Let’s recap what turned out to be a busy Wednesday in Congress, particularly in the House. We’ll start with the Senate:
• The Senate actually planned as many as 5 cloture votes yesterday, but only got around to 2. Senators failed to invoke cloture on a collective bargaining bill for firefighters and police (which would have set minimum standards for contracts), and a $250 one-time benefit for Social Security recipients, because their cost-of-living adjustment remained flat for the second straight year. The firefighter bill got 55 votes and the COLA bill 53. No Republicans supported either.
• The reason the Senate didn’t proceed on the rest of their schedule is because they wanted to take the House’s version of the DREAM Act, which was third in the queue, and the House didn’t get around to taking action on that until late at night. In addition, talks continued on the defense authorization bill, as Susan Collins gave a counter-offer to Harry Reid on the rules for debate that was similar enough to Reid’s initial offer to see a path forward. Reid didn’t want to force the issue and potentially blow an impending deal. So that was postponed, along with another bill to compensate 9-11 volunteers sickened at Ground Zero.
• The Senate did have time to pass by voice-vote that one-year “doc fix” which I mentioned Tuesday. The fact that it was paid for through clawbacks to exchange subsidies for people who “didn’t deserve them” by virtue of getting a new job mid-year didn’t faze anyone in the Senate (the authors of the bill call it “modifying the policy regarding overpayments of the health care affordability tax credit”). This will now move to the House. I’m sure Democrats are happy to defuse this bomb for a year and get the issue behind them, but it shows just how insecure those exchange subsidies are, years before they get implemented.
• The House, after failing to get 2/3 for a suspension calendar vote on the Social Security one-time benefit, moved on a huge bill to fund the government until September 2011, or for the rest of the fiscal year. They passed it by one vote, 207-206, with no Republican support.
Lest you think it was a decent bill, it wasn’t. Republicans just wanted an option to hack away at the FY2011 budget when they get into power. This bill is actually bad enough. Jamie Dupree has the details from a letter by David Obey, the outgoing Appropriations Committee Chair:
This funding Act freezes FY 2011 discretionary appropriations at the FY 2010 level; providing $45.9 billion less than the President requested for the year.
Within that ceiling, the Act adjusts funding between programs and accounts to deal with current demands and workloads and avoid furloughs.
“At a time when we are apparently extending huge tax cuts for millionaires and we’re giving families worth ten million dollars or more a bye on paying taxes on their good fortunes, this Committee has done its dead level best within the constraints under which we are operating to make some modest adjustments to salvage some investments which over the long haul just might create more jobs than a tax break for millionaires and adjustments that just might ease the financial desperation facing so many families today who cannot afford to send their kids to college, to find decent child care, or to provide adequate medical attention for their needs,” said Chairman Dave Obey (D-WI).
Let’s add in some more details. The bill cuts high-speed rail funding by $1.5 billion, per the President’s request. Commerce, Justice and Science get $8 billion less than last year. Financial Services gets a billion less, although they do boost funding for more regulators to enforce Dodd-Frank. Transportation and HUD get $3 billion less than last year. The discretionary spending freeze is carried through in this bill, and so is the federal employee pay freeze announced last week. Defense base closure funding is cut by $5 billion. The nuclear pork new START deal is pre-figured in this bill by $624 more in funding for nuclear weapons programs. Race to the Top of course gets $550 million. The Defense Department gets a $4.9 billion dollar bump over last year. And in a good move, the bill shifts $5.7 billion to cover Pell grants, which faced a major shortfall.
Oh, and the bill ends all terror trials for Guantanamo detainees for the rest of the fiscal year, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, because it bars them from being transferred to the US (more to the point it bars money from being spent on transfer). As Adam Serwer notes, this is a real assertion of authority by the Congress over executive actions.
Now, will any forecaster incorporate the $46 billion cutback to the federal budget into their forecast for 2011? And remember, that’s before the Republicans take the government hostage over the debt limit and try to extract more cuts.
• In addition to the funding in that omnibus bill, the House stuck the food safety bill in it. You remember that, because of a drafting error, the Senate illegally originated a tax bill in their chamber, instead of using a shell bill from the House. This threatened the food safety bill, which passed both houses. But now, the House added the Senate’s version of the bill into this must-pass legislation.
• Finally, the House passed the DREAM Act. The roll call is here. Eight Republicans supported it; 6 are leaving the House at the end of the year, and the other two are Cuban immigrants. There was some question whether the House would be able to get this passed. It’s the first pro-immigration bill passed by either chamber of Congress in a decade, and that’s an achievement in and of itself. But nobody really expected it to pass the Senate. That vote will happen today.




39 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Well, I hope this shuts up the people who keep saying the tax deal means austerity is dead. This is an unbelievable failure of House Democrats.
Just wanted to pipe in here to remind all readers that the reason this, and nothing else, passes the Senate, is because they CHOOSE to claim passing legislation requires 60 votes. It does not. That is a choice they make, for which all voters should hold them accountable.
holy crap david, sorry to go off topic so soon but c and elle is reporting there aren’t even unemployment concessions on the republican side!
this bill got NOTHING in return for it’s capitulation!!!
According to Calculated Risk, this is just the same kind of “bridge” legislation we’ve seen before, in which people who were eligible for the next level of extensions (but couldn’t get them because they expired) are now eligible to move on to the next extension level.
It’s not another tier. There are no new benefits. You still can’t collect any more than 99 weeks. All it does is maintain the same system that was alrea
PRESIDENT OBAMA IS A FRIGGING MAGGOT!!!
it demonstrates without any doubt, the democrats are paid for and sponsored by and for the wealthy
we have a one party system
this reminds me of my highschool football team, they would run scrimmage against the jounior varsity
same thing here, the democrats are republicans in training, running jv scrimmage
This was known, as KO elequently took the
assholePresident to task for it.But the funding for the tiers under 99 was going to run out without this. No, I’m most certainly NOT defending this POS, just pointing out that there was something there. Also, the 2% payroll tax holiday was added too. As well as a lot of other tax credits.
Your main point though is that there is nothing really new here. WHich is why IMO the whole stimulative arguement is bullshit. This merely extends unemployment benefits for some (something done in the past), and it replaces the original $400/$800 make work pay credit with the the 2% cut in payroll taxes, which for folks at the bottom of the earnings ladder are actually going to see taxes go up IMO.
How anything that extends current policy, with perhaps even less than that regarding low earners, be called “stimulative” when the current policy is obviously not very stimulative is beyond the capacity of this old worn out and dumbass brain to figure out.
Robert Reich gets it…totally:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/post_1408_b_794177.html
I have no idea where Obama would get the political clout to do these things, IF he wanted to, but they ARE the medicine for our ills. Too bad we don’t have a “doctor” in the White House who didn’t prescribe them when he had the clout and the popular support to do it.
Now?
It’s like this: In the next general election, the voters will be saying to democrats:
“Either you get rid of Barack Obama, or we’re going to turn the democratic party into the new Whigs, and disappear your cowardly, hopelessly fucked-up asses.”
Which is precisely what they SHOULD say.
I think he’s saying let the tax cuts expire and start making the argument. At least let the public know there is a counter argument.
David, please contact Jane and ask her to post on the FDL home page the link for Xipwire so that folks who want to contribute to WikiLeaks can easily do so.
Thanks.
ghost
Perzackly. Obama’s unwillingness to confront the assholes who practically ruined the country during 8 years of bushCo’s bloody lunacy, and in fact, his help in sustaining and ratcheting up so much of their shit, is the reason he’s becoming the political equivalent of genital lesions.
People speculating about his chances for winning a second term make me giggle. The democrats would have to be idiots to the point of being suicidal, to LET him run again. Not. Gonna. Happen.
18-20 months from now, the dems in congress will look like herds of rats heading for the hawserlines as they publicly desert him.
If not sooner.
A one time $250 benefit? How very generous! Now some of them can buy that newspaper they’ve been saving up for.
That, too, but I think the main thing from Reich was re-establishing the principle that millionaires pay their fair share, and instuting policies that get poor and working class Americans out of the economic shitter, AND protect us from the predatory corporatist policies that Obama is so bent on sustaining.
I find it entirely believable. You can bet they won’t be “sacrificing for austerity”. Wait till the last day of term when they vote themselves a CoL increase.
I was actually looking forward to that. Would’ve helped me a lot. So of course they didn’t pass it.
Wouldn’t give a shit if the rich were forced to pay their due and were held accountable.
Nope. Me, I could go break in the local grocery store and steal $100 worth of food and go to jail. Those assholes can steal everything AND wreck the economy to boot with their bullshit investement games and they get….. MORE FUCKING TAX BREAKS.
INFURIATING!
Whatever makes you think that? O’s approval rating is above Reagan’s at comparable stages of their presidencies.
“this is a real assertion of authority by the Congress over executive actions.” What a load of crap that statement is. Only a fascist would find this action by the Congress to be a positive development. The detainees in Guantanamo should be put on trial in a federal court in the jurisdiction in which they committed their crimes. That is the Constitutional thing to do. They should NOT be held indefinately without a trial or tried by a military tribunal. Peace
No shit, Margaret!
That little turd-token was tried by Bush, to suck up to the voters while this wave was rolling over us on HIS watch. If Obama wants to reverse the tsunami (and I fart derisively as I type that…) he better start reading up on Mr. Roosevelt’s salvage operation, and PDQ!
To update a neat question:
“Wouldn’t it be great if average americans were keeping their jobs and their homes, while the Pentagon had to hold a yard sale to buy a Predator drone?”
Yep. While people like me lose their income entirely. What am I supposed to do now? What more do I have to sacrifice on the alter of unrestricted capitalism? My car? My apartment? My cat? My FDL friends? Well all of them will be gone within three months, max.
Oh, yes, I totally agree. Step one was let the freaking tax cuts expire. Step two though requires embracing the narrative he lays out and when you actually try to fight for something there is no certainty you win. That’s why I say I think Reich’s point, after at least restoring some economic balance, was start drawing a new narrative to counter the republican one.
OT. FABULOUS dig at the thugs in the US for their handling of WikiLeaks.
Link.
Very smart PR move by Russia. The idiots in the US are leaving themselves wide open for ridicule.
I don’t think he said it was a positive development, I think he merely said it was an example of the Congress flexing it’s muscles (for a change) over the executive. Which it is, sort of. The Obama admin claims to want to try folks in federal court. This would be Congress saying NO.
Of course, IMO both the executive and the legislative are guilty of human right violations on the whole GITMO (as well as about a hundred other areas) so it doesn’t really matter who’s flexing their muscles, human rights takes the hit.
Just back to the desk.
What’s that above about the 99ers? Does this mean that I can go back and get benefits that they told me I could not have because my tier ran out one week before the extension in May?
LMAO! They are creating their own ridicule. The United States is author of it’s own misery.
Are you kidding me? We have good DEMOCRATS howling in outrage while the republicans humiliate him and make him look like a puppy being housebroken to shit where they want him to.
He is losing the base by the day, and whatever moderate dems are still with him, are eyeing the gangplank, as we speak.
It’s simple: you need political capital to run for preznint, even if you’re an incumbent.
Where is Obama’s going to come from? Comparing his numbers with Reagan’s now is specious to the max. In his last two years, Reagan wasn’t confronted with this recession/depression, and he wasn’t confronted with a congress that was busily pimping the democratic worldview.
Please tell us how you think Obama is going to accomplish enough of a real salvage operation to give himself a chance to run in 2012.
I’m listening.
Thank you so much for this rap-up. I was somewhat off the radar yesterday and this is extremely helpful. Way to go!
I guess we are going to have to creat a not-for-profit Citizen’s Roundtable group in order for DC to hear anything from the real American people. They don’t seem to want to face the real facts.
That poll was taken before this tax deal. I’ll be astonished if it’s anywhere near as high afterward.
I’m just pointing to the real evidence, not spouting my opinion. I agree on the substance of your arguments, but apparently the public disagrees. At least as of now, on the basis of which I conclude that talk of O’s demise is premature.
That will be interesting to watch, to see how carefully the general public is following the matters.
I honestly don’t think he’s going to run. If he (and the Republicans) can finish off gutting social security (which this tax “deal” almost ensures IMO), then he will have done what he was sent to do.
Enshrine voodoo “trickle down” economics as the ONLY way to do economic policy, gut entitlements, finish the job of making the unitary executive, and cementing in policy that the US Constitution is officially dead.
Actually, I suppose one could argue that’s quite impressive for a one term president.
I’m not going to argue that though.
Asshole.
The “real evidence” is that Reagan, at this point in his presidency, had practically none of the problems that Obama faces.
No expensive, unending wars.
A recession that was one good economic hiccup away from becoming a depression.
No congress that belonged, philosophically, to the other party’s view of government.
No republicans who were calling for his political ass.
No democrat in the House who, as John Boehner is already doing with Obama, was playing marbles with his political balls.
VERY importantly, Reagan had not a whiff of the “wimp” about him. Suffering from Alzheimer’s, gnoshing on jellybeans, forgetting which country he was travelling in, he still was “the boss”.
I spout off again: Where is the political capital for Obama to run again, going to come from?
I simply drew a line in the stand on this obnoxious and stupid push back on executive authority, rather than capitulating to the fascist Democrats who contol our Congress. It’s time they paid more attention to the human righs violations and erosion of the liberties of us Americans than they do in propping up dictatorships in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia with our tax dollars. Peace
I may be misremembering, but I’m not sure all of those accurate. Are you sure they are?
My memory seems to recall a pretty bad economy in 1982 for which his party took a beating, and I’m pretty sure the Democrats had at least the House because they controlled the House for 40+ straight years up until 1994, so he did face a Congress with at least one House D. Might’ve even had both Houses for one two year period at least of his 8 years.
The effect of the most loyal part of the democratic party, progressives: the people who worked the hardest to give him that historic win, talking baaad shit about Mr. Centrist, is going to be catastrophic.
That he is openly vilifing US, because we won’t clap louder, is already scaring him. That’s why he’s pissing and moaning about the “extremists” in the party.
Example: He has to live up to his promise to get ALL of our troops out of Iraq by the end of next year, or he has to make Americans, not just progressives, eat some more bushCo bullshit. It’s coming out of our ears, and if you doubt it, just check the results of the last election.
Obama’s problem is not that the tea partiers are spouting off the gibberish about his being a leftist: it’s that a shitload of voters are beginning to perceive that he represents George Bush’s third term.
If anyone can tell us how he’s going to change that now, then please feel free to do it.
Peak unemployment under Reagan was 10.8% in 12/82.
Oldguy:
Wars?
Tanking economy?
Having a democratic congress is not the same thing as having a congress that is telling you when and where you can take a leak, and is demanding (with huge success) that you, as the democratic president, embrace the entire trickle-down philosophy. Reagan was a stone corporatist, and he didn’t feel free to go after SS, the way Obama is caving for it, with the GOP.
Surely you don’t believe that Ronald Reagan, in his last two years, faced anything like what Barack Obama has largely brought on himself.
Bottom line: One. More. Time. :
Where is Barack Obama going to get the political capital to run again?
What policies is he going to implement that will turn this debacle around enough for him to be able to rationally ask the voters for another 4 years?
I’m waiting. :o)
Reagan: wasn’t looking at the numbers of people losing their homes, that Obama is looking at.
He wasn’t looking at a congress that has basically been telling him to go shit in his hat, for his first two years.
He didn’t have two bloody, useless, wars going on, that he had promised to get us out of.
He didn’t have a substantial segment of the voters yowling that he was a fascist, nor a media that wouldn’t take the trouble to point out what bullshit that was.
Again, which you studiously ignore, he didn’t have the most loyal republicans beginning to publicly abandon him.
Barack Obama is in FAR worse political straights that Reagan ever was, and saying otherwise is nonsense.
Well, like I said above, a huge part of me feels the guy isn’t going to run. You’re starting to see leaks in places that I thought you wouldn’t. When an adviser to MLK comes out and suggest the first ever African American president should be primaried, well IMO that’s HUGE.
This tax deal, like Margaret suggested above, is IMO going to further estrange the base, possibly to the point of no return (he’s long past that point with me, but not near there in the AA community, the biggest and MOST loyal part of the D base IMO), at least as far as being viable in the general election.
If he does run again, I suspect most of his capital will be the almost impossible to overcome obstacles to beating an incumbent AND the support of the AA community that is crucial in many, many states, especially southern ones. He may actually pull out a primary win (assuming he’s primaried) but no, I don’t see him winning another term.
The only way I see it would be if TPTB determine he hasn’t finished his job yet, so they make sure the R’s nominate one of the most far rightwing nutcases ever, making Sarah Palin look like a true statesperson. That nutjob then begins to argue for war with China, well, IMO the “lesser of two evils” will win out. Again.
One other salient point about Reagan and what he faced when he won the presidency:
He spent the first two years of his first term loudly and repeatedly blaming Jimmy Carter for ANYTHING that went wrong.
Obama has basically spent HIS first two years licking the asses of the people who handed the GOP’s Venusian fire drill to him, and in “reaching out” to them.
Which tactic do you think was most successful?
OldGuy; I just don’t think there’s even a possiblity that he can run in 2012.
The republican faithful never deserted Reagan. They STILL love him. If they could, they’d have freeze-dried him, installed servo-mechanisms, and run him again and again.
Obama is in deep trouble with the very people who worked the hardest to get him into the White House. There is no rational comparison between their respective situations.
For Obama to have a chance at a second term will require a political miracle. I’d thought that Obama would never stoop to attacking Iran as a tactic to salvage his imploding presidency, but with every passing sellout, and with his compulsively rolling over for the republicans, I think he just might be corrupt and stupid enough to try that.
After the years of Bush’s shitmires, I have my doubts that it would work. I sure hope not.