOSTON – A month after being crowned the darling of national conservatives, Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts is being branded "Benedict Brown" for siding with Democrats in favor of a jobs bill endorsed by the Obama administration.

Like the four other GOP senators who joined him, the man who won the late Democrat Edward Kennedy's seat says it's about jobs, not party politics. And that may be good politics, too.

The four other GOP senators who broke ranks — Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, George Voinovich of Ohio and Christopher "Kit" Bond of Missouri — also were criticized on Tuesday. But Brown was the big target on conservative Web sites, talk shows and even the Facebook page his campaign has promoted as an example of his new-media savvy.

"We campaigned for you. We donated to your campaign. And you turned on us like every other RINO," said one writer, using the initials for "Republican-In-Name-Only."

The conservative-tilting Drudge Report colored a photo of Brown on its home page in scarlet.

The new senator responded by calling into a Boston radio station.

"I've taken three votes," Brown said with exasperation. "And to say I've sold out any particular party or interest group, I think, is certainly unfair."

The senator said that by the time he seeks re-election in two years, he will have taken thousands of votes.

"So, I think it's a little premature to say that," he said.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wasn't particularly perturbed about Brown's vote, saying his election last month has "made a huge, positive difference for us and for the whole legislative agenda."

"We don't expect our members to be in lockstep on every single issue," McConnell added.

Political observers said each of the five Republican senators had solid reasons locally for voting as they did, to cut off a potential Republican filibuster on the bill.

The measure featured four provisions that enjoyed sweeping bipartisan support, including a measure exempting businesses hiring the unemployed from Social Security payroll taxes through December, and giving them a $1,000 credit if new workers stay on the job a full year. It would also renew highway programs through December and deposit $20 billion in the highway trust fund.

It faces a final Senate vote Wednesday.

Snowe and Collins hail from economically ailing Maine, and they can't stray too far from the Democrats who populate much of New England. And Voinovich and Bond also are from states hard hit by the recession.

The latter two also have the ultimate protection from retribution: They're not seeking re-election this fall.

"When you have decided to retire and you are a free agent, you can pretty much do what you want," said Peverill Squire, a political scientist at the University of Missouri-Columbia. And Squire doubted that Bond, retiring after 24 years in the Senate, would have paid much of a political price even if the famous appropriator were seeking re-election.

"He's had no shyness in trying to send money," he said.

While conservative columnist Michelle Malkin used her blog to accuse Voinovich of being a traitor, even suggesting he got some unspecified goody for his vote in favor of the "porkulus" bill, Ohio's governor defended him.

Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, praised the senator for "standing with the people of Ohio over the majority of his party."

For Voinovich, a Republican from a Democratic stronghold, the party defection was nothing new. The two-time Ohio governor and former Cleveland mayor has sprinkled his political career with independent votes that can agitate the GOP. Former President George W. Bush famously visited Ohio in 2003 in an attempt to secure Voinovich's support for a tax cut package.

Voinovich still voted no.

Snowe and Collins, meanwhile, "survive in New England by a unique set of rules," said Dante Scala, political science professor at the University of New Hampshire.

He said: "The way they survive with voters in their homes states is by making it clear that, first and foremost, they're the servants of their constituencies, not the party label. So, they'll make a point of defying their party and going their own way."

Brown got little such leeway, despite campaigning as an "independent Republican" and publicly eschewing national supporters.

National Republican groups, as well as "tea party" members and an array of conservative special interests, all claimed a share of the credit for his upset win in the battle to succeed the legendary Kennedy.

They felt especially justified after funneling millions to Brown's campaign, including $348,000 on late television ads paid by the California-based Tea Party Express.

"You've already turned out to be as big an idiot as Obama," said one Facebook poster. "Enjoy your one term as senator."

One local political scientist believes the vote was anything but dumb, considering Brown faces re-election in less than three years.

"Scott Brown knows that he's going to be judged differently in 2012 than he was in 2010," said Jeffrey Berry, a political science professor at the senator's alma mater, Tufts University. "He's facing a different electorate, with more Democratic voters, and Barack Obama at the top of the ticket, in what is still a blue state."

M.C.L comment: Sorry right wingers Scott Brown is thinking about his own ass, because he knows he's still in a Democratic state and with President Obama being the headliner in the 2012 election and the potential Massachusetts Democratic party fielding a strong candidate could equal a end to his term.