LOL

good ones all of them.

First off, do we know Reid actually did deny Republicans that chance, or did the Republicans just make up that line to deflect blame for blocking the bill?

If Reid DID deny the chance for amendments, then I would say your questions are valid. But if the amendments then were voted down, the Senate - and certainly the House - would vote the whole bill down anyway. I suppose from a political standpoint, it would have been better for the Dems to try that. Then if it got voted down, the Republicans would have no excuses.

Ultimately, I (and I'm sure the rest of us left of center) believe this is just another chapter in the GOP's plan to prevent Obama from having any more feathers in his cap before November. If that is the case, then this has to go down as the most misguided, despicable, do-nothing-for-the-people, Congress in our history. No matter who wins control of the House and Senate this fall, the rules regarding majority votes and filibusters absolutely have to be changed.

KJ, don't disagree, even partly with the last paragraph.

But everybody is playing. I don't have to tell you all the things Republicans are doing in that manner but a for instance on the Dems side - the Republicans wanted the Senate to vote on "increase" taxes for the 250,000 and up crowd like the President wants and then vote on the Repulican's plan to extend all the cuts. The Senate Democrats would not because many think the 250,000 should be higher and other political reasons.

So, (I know at least one person will be upset with me saying this) both sides are in full political gamesmanship mode.

RobDon,

That's interesting what you say about the vote on taxes on the quarter-mil-and-up folks. I hadn't heard about that. And I don't disagree that both sides are in gamesmanship mode, but I don't think both sides play the same way. It's just very disappointing that nothing is getting done.

What I would like to see changed in Congress is:

• Bills go back to passing with 50% plus 1 vote.
• Filibusters are limited to a percentage of bills introduced by the opposiing party; say 10%. That way you'd have to be selective on which issues you really want to fight over. When a filibuster IS used, still require 60 votes to override it.
• No filibusters on bipartisan-introduced bills.

The point is they could just vote on the bill and pass it for the economy , but instead once again rand paul PROBABLY wants to put his anti abortion tag line on it , if the gop can not take 15 minutes to focus on jobs in their busy obstruction schedule , they are worthless , Mr Benens point is that we have not seen a political party be so against helping the economy in over 100 years , that should outrage everyone , but it is not ....the bill is a no drainer to help business's who are creating jobs , how can that fact be confusing to anyone? It did not pass , because of gop obstruction , period

I agree, Patango.

The "both sides do it" and "both sides are in political mode" is absolute nonsense.

The GOP is out to do everything they can in order to make Obama a one term President. And they don't care how it gets done, either.

Patango,

...but instead once again rand paul PROBABLY wants to put his anti abortion tag line on it...

I love how you just try to make up what happened without knowing or sourcing anything. My facts are accurate unless you want to challenge them. I believe I can quote a neutral source on everything. The Rollcall article I mentioned in comment 4.7 has most of it in there if you care to check.

Granted, the motive...the playing game part is opinion but I think there's enough to support that politics was involved.

KJ, CR, IA . . . 10% of all bills introduced would be FAR too high a number of filibusters to allow. There are loads of bills introduced for various memorials, naming of roads, housekeeping measures, etc., that pass easily by voice votes.

10 filibusters per Congressional session would be more realistic if you want to limit the practice to very important and controversial bills. You would also have to have a rule that prohibits the majority party from introducing the same bill (or a very similar bill) multiple times to chip away at that number.

It will take some tinkering to come up with a way to do this that protects minority rights while limiting the ridiculous number of votes on closure that we've seen lately.

The Republicans proposed Amendments that the Democrats refused to include.

Boehner-McConnell recession!

Yep, their obstruction. Their responsibility. Repeat it every time you refer to it.

Absolutely. Or the Bush-Boehner-McConnell economy.

Republican Obstruction. You broke it, you refuse to let anyone fix it.

This is so frustrating. Hopefully President Obama will use all this in the fall... I heard a piece on national news that neither candidate is communicating their points well - INCLUDING President Obama. Sir, do you really want this thing? Hello?

There's no reason not to have votes on the Republican amendments but it would allow Republicans to claim authorship and input. Both sides playing games.

harry did bring both up. so wheres the game?

"On Wednesday Reid tried to set up a vote on the competing proposals, but Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) objected to his unanimous consent request, saying that Republicans would not allow a vote to be set up until Obama's proposal was presented to them in paper form."

"Of course McConnell blocked it, because if it was voted on in unanimous consent it couldn't be filibustered and McConnell is afraid, as Democratic Senate aide told Greg Sargent, that the Democrats' bill would pass. The last thing McConnell—or any Republican—wants is for this issue to be resolved. The tax bill for millions of middle-class Americans is far too valuable a hostage for him to let slip away."

Indeed, RobDon is a Shooter-style troll, seeing as he's here saying the same thing three different places in the same discussion.

As far as the Republicans are concerned, today they showed their sabotage of America in public.

Speaking of trolls, there is one called Packers33 who went onto an essentially dead thread (Tax avoidance...) and spouted a lot of misrepresentation, etc.,arrogantly proclaiming that he was presenting "facts".

Working against the USA as long as "that man" (their horrid bug-boo) is in the White House. That is unpatriotic. Ironic, no?

I realized years ago that Ambrose Bierce had the right idea about patriots and patriotism. the following is his.

Pilotshark, Sen. Reid didn't bring the proposals up for a vote, he offered to only after the vote on the small business tax.

Reid later Wednesday proposed a vote on both tax proposals, but only after a vote on the Democrats’ small-business tax bill and a House-passed small-business tax bill.

In this quarter of play I would say the Democrats played the better hand but both were playing. Dems said let's vote on small business tax. Reps said I want to add an amendment to it to vote on the Bush tax cut extensions. Dems said no, we will do that only after we pass the small business tax. Reps said I want to see the plan in writing first.

I think the article in rollcall I quoted gives most of this information.

They do lack subtlety in their filibustered bludgeoning of the American Dream.

Patrick, why don't you think Sen. Reid wouldn't allow the Senate to vote on Republican amendments to the bill? If it would have "watered down" the bill wouldn't the majority (Democrats) have voted against the amendments?

The Republican beast needs to be killed. We've long passed the point where there can be a useful discussion. They simply won't accept facts and reasoning. The only thing people like this respect is power and punches to the mouth. The next time they are down like in 2009, a stake has to be put through that heart and never let them rise again. It is just too dangerous to the country and the world.

RobDon you keep repeating wrong stuff.

Reid was not the one who WOULDN'T aloud a Vote it was Mitch.

Wow, there are so many words that "RobDon" is a synonym for. We've already learned it's a synonym for "moron," "idiot," "drooler," "illiterate," and now we find out it also is a synonym for "troll" since RobDon must be one of Shooter's boys.

Even if Senator Reid didn't allow them to vote on Republican amendments, what does it matter? What were they going to add? More anti-abortion nonsense? More tax loopholes for millionaires? A bill that would add a million jobs is a bill that would add a million jobs.

I don't care if both sides are playing politics. If the Republicans gave a damn about this country, they'd do what they always give lip-service to and "put politics aside" and vote yes. But, they just want to obstruct and obstruct.

Useless children is what they are. Sad, pathetic man-children.

I am almost ashamed to say that I share your feelings, Patrick. I have often disagreed with them, and even disliked their leaders for the policies they implemented, but actions of recent years have gone way beyond the pale. They are like the guy who will punch holes in the lifeboat because they can't sit in the front, sinking everyone. There seems to be no voice of reason or conciliation among their number, and certainly not in the leadership. I was shocked by the debt ceiling hostage crisis. I was angered by the subsequent betrayal of the defense budget cut agreement. I am tired of them.

My wife would like me to see Republicans as 'people', and have compassion. I have been asked, for instance, not to complain about the Romney's million-dollar therapy dressage horse, since MS is such a dread and terrible disease. But I then think about how Ann's husband wants to take away medical coverage for everyone else with that same disease who is not wealthy. I wonder how she can stand to look at her husband, knowing that others with the same degenerative illness may face suffering, degradation and death for lack of money. Is she without compassion? Does she discount the basic humanity of others? How can she do that?

Yes, to my shame, I have also come to hate them. Almost to a man, I bear them ill will. To call them traitors, to call them enemies of this country is almost too mild.

Where do they come from? What evil influence, what foreign enemy, what malevolent power raised up this army of barbarians? It is almost too much to bear, some days.

- - - -

I am commanded to love my enemies. It is a heavy burden, and exceeds my human capacity to fulfill. And so I must ask of God for his forgiveness and for the strength to do as I am told. It is sometimes a bitter obligation.

Look, you can disagree with my opinion or my logic but, in general, I try to double check to stay accurate on my facts. Reid did not allow votes on anything in relation to this discussion. They didn't vote on the bill (Republicans blocked it). They didn't vote on the amendments (Dems blocked it).

See my post 4.7 for summary and source.

If the Republicans gave a damn about this country, they'd do what they always give lip-service to and "put politics aside" and vote yes.

You could say the same thing about the Democrats. President Obama said to pass the extension of the Bush tax cuts for those under 250,000 and the Republicans were ready to take a vote on that, the Democrats were not. As I stated earlier, I think the Democrats played this better but they were playing as well.

What was that we used to hear about a clean bill? We seem to be hopelessly checking, meaning extremely low approval of Congress.

From my view, I would hope that any kind of bill without a specific company or industry that has a chance to increase jobs would be on the fast track. It makes me wonder what amendments were they trying to add. I'll guess, Keystone Pipeline?

I would oppose Keystone Pipeline. I can't condone it, but I can condone tax cuts for small business that hires.

Why can't anyone see through the games both sides are playing. Thia bill is for 2012 only. It's now July. For the most part, business will only hire if the expected revenue is greater than the cost. The credit is only 10% of the excess of wages or compensation paid in 2011.

I was not a small business owner, but I don't see any incentive to hire based on this bill. If sales are up, and current staff can't meet demand, a short term incentive is nice, but not the driving force. If the sales aren't there, why hire?

http://ria.thomsonreuters.com/taxwatch/

RobDon . . . I suspect that the reason Reid didn't allow voting on amendments is a tactical one. He wanted to keep the bill clean so that voting would be limited to one proposition, and one alone: should the "Bush tax cuts" for those under $250K be continued.

The Republican amendments would include things like extending the tax cuts at ALL income levels. By disallowing this vote, and others that were, no doubt, strategically developed by Republican leadership, Reid prevents the following scenario: Repub senator proposes to extend all cuts. Dems vote that down, wanting to limit them. Repubs run to their echo chamber with the message, "Dems vote to raise taxes on everyone under $250K." Then, they start running TV commercials saying the same thing.

Dems wanted to keep the focus on whether or not cuts would be extended beyond $250K, without a lot of clutter that would have clouded the very real and significant difference between the two sides. Based on the voting that DID occur, Dems can now claim the "Repubs are willing to endanger a continuation of lower tax rates for those under $250K because they're protecting the upper 2%" line of attack. That will be a correct and accurate claim.

Dems can now claim the "Repubs are willing to endanger a continuation of lower tax rates for those under $250K because they're protecting the upper 2%" line of attack.

Yeah that pretty much somes it up

This is a smart move both politically and policy wise. Which is odd coming from the democrats in congress since usually they are too busy being the republican's door mat.....maybe all the record breaking weather events of late are also causing an abnormal amount of democrats actually fighting back........now lets see if they can keep this up til next week...

Back to the policy issues it is a good move to extend tax rates that will not not hurt job creators so they will have more money to spend. Both sides agree that the 98% should not have an increase yet and that the potential damage of that would only make it more difficult to get serious on the debt in the future. Or so the republicans say they want because as we just saw they voted it down or rather obstructed it with proceduralism shenanigans. Both sides agree on the 98% issue yet only one side has been trying to ensure that happens. If the GOP supports this policy then why not pass it? It would not mean an instant raise on those in the top 2% or rather the measure would not have to, the democrats would not care if it didn't include any definate increase and was just about the 98. So after they ensure the people who need the tax cuts then they can fight like cats and dogs about the other stuff. America has no problem with that, and why? Well lets see..... perhaps because most Americans are in that 98 group. That might have something to do with it.

But no the GOP does not want action. Either they want to hold the economy and job creators hostage again, are afraid of doing any actual work...I mean god forgive they actually do the job they get paid for....or they are only concerned with the wealthy.

If they support this why not make it happen so that we have certainty for most? But naturally if the GOP couldn't hold the economy hostage that would just be no fun since they'd actually have to win the argument instead of just pretending they will. If their argument has undeniable merit the people will get behind it won't they? If their idea is good what are they worried about?

You can't bitch about the "progressive controlled Senate" and then cheer when you fillibuster important measures or block things like the AJA. Funny how they're only poor and helpless when they actually have to work across the aisle. You have the house and are near 50/50 in the Senate so don't give me this "we have no power and the democrats are so mean to us" bullcrap GOP. Make your case or get out of the way

But I think we all know the reason they won't give us any certainty is because they know they will not win over the american people on facts and merit so they need a hostage once again. You know I have an idea, Democrats do what the GOP house does ie nothing. Don't fight them on this and just wait and see. Wait till the GOP wants to actually do something because they waited to the 11th hour unlike the other side. Then this will force this to right a bill otherwise taxes will go up on everyone which in reality lefties won't like but will bear because we know about the budget and debt have to be dealt with sometime so if that's now so be it. We are prepared to sacrifice even more than has already been taken from us if we must unlike the small number of greedy millionaires who will always refuse.

Rich and poor the vast majority of americans of all income levels, religions and races are ready to sacrifice for country. The 98% is willing to sacrifice for this country and do what it takes to get the nation's finances under control for the good of our society. However will not sacrifice so that only 2% can benefit.

Ok then Jeff , what in the aca was not about H C ? You said it , so lets hear it

" "We have to pass the bill before we know what's in it" "

sorry that line pretty much tells me all i need to know.

now if you wanted to use that line great just make sure you use the whole line, not just the cherry pick line that's given to all newbies in troll basic training.

now i don't know you so at this time i will reserve the troll part until further notice. LOL

Those job bills the Republicans keep talking about are mostly bills on regulations, which helps their buddies not necessarily creates jobs. How about a straight forward jobs bill - not regulations no attaching person-hood amendments to it - straight up jobs bill. There is none from the Republicans. But wait they are trying to pass legislation on abortion - gee how many jobs are you finding in a woman's vagina? Yes they have 33 times passed a bill to repeal Obamacare - how many jobs did that create.

Regarding the budget - does not get passed because Republicans and Democrats can not come together on Increasing Revenue and Decreasing Spending. Both sides to blame. Ryan's Budget would not pass because it is extreme and would hurt everyone except the top 1% and his Corporate cronies.

I guess if you want such politically slanted questions answered, you need to address them towards the authors/originators of the Urban Dictionary. Not me. Or of course you could keep coming here to TRMS & blog. Where misinformation reigns supreme.

Ummmmmmm, the only jobs I am aware of in a "womans vagina" to be created would have to do I guess with, prostitution. But that's illegal in most states. Oh except in Harry Reid's Nevada.