The Payroll Tax Cut passed the Senate in a bi-partisan effort in an 89-10 vote. It has already been called a success. The whole world thought Congress and the Senate had finally pulled it together and were going to give up their childish games for the greater good of the country; that is their job, after all. They are there to pass laws for the good of the American people. They are not there to bicker, fight, and vie for media attention. Nor were they voted into office to cater to Grover Norquist or the Tea Party.
Well, not so fast. Now House Republicans have decided not to vote today on the Senate plan. Instead they want to send the bill to committee. Pelosi commented that if this bill does not pass, 2 million people will lose their unemployment benefits and 48 million seniors will lose the ability to choose their own doctor under Medicare. She also reported that the Senate leaders came together, both Republicans and Democrats to get the bill passed.
Is Boehner the problem in getting things done or can he just not control his party?
The GOP continue to try to twist the story around, making the bottle-neck a Democrat problem. This argument simply does not hold water. If the Senate can work together, why can the Congress not compromise on anything? Do the Republicans want Americans to suffer even more? It would seem so as their constant blockade to any progress only hurts the working, middle class citizens. Fire all the Congressional Republicans in November and get the government governing again.






Comments: 26
Didn't the Senate decide not to vote of the House plan? Where's the ire for Senator Reid?
Instead they want to send the bill to committee.
That's normally what happens when the Senate and House pass differing versions of legislation.
Also, the National Payroll Reporting Consortium said the Senate bill cannot be implemented properly.
Again, get the lazy asses out of Congress if they can't do their job.
This is what's been going on for at least the past 6 months in D.C.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/19/harry-reid-payroll-tax-cut_n_1158198.html
See steps 11 & 12.
In addition to this, the business community is livid, because 2 months does not give them the security to hire or administer the law, much less to worry about this again in 2 months!
Nope, this one is all Harry Reid's. And Pelosi still believes that saying it makes it so, and evidently that is true to the blind loyalists.
I believe Boehner is doing his best, but both parties have very experienced politicians in control. So, we get back and forth from both sides. All we can do is stop taking the side of the Dem or Rep, and figure out EVERY time, which side has the position that is better for the people! There is very little difference in them. The side just doesn't seem to matter much anymore, the graft os so great. Very sad, honesty is probably more important than anything, right now.
That's a success?
If your are impressed with this, you are easily duped!
That is unproductive.
We do need a new Congress, one that will represent us and not Big Business.
If you tax something, you want to promote less of an activity, like smoking, or using gasoline. By taxing work, you get less work.
We the people need to wise up.
The Republicans are pushing for a 1 year extension while the Democrats will only agree to 2 months! Dems are more interested in a political issue for the election than helping their constituency.
So let me get this right. Harry Reid couldn’t pass an extension to the payroll tax (by the way, does anyone know what the payroll tax is … it’s Social Security folks … this is a vote to ROB THE SOCIAL SECUTRITY TRUST FUND ... isn’t that supposed to be going BROKE) which was passed by the house, so they managed to kick the can down the road for TWO MONTHS, and somehow this moronic compromise in the Senate is somehow Boehner’s fault for calling a pile of manure what it is?
The House has done its job, again and again. It’s passed the bills, again and again. Reid can’t even get the president’s legislation passed by his own party.
Here is an example. It’s not Boehner that can’t get the job done in the House, it’s Reid in the Senate.
Balanced Budget Amendment - Vote Rejected (21-79)
The Senate rejected the Democratic balanced-budget amendment that would have taken Social Security off the books and prohibited Congress from cutting taxes for millionaires if the cut increased the deficit. A two-thirds majority is needed in both chambers to send constitutional amendments to the states for ratification.
But what is not so shocking to me and has become very common is the democrats need to spend money to fix every problem and the Republicans / Tea Party attempting to fix problems while living within a budget.
My question is why do you define “compromise” as Republicans giving in to spending what we don’t have. Soon we will be $16 trillion in debt and who is going to pay that back? Soon the president will want another debt limit increase. Who is going to pay that back?
If you divide the debt among the current tax payers, it would cost over $133,000 per tax payer to pay it off. Now because we can’t afford that in one lump payment, we could not pay that off in over 30 years assuming the interest rates stay low for that same duration.
Why are you so willing to spend money your kids and grand kids will have to pay back?
Why? That is a real question!
What is your plan to pay it back?
My plan is simple, stop spending money on everything that is not listed as required in the constitution. Let the states pick up the tab for what is the states responsibility and we the people will have to take care of the rest.
Any other solution that does not require personal responsibility will fail.
Look at Greece, Italy, and Spain as they fail for the same reason we are failing.
Why are you so willing to spend money your kids and grand kids will have to pay back?
How about George W. Bush pay it all back. He's the one that spent the surplus, he's the one that went to war without Congress's approval.
Compromise is Republicans willing to roll back the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy -- that we couldn't afford in the first place. That's not spending. Those Bush supporters should be made to pay back every dime he "saved" them when the country couldn't afford it.