The House passed the payroll tax/UI/doc fix bill this morning by a count of 293-132. 91 Republicans and 41 Democrats voted against the bill, but the combination of Democrats and Republicans in support were more than enough to carry the bill across the line. Republicans voting against it were mostly hardliners philosophically opposed to things like unemployment insurance and newly exercised about tax cuts for working families, particularly without an offset. Democrats voting no opposed some of the pay-fors – particularly the increase in pension contributions for new federal employees, and cuts to health care programs – and the reduction of weeks of eligibility for unemployment benefits. But despite this, the bill got across the line.
I’m more interested in the little deal cooked up in the Senate to ensure passage:
The Senate is expected to take up the agreement later Friday. Though aides expect it to pass, they also predict significant Republican opposition, reflecting the GOP’s underlying opposition to the payroll tax cut as policy, and the fact that the party’s negotiators were frozen out — or claim they were frozen out — of the discussions. To accommodate those objections, Senate leaders agreed in a last-minute development that the conference report would be immunized from a filibuster — meaning it can pass with a simple majority.
I see. So the filibuster is a massive problem, because everybody knows you need 60 votes to get anything done in the Senate – until you don’t.
That said, there could be at least some problems corralling 50 votes on this. Republicans in the Senate for some reason think they were shut out of the negotiations, even though their conferees sat in on all of them. Democrats in the Senate have the same objections as their counterparts in the House, with the budget cut issues. Bernie Sanders thinks the cuts to the payroll tax will threaten Social Security down the road, because the rhetorical case can be made that the general fund is paying for some of it, so he’s a no.
But the fix is really in here, with the agreement to require just 50 for passage. I’m sure it will get by with just enough votes. And then Democrats can go on and carp about how the filibuster stops everything from happening in the Senate. The truth is that the rules are only rules until it’s in everyone’s interest to pass something. Then those supposedly ironclad rules are suspended, and while Republicans and some Democrats will yell and scream about the particulars, the legislation will get done. Let this be a lesson to everyone that “procedural hurdles” are merely suggestive in most cases.
…The Senate approved the bill 60-36, so they didn’t actually need the provision making it an up-or-down vote, as they were able to find 60. The bill now goes to the President for his signature.




12 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Yeah! The economy is saved go on vacation and enjoy.
Whupty fuckin’ doo. Now I can go out and buy that Ferrari with the extra 52 bucks a year I’m gonna make. While the cut sucks the life out of the revenue going to Social Security. Motherfuckers.
Are they celebrating already? I know they are looking forward to the end of the year Hostage taking with this one.
After what the Fraudclosure settlement brought us they should never again talk about deficits or tax cuts for billionaires. We essentially get to bail everyone out at the banks again.
My boys can now use that extra $20 each week on the gas tab. Has anyone else noticed that price jump?
“I see. So the filibuster is a massive problem, because everybody knows you need 60 votes to get anything done in the Senate – until you don’t…Let this be a lesson to everyone that “procedural hurdles” are merely suggestive in most cases.”
When the aristocrats want the peasants to suffer there will always be bi-partisan agreement. The point of “the return of the culture wars” and “positive economic indicators” these last few weeks is to distract the masses of what is really happening to them. As DDay noted just a few days ago how America totally missed a Pentagon Papers moment and the continuous gutting of social security and reduction of unemployment insurance seems to go unnoticed by the mainstream propaganda outlets. Foreclosure fraud settlement is just another bailout for criminals. This is what American austerity looks like. Yet our fascists leaders yearn for new and continuous war so that a handful of corporations can make a profit off of death and destruction and the citizens of the world become mindless workers and consumers.
That’s the plan. It’s also the reason why I call Obama, Benito. We the peasants are going to have to create our own economic standard because the one we have just ain’t working.
Yep or pay for gas, it’s gone up .40 in Calif. in the last few weeks.
If 2% of your yearly pay is $52 you need to talk to your boss about a raise.
… liked this comment … indeed seems to be the case
…well put and stated
so if I am understanding this ‘compromise’ -
the goal of our leaders is to further evicerate social security so they can pilfer the trust fund and give it to the banks and security firms to play with and cream a percentage off of-
And, our brave and moral leaders (both Democrats and Republicans) choose to; 1. take money away from federal workers threatening their retirements and possibly forcing them to rely wholly upon the social security system that they paid into directly off the top of their paychecks for years & years when they become too old to work, and, 2. taking relief away from people who have no source of income?
Are you fucking kidding me? who the fuck elected these fascist corporate toadies as public servants anyhow?
here is an idea – tax the rich at the same level they were taxed in 1980 (70 percent) – or how about the 1960 highest tax level (90 percent) instead of taking food out of the mouths of poor and sick Americans?
tax the rich to save the rest
Wth median income being a little over $40,000 a year, half the country is getting about $800 split over 52 weeks. That works out to about $15 a week. Meanwhile food had risen and so has fuel. And let’s not even talk about health care premiums or local taxes. That Congress would laud this as some great accomplishment is absurd. Particularly since everyone knows their intent is to use this as an excuse to get out of paying back the surplus owed to the trust fund in a timely manner. They are out to screw those of us who paid additional funding into the trust fund from the 80s to secure its financial well being.
That’s a lot of good information directed against my post, but as I said, and you didn’t address, if 2% of your yearly pay is $52 you need to talk to your boss about a raise.
Everyone in America is worth more than that.
Perhaps he’s one of the 16% of the country that is underemployed.
Granted $52 dollars means a $2600 a year job and is well below poverty line but considering that nowadays you see more and more people getting temp or contract work I find it within the realm of possibilities that someone could get that amount. Frankly, I’m more inclined to believe a boss that would pay that little to an employee would be equally likely to be immune to requests from his employees for better compensation. In my experience stingy people only change in works of fiction.