Wednesday, January 02, 2013

The Fiscal Cliff bill, who voted how, and who comes out ahead?

Courtesy of the Washington Post:

Most House Republicans voted against the final fiscal cliff deal late Tuesday night, while just 16 Democrats joined them. 

A few notes from the votes: 

* The bill easily passed 257-167, with 217 votes needed for passage. Democrats voted 172-16 in favor while Republicans votes 151-85 against. 

* GOP leadership was split. While House Speaker John Boehner (Ohio) and 2012 vice presidential nominee and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (Wis.) voted yes, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.) and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) voted no. 

* Ryan’s vote is noteworthy because another major 2016 presidential contender, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), was one of just eight senators to vote no early Tuesday morning, as did another potential presidential candidate, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). 

* Other no votes included GOP firebrands Reps. Allen West (Fla.), Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Joe Walsh (Ill.). West and Walsh lost reelection in November, while Bachmann narrowly won. 

So both West and Walsh voted against the bill huh? Well that is part of the reason why they are now EX-House members. 

Now as interesting as that was I was kind of fascinated with just WHICH Democrats broke ranks and voted against the bill.
 

* The 16 Democrats voting no split between the liberal and the moderate. More liberal Reps. Xavier Becerra (Calif.), Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), Peter DeFazio (Ore.), Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), Jim McDermott (Wash.), Brad Miller (N.C.), Jim Moran (Va.), Bobby Scott (Va.), Pete Visclosky (Ind.) voted no. But they were joined by moderate-to-conservative Reps. John Barrow (Ga.), Jim Cooper (Tenn.), Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike McIntyre (N.C.), Collin Peterson (Minn.), Kurt Schrader (Ore.) and Adam Smith (Wash.).

These sixteen bear watching in the future, and I hope their constituents are paying close attenion to how carelessly they treat the fiscal security of this nation.

So that is how the vote played out in the House, but when the dust settles WHO got their ass handed to them the worst?

This again according to the Washington Post:  

The bill was 153 pages long. It was written only the day before, by Washington insiders working in the dark of night. It was crammed with giveaways and legislative spare parts: tax breaks for wind farms and racetracks. A change to nuclear-weapons policy. Government payments for cheese. 

And, most significantly, the bill will raise taxes but do relatively little to cut government spending or the massive federal deficit. 

To a tea-party-influenced crop of House Republicans, the bill to resolve the “fiscal cliff” crisis was everything they had wanted to change about the way Washington worked. Too rushed. Too bloated. Too secretive. Too expensive. 

“There’s lots and lots of pork in this bill,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), one of its most outspoken opponents. 

On Tuesday, however, it passed on their watch. After the Senate approved the compromise, it briefly appeared that the GOP-led House would rebel against the bill. But the threat faded: For many Republicans, it appeared, the risk of rejecting the bill — and courting economic calamity — outweighed their unhappiness with the bill’s contents.

Here is how jaded I have become over the political process in Washington these days.  I fully expect my side to be screwed over anything that gets through both houses. I am just happier when the Right Wing gets fucked harder than we do. (Especially that prick Darrell Issa!)

You know it's the little things in life.

By the way purely to get a sense of who would or would NOT vote for this bill and why, I checked how my two Senators and lone Congressman voted. Believe it or not, they ALL THREE voted for the bill.

Oh and speaking of winners and losers, I just saw on MSNBC that President Obama boarded a plane to rejoin his family to finish out their vacation.

17 comments:

  1. I was pleased to note that both my senators (one of each flavor) and my Repugnicant-flavored representative all voted in favor of the deal. But I won't hold anything against those D's who voted against it because there are some things that it doesn't do which many D's think is important. It doesn't raise as much revenue as the original proposal and it leaves the debt ceiling to be taken hostage before long.

    The big win on this is that Boehner broke the so-called Hastert rule and allowed a vote on a bill that required bi-partisan support to pass which is a clear indication that he did not allow the Tea Baggers to hold everyone else hostage. Whether or not he retains the Speaker's chair and, if he does, whether or not this is a sign of a willingness to consider the national interest rather than Grover Norquist's kissable butt remains to be seen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This Oregonian story explains why the Oregon legislative voted mostly "no" -- except for the one lone Republican, who's as close to a teabagger as we see here in Oregon.

      Delete
  2. Flew back to Hawaii?!?!?!?!

    Gawd, the billions spent on Barry's never-ending vacations. IMPEACH ! ! !

    Just having some fun. I have such a guy crush.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cracklin Charlie7:53 AM

    Doesn't Biden look like he is about to bust, wanting to tell the President what a big effin' deal this is?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous8:04 AM

    I am so glad that President Obama took off after the vote to spend the rest of the vacation with his family. He certainly deserves a few days in the sun.
    Beaglemom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous9:43 AM

      You can bet Bachmann and the Tea Party will be bitching about him flying back to Hawaii and how much money it costs. They seem to have forgotten how much time Bush spent at his ranch in Texas, or any other President for that matter. A prime example of their selective memory, and of course Bachmann likes to site ridiculous cost that are not even close to reality. But Bachmann and reality we all know is like water and oil.

      Delete
  5. I love my family… and then I love those two men.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:08 AM

      And that's the problem with America. The people will eat up the spin that says it's a good deal and walk away happy. The question now is, how long will it take to sink into their thick heads that they got shortchanged again. Probably when they go grocery shopping and find they can only afford Kraft dinner for the kids and cat food for granny. Will Americans ever start getting it that there's more out there for them if the income disparity is really worked on a little?

      Delete
  6. Sharon9:23 AM

    I am not sure about what are the bad things Obama had to swallow, but they raised taxes and extended unemployment without any spending cuts. I am feeling more optimistic than ever that McConnell/Boehner have seen the writing on the wall...they are done unless they start to back away from the teabaggers, even Ryan voted yes. I think the power of Obama's wisdom and long term view combined with the best VP we could hope for in Biden will continue to make cracks in that horrible congress. Grover is spinning this as he always will...he is a cancer, it is hard to watch.
    I am so glad Obama went back to Hawaii...he so deserves a recharge from these assholes. Congress of course says FU to the Sandy victims while they enjoy their money and time off, I wish we could demand a refund from them. I hope the horror of the debt ceiling fight is going to be the final downfall shown around the world.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous10:03 AM

    A quote from an article at HP: "The White House sent Reid a list of suggested concessions as his staff debated what to send back to McConnell. Reid looked over the concessions the administration wanted to offer, crumpled up the paper and tossed it into his fireplace. The gesture was first reported by Politico and confirmed to HuffPost by sources with knowledge of it, who noted that Reid frequently keeps his fire going and is fond of feeding a variety of proposals to it.

    Reid's staff then called McConnell's office with a simple message: Our last offer stands. There will be no further concessions. McConnell took to the Senate floor, complaining that he had no "dance partner" in Reid, and called Vice President Joe Biden, a man he assumed would be more willing to give. McConnell was right."

    You have a real big problem with your negotiator in chief, you know who. Whether my explanation of him being brought up to play second fiddle to ol massa, is right or not, it's worth considering what the problem is if it isn't that. This one's over but there's 4 years ahead of very tough negotiating to do. And you know that's the end of the tax concessions the repubs are going to hand over. A very unsatisfactory deal for the little people in my opinion. And it's not enough revenue increase to make even a small dent in the revenue problem. Pretend as much as you like!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What happens reinforces my position that Obama should have been the one to take the dog training lessons because he knows nothing about discipline.

      He just effectively undermined Harry Reid's position. He also reinforced the GOPs behavior of whining, complaining and obstructing. He's taught them that if they keep saying no and waiting until the last minute they'll get what they want. If not everything they want then at least some of it.

      And yes, he gave up all their leverage with the cuts delay.

      What we need in our government is a lot of teachers, dog trainers and Mothers. They know how to discipline.

      Teachers know classroom management.

      What is needed in our government is someone that knows Congressional Management.

      Harry Reid did. Obama doesn't. Biden is only doing as he's told.

      Delete
    2. DetroitSam12:14 AM

      You my dear, obviously have no clue. Stop spouting nonsense.

      Delete
  8. Anonymous10:51 AM

    The Long Game, Revisited

    ...And so you see that Obama's re-election has meant the biggest increase in revenues to the federal government since 1968. That would not have happened under Romney. And if the tax deal is not as big as the polls suggest Obama could have gotten away with, it is in part because of the contextual reasons Bruce Bartlett lays out here, in part because Obama genuinely believes in exercizing responsibility as president, but also in part because the president wants to avoid too much austerity too soon as we inch out of the worst recession since the 1930s.

    It seems to me this latter point is under-rated. The left often talked of the fiscal cliff as if it were only win-win for Obama. It wasn't, in my view. He faced two dangers: of seeming unable to come up with a compromise (which is integral to his appeal) and of seeing the US economy sink under the weight of an imprudent and drastic reduction in demand. As Josh Marshall has noted, Obama always wanted a deal. No president wants to kick off his second term with a double-dip recession. He got half of a deal that will not have as drastic an effect as the full cliff-divers wanted.

    Does the promised debt-ceiling hostage-taking by the GOP render all this strategy moot? Maybe. But it seems to me that the GOP has hurt itself so far since the election on fiscal matters - appearing, especially last week, as a herd of feral, foam-flecked cats. I don't see their threatening to ruin America's credit unless they get to cut Medicare by $500 billion over a decade as a particularly strong political hand. Any party triggering a self-imposed credit crisis as the economy recovers will not be rewarded politically. On that, especially after 2011, the president has the upper hand. Americans do not like monkeying around with the national credit rating as a way to cut medical care for grandma.

    More to the point, the GOP has yet to even lay out the details of its proposed entitlement cuts (and campaigned in part against them). One way out would be for both parties to focus on cutting the Pentagon bloat - but that's not going to happen any time soon. And so I can see revenue-raising tax reform returning as a way to alleviate some of the political pain on both sides.

    In other words, I can see Obama's logic here. What he's getting - which is a gradual shift toward more fiscal responsibility, with key protections for the working poor and the unemployed in place - is all he really wants right now. Like many of Obama's incremental achievements, you can sometimes miss the forest for the trees. We have the biggest tax hike in decades - without a sudden recession. And we have huge, painful spending cuts looming unless new revenue is found through tax reform. The end result - for all its unseemly messiness right now - may still be a sane, graduated fiscal readjustment as the economy recovers. The sequester can be back-loaded a little to find that elusive sweet spot between structural fiscal rebalancing and economic growth. And we could even clean up the tax code a little.

    It's not great, but it will do. Sometimes, the little advances are preferable under certain circumstances to big breakthroughs. And Obama has to face a rabid Republican House probably for his next four years. They self-destructed on Plan B. They will almost certainly have to swallow hard and vote for big tax increases in the next day or so [and, in fact, now have]. And a campaign to slash Medicare is their next major goal. A phrase springs to mind.

    Meep meep.


    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2013/01/the-long-game-revisited.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. As we all do, I considered what *I* would do if I were in the Senate or House and presented with this bill to vote on.

    I'm not sure I'd vote for it either. As was stated, too bloated, too much pork, and didn't go far enough.

    But I recognize that I am no privy to all of the contents, nor ramifications of a yea or nea vote.

    I can only consider my personal representatives and trust that they knew what they were doing.

    Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer. They're experienced enough to do the right thing. Bob Filner is leaving and will be our new Mayor. I've met him and heard him speak and he's pretty savvy too.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous3:02 PM

    I am still confused about what this all means. Who won and who lost?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anita Winecooler6:50 PM

    One cliff down, three to go!
    Yeah, this was just a warm-up, and I hope it's a peek into the future. To be willing to take the nation to the edge of calamity to get all you want is chasing the "perfect" while harming the "good".

    I'm trying to figure out what President Obama has in mind, He said he refuses to debate the debt ceiling with Congress, and we all know that's the fight the GOP wants.

    I'm glad he's in Hawaii, finishing out whatever's left of his vacation with his lady and their girls. The luddites at Fox, of course, will be all over it, especially if he flies back to DC to sign the bill then goes back! This could cost trillions!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. DetroitSam12:10 AM

    Gryphen: For. MI Gov. Jennifer Granholm had two segments on her 1/2/13 War Room show on Current TV that really explains the fiscal cliff deal. I have been reading so much whining from many so-called liberals/progressives who, I believe, have no clue about any of this. Mostly they just bash Pres. Obama.

    Perhaps you can watch the videos and then post them for your fans who don't have Current TV.

    Granholm: It’s time to stop whining! What the fiscal cliff deal really means

    http://current.com/shows/the-war-room/videos/is-obama-a-better-negotiator-than-democrats-give-him-credit-for via @GranholmTWR

    Michael Tomasky joins Jennifer Granholm in “The War Room” to talk about the fiscal cliff deal

    http://current.com/shows/the-war-room/videos/is-obama-a-better-negotiator-than-democrats-give-him-credit-for

    Sammy

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.