Schumer: delay tax overhaul vote until new Alabama senator seated

[DonViejo]

Source: Reuters




DECEMBER 13, 2017 / 9:07 AM / UPDATED AN HOUR AGO


Reuters Staff

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer will urge Republicans on Wednesday to delay a vote on pending tax overhaul legislation until the new U.S. senator from Alabama, a Democrat, is seated, Schumer’s office said in a statement.

Schumer wants to slow down the legislation, which Republican leaders want to vote on before Christmas, so Democrat Doug Jones, who won an upset victory in deeply conservative Alabama on Tuesday night, can cast a vote in the closely divided chamber.

###

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tax-schumer/schumer-delay-tax-overhaul-vote-until-new-alabama-senator-seated-idUSKBN1E71UA?il=0

[Irish_Dem]

1. Two can play McTurtle's game. nt

[notdarkyet]

2. If we can delay a SC justice for a year, the tax travesty can wait a month.

[pandr32]

8. Agreed!

I would love to hear that point brought up by the press.

[MrPurple]

16. Unfortunately, the key difference is that it was the MAJORITY party delaying Merrick Garland

[Ellipsis]

3. Can they pull that off?

[unblock]

4. my understanding is the most of the delay opportunity is on the state side

alabama can delay certifying the election, giving time to republicans in congress to hurry up and finalize the tax scam.

once they certify, i don't know how much further delaying mcturtle can do.

[unblock]

5. one more point -- worse comes to worse, the house will pass the senate bill as is.

they don't need to win another vote in the senate to pass a tax bill.

if they can't reach agreement, before or after jones is seated, the house will just pass the bill the senate already passed and then donnie will sign it and it will become law. we couldn't stop it even if we won 20 more seats through special elections.

[unc70]

9. The Senate version is too flawed to pass unchanged

In their rush to passage in the Senate, the Repubs made several errors in the tax bill that the House will not agree to. There are apparently several other issues they have with the Senate bill. Finally, there is the big issue that GOP reps in CA, etc. have with losing the SALT deductions.

So I think the option to just pass the Senate version is highly unlikely.

[unblock]

10. i agree it has problems, but from the republican point of view, passing nothing is probably worse.

by far the best solution for them is to actually reach a compromise, but if that proves impossible and the choice becomes either the senate bill as is or nothing, i think they'll pass it.

then they'll try to fix it and blame democrats for preventing them from fixing the problems, it's always our fault, blah blah blah.

[FakeNoose]

20. Too late for that - they've already changed it

Now they've got a revised bill that - they say - both Senate and House Republicans are happy with.

But the provisions are different from what has already been voted on, so they need to vote gain. That's why this is such a rush, they want the bill in both houses passed before the end of the year.

Of course there's no time for hearings or debate on anything, just vote the thing and get out of town. Seems to me the Dems have a good argument to block this after it becomes "law" - they can take it to the Supreme Court, early next year. Such major changes to every part of our government, and we haven't had any time to discuss or review it. What are they afraid of? I think we know the answer to that.

[unblock]

21. i do not think it is a coincidence that they reached an agreement right after they lost a seat.

they know it will be that much harder as soon as jones is seated and they are anxious to get the final bill voted on before then.

it remains to be seen if the rest of the republican senators will go for it, but they probably feel similar pressure. that said, if people like collins and rand drag it out, it may kill any chance republicans have for getting a compromise passed, in which case passing the old senate bill as is remains a (poor) plan b for them.

[FakeNoose]

22. Agreed - the whole think stinks

[still_one]

6. The argument is Alabama deserves a say on this bill, and to deny Jones from being seated is denying

those in Alabama their representation

[unblock]

11. they are represented by strange (and shelby) until jones is seated.

alabama is fully represented. there's always a time lag between election and the winner taking over from the previous senator.

the only issue is whether the transition will be delayed unnecessarily.

[still_one]

12. Thanks

[turbinetree]

7. Since the turtle doesn't like to read the constitution and uses it for toilet paper

maybe he should go back and read Article I Section 3 paragraph 2, the people, the citizens, the human beings of the state want that seat filled, and that seat was vacated, they voted to fill that vacancy.

Turtle cannot wait until next year, he cannot decide all by himself, just like the Michigan asshole Snyder wants to wait, the Constitution does not have language to wait, those seats have to be filled...............................this isn't some fascist state

[onenote]

14. The Constitution says the Senate is the judge of who is chosen to be a Senator

And the Senate has rules implementing that provision, such as the rule requiring the state from which a senator is elected to submit a certification of the election.

So, no, there is nothing unconstitutional about the fact that Jones won't be seated until after Alabama certifies the election to the Secretary of the Senate.

[FakeNoose]

19. The seat has been vacant almost a year - since Sessions resigned

... so it would be difficult to argue that the people of Alabama have been cheated out of their vote.

We have to find another way to delay this vote. Maybe a cease and desist order?

[ascap_scab]

13. Revenge of Gorsuch.

Yep, seat Jones first.

[FakeNoose]

15. Maybe McCain will play the game

If McCain gets sick again, or plays sick anyway, he could stall the voting until after the first of the year.
It might work! McConnell needs his vote so they'd have to wait for him.

[MrPurple]

17. The R's would still have 50 without McCain and Pence gives them 51

To stop the tax plan, 2 Republican Senators need to go missing, which isn't likely.

I like DU, but sometimes there's a lot of overly optimistic wishful thinking.

[MGKrebs]

23. Right. An empty seat and a no vote are the same thing here.

It needs 51 votes to pass, so whether he is there or not makes no difference (assuming he would vote against it).

[DoctorJoJo]

18. Yeah--Like That's Likely to Happen!

Those cretins will vote on Xmas Day if they have to!