Meanwhile the future of our economy is at stake: Not enough votes to pass the stimulus bill..

[DCBob]

Senate Lacks Votes to Pass Stimulus
By Shailagh Murray and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, February 4, 2009; Page A01

Senate Democratic leaders conceded yesterday that they do not have the votes to pass the stimulus bill as currently written and said that to gain bipartisan support, they will seek to cut provisions that would not provide an immediate boost to the economy.

<snip>

For now, the Senate bill remains a work in progress. "We're trying to find a way to reach 60" votes, Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), the Senate's chief vote counter, told reporters. "A number of Democrats have said they want to see changes to the bill before they can vote for it." Durbin predicted that "100 decisions" will be "made between now and when we deliver the bill to the president's desk." To remove obstacles from the measure's path, Reid said numerous items could fall by the wayside. "The president, the Democratic leaders, the Republican leaders certainly have every intention of moving forward to getting everything out of the bill that causes heartburn to a significant number of senators," he told reporters yesterday.

What Senate leaders cannot predict is which provisions will stay in and which will fall out. It also remains unclear whether Democrats are willing to tamper with measures that are considered high priorities for Obama, but that tackle longer-term challenges such as health-care reform and alternative energy development, rather than providing the quick jolt of expanded unemployment and food-stamp benefits and individual tax relief.

The most ambitious effort to cut the bill is being led by Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), moderates in their parties who share a dislike of the current version. Collins is scheduled to visit Obama at the White House this afternoon. "I'm going to go to him with a list" of suggested deletions, she said. Nelson said he and Collins have agreed to "tens of billions" in cuts, although he said he is skeptical that the effort will reach Collins's target of $200 billion in reductions. The pair has counted up to 20 allies in their effort, with more Democrats than Republicans at this point.

<snip>

Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine), a moderate who has been considered the most likely GOP vote in favor of the plan, said yesterday that she cannot support it until items that would not do enough to stimulate the economy or create jobs are dropped. "They should scrub it," said Snowe, who voted for the tax-relief portion in the Senate Finance Committee last week. She said many of the provisions were jammed into the legislation by members of the Appropriations Committee who were "trying to short-circuit the normal legislative process."

<snip>

Some Republicans in the group are seeking a much broader rewrite of the legislation, and they want Obama to lead the effort. "Get us all in a room. That's what you do with a major piece of legislation," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), who supports an alternative drafted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that would cost $445 billion.

Graham said he could back something between the McCain bill and the House bill. Although some Republicans would prefer to shelve the measure temporarily, hoping that spending demand will cool, other GOP lawmakers would prefer to stay on schedule and find common ground. "There's sort of political chaos right now," he conceded.

more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/03/AR2009020304024.html?hpid=topnews

=============

I suspect they will cut enough of the most controversial items and get a few of the moderate Repubs like Snowe and Collins onboard and pass it. Frankly I am amazed how lock step the Republicans are on this bill. I suppose they see an opening with attacking the so called "pork" and "waste" of the bill. It is easy to criticize a bill of this size and scope. One man's pork is another man's stimulus.

[Catshrink]

1. McCain "hearts" his tax breaks for the wealthy

and doesn't want them to expire. Nor does he want corporations to pay their fair share.

Cut taxes, cut taxes, cut taxes. Republicans are fiscally irresponsible. Case in point: Bush's War. It wasn't written into the budget so who knows where the money to pay for it was supposed to come from.

That's my Senator. Believe it or not, the state government is worse.

[DCBob]

3. The Repubs have no problem sending hundreds of billions to Iraq...

but are unanimous in screwing the American people. I read a great comment on the WashPost forums: "Baghdad will probably get mass transit before we do".

[Catshrink]

39. And aren't our soldiers building schools in Iraq?

while ours at home crumble?

This is the Republican legacy.

[bunnies]

2. These fuckers didnt bat an eye at 700 bln for banks...

NOW they care about spending? NOW?! Geezus. The Democrats have given Obama more trouble in the last 2 weeks than they gave idiot Bush in 8 years. Damn them all.

[fugop]

5. Just wish someone would say that!

Seriously, I wish the Dems would drop the polite, weak-spined bullshit and say some of this stuff out loud! I'm so tired of the Republicans dominating the discourse. If some Dems would just say it flat out, talk about how they've sat back for eight years and aided and abetted Bush as he ran this country into the ground, I'd feel a lot better about the stimulus's chances! Dems are letting those idiots frame this as they're saving the country from the Democrats mean old "spending" bill. I don't understand why there isn't a HUGE pushback. It's driving me nuts. Bring on the smackdown!

[bunnies]

10. Totally. Sad fact is though...

NOTHING in congress has changed. The Dems are the same old spineless suckers that they were under Bush. Its infuriating. :nuke:

[democracy1st]

51. I know I can't freakin take this crap much longer,a house cat has more fight than these guys

[DCBob]

7. Bush and Republicans ran up the national debt fighting a dumb war in Iraq and giving tax breaks...

to the rich and now suddenly they discover fiscal responsibility when we actually need to spend some money to get this country back on track. Pathetic.

[bunnies]

12. Yep.

I really dont know how they can live with themselves. I really, really dont.

[slipslidingaway]

26. More Democrats voted for the 700 billion than did Republicans...

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-681

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-213

:shrug:

[bunnies]

33. Exactly my point.

They (Dems) had no problem throwing cash at the banks but for the people? Not so much. :banghead:

[slipslidingaway]

45. And my mistake :) n/t

[MercutioATC]

4. The problem is that it's not a stimulus bill...it's an omnibus spending bill.

Hell, I'd vote against it.

Gimme a bill without the pork that would provide a real stimulus and I'd support it in a heartbeat. This bill doesn't do that.

[DCBob]

8. What exactly is the "pork"? Is all targeted spending "pork"?

One could argue any infusion of money into the economy will help save companies and jobs. Isn't that the whole point?

[MercutioATC]

19. "Pork" would be ANYTHING not directly designed to stimulate the economy (in this bill).

Money for alternative energy research? Great idea, but not in a stimulus bill.

Same goes for money for the arts, etc.


By your measure, we might as well just hand $800B to Exxon. The CEO would probably tip the valet a couple of bucks to park his new Bugatti.

We need infrastructure upgrades and repairs anyway. Why not allocate a larger portion of the money toward infrastructure spending instead of the arts?

[JamesA1102]

41. Money for the arts helps to employ

Stagehands, carpenters, electricians, musicians.

[MercutioATC]

46. Yes, but is it an efficient use of that money?

Supporting the arts is great, but given the choice between voluntary spending (the arts) and necessary spending (infrastructure) I think that infrastructure spending gives us much more bang for the buck.

[RBInMaine]

53. Do you want to invest in an economy for the future and fix energy and healthcare? That's what we

NEED ! Not just a short term trickle down bill.

[dascientist]

6. so basically they are saying f the presidential election, we going with McCain anyway

WTF

[MadHound]

9. Umm, they have the majority of votes in the Senate, yet they can't get it passed?

Really now, WTF? Sorry, but I remember clearly how 'Pugs would get controversial legislation passed while not having sixty votes, and they did it by being brutal street fighters. Some arm twisting here, some knee capping there, and VOILA! the 'Pugs got their shit through Congress.

But these fucking weak kneed, lily livered, pansy ass Dems are simply refusing to fight, and instead they're going to cave on this bullshit, pull some of the spending that will actually stimulate the economy in favor of more bullshit tax cuts for the rich and corporately connected.

Either the Dems are fucking goddamn spineless wimps, and should be kicked out for that, or they're simply doing the bidding of their corporate masters and they should be kicked out for that. Either way, these fucking knocked kneed spineless assholes have got to go. We need people who will fight, not cave at the first sign of resistance.

[Mist]

16. The kabuki theater routine is wearing thin--some Dems (complicit, corporate Dems) have to keep

finding reasons why things can't get done.

[MadHound]

17. I hear you,

I was actually hoping that we got sixty Dems in the Senate. It would have been amusing to see what sort of pretzel logic they would have used to excuse the fact that they won't (notice I say won't, not can't) get real change done in this country.

Instead, we get to hear the same old tired excuses, which all boil down to the single, glaring fact, for the most part, Congressional Dems simply won't fight for what's right.

Sorry, no change here.

[sampsonblk]

22. "fucking goddamn spineless wimps"

Are you just figuring this out?

[MadHound]

23. No, I'd figured it out long ago,

I was just hoping that some of that "change" would actually come about. Sad to say, it doesn't look like that's going to happen, just more of the same ol' same ol two party/same corporate master system of government.

[PVnRT]

25. Well, you need 60 votes for cloture (to close debate and bring it to a vote)

If all Democrats voted, they'd have 58 votes (no Franken yet). That's usually the real problem in getting things passed in the Senate.

[Kalyke]

29. If you can't close the debate, then make the Republicans

actually, physically filibuster. Make them stand on the floor and read the phone book or something. Make them do it. Don't let them get by with an "implied filibuster" as they have been doing. Then, when they fail, call the nuclear option and vote the thing on an up or down vote.

A couple of times of having to skip the dinner parties and trips abroad would make them stop being such obstructionists!

[RoyGBiv]

42. Damn right ...

This is what I'm sick of ...

Okay, so the obstructionist party can use the filibuster. Good. Now MAKE THEM USE IT. This gentleperson's agreement of just going home for the day when they can't invoke cloture is asinine. If they're gonna obstruct, make the bastards stand there, talking, constantly, for as long as it takes.

This whole Congress is such bullshit.

[MadHound]

38. Take it to the 'Pugs if that's the case

Make them filibuster, do what they did when they were in power but looking to bring about closure, fucking go out and kneecap your opponents.

This bullshit of pussyfooting around the 'Pugs when we don't have sixty votes is simply put bullshit. It's an excuse for not doing what's right or what's needed. Instead of getting a stimulus bill that has a modicum of spending in it(the most fiscally sound way of stimulating the economy) we're going to get another goddamn tax cut bill that's not going to do a damn thing except cost out grandkids more money. This is not just bad politics, but it is morally and economically a disaster.

Fuck the 'Pugs, the Dems need to grow a pair, grow a spine and make the 'Pugs pay for being obstructionists. We've already seen that they're not going to play ball, then roll right over them. In fact the Dems need to be taking out every goddamn sweetener that was put in for the 'Pugs and make it a more fiscally sound bill.

But that's not going to happen is it? Nope, they're going to roll over and piss all over themselves in fear of the mighty 'Pug machine, putting in more tax cuts, taking out needed spending, and screw the American people once again.

Two party/same corporate master system of government:puke:

[Blue_Tires]

31. that's my point as well

if every dem is on board, that should be enough...let the gop be shown on TV as the ones holding it up while the economy burns...

i just HATE how every little thing has to be catered to the repubs...its like no one even remembers what senate votes were like 3-4 years ago...

[paulk]

47. it's an article in the Washington Post

which can be counted on to slant things the way of the GOP.

There are enough votes to pass - if the Republicans don't filibuster. This game hasn't played out yet, so let's just wait a bit before making the sort of accusations you are making...

[terisan]

11. Actually the stimulus should focus only on the items that will have immediate effect. Susan Collins

is making sense. The emergency needs to be addressed immediately. Things that do not provide immediate relief need be better planned planned and prioritorized As it stands this is a lobbyists bill.

After the true smaller stimulus is passed, the foreclosure issue must be addressed (should have already been addressed), the second big bank bailout must be scrapped,

The big bank bailout billions are probably going overseas and probably will result in an immense amount of off-shoring and empoverishment in America.

[DCBob]

13. I tend to agree with that... It certainly will be easier to pass.

I am not sure why the House Dems made this bill so complicated. I just hope they can quickly modify it and get something passed. The economic problems worsen by the minute.

[Thrill]

14. Obama and the Democrats have let the Republicans completely define their package

Terrible selling job. As usual the Democrats never learn how to frame the debate in the media.

[democracy1st]

52. and the pres gave these guys credibility by pushing the bi partisan crap so hard also

not enough surrogates on tv. The plan needed to be presented to the public, just a total complete failure when it comes to presentation.

[sampsonblk]

15. I agree with Susan Collins

This monster should never pass as it is now. This is a real opportunity lost for our party. We could have done a good job and shown how poorly the GOP governed. Instead, we have come up with this awful stinker. I would vote against it also.

[meli224]

18. I wouldn't vote for it either.

The house totally screwed Obama on this bill. Adding all that bullshit to it. Yesterday they passed an ammendment to strip 267 mil in tax cuts for the film industry. Are they kidding?? Can they not write up a bill without all this crap in it. I mean they had to know the Repukes would use all these crap to talk down the bill. Now the public doesn't even support it anymore. I would've never had them in charge of writing this.

[RBInMaine]

54. So you'd prefer the Republican bill? More trickle down?

[NRaleighLiberal]

20. Maybe the Stimulus Bill should be framed in terms of pulling the plug on life support for the US.

That sort of thing seems to get the Repubs exciting and voting on it.

[meli224]

21. I don't think they will vote for it even if there is huge compromise.

They are fucking assholes. but I still think this was the House screwing Obama on this one. As long as they get these bullshit giveaways out, and add more infrastructure, and green jobs it will be better.

[Jennicut]

24. Obama has already directed the Senate to drop a lot of that crap.

I think if that happens then Snowe or Collins would vote for it.

[meli224]

27. I heard some report, I don't remember where it was from, but

they said his meeting with the Dems didn't go well, he was extremely annoyed at all the crap in there, and ordered them to take it out. At least he has a brain! These jerks that put all this crap in there should be bitch slapped by him.

[Jennicut]

30. I think that was with the House. The House or Reps never has any brains.

Repubs and Dems both suck in the House. I always thought the Senate, the more deliberative (although slower) body was better.

[Life Long Dem]

28. I better not be hearing this.

[cooolandrew]

34. misposted.`

[anonymous171]

32. WE NEED TO PRUNE OUR PARTY AND INSTITUTE A LOCKSTEP MENTALITY

The republicans passed all sorts of shit without a majority. We should be able to as well.

[democracy1st]

49. To many Blue dog democrats who will vote with the GOP,and the GOP has purged liberal to mod repubs

[cooolandrew]

35. To be fair to President Obama any Democratic president would be facgin this, sadly.

[Barack_America]

36. Why agree to cut spending????

Cut the questionable pork and add the expenditures to infrastructure spending. I'd love to see the GOP stand up against infrastructure spending, which is tremendously popular.

[meli224]

37. Yesterday the Repugs blocked an ammendment

that would've added 25 billion to infrastructure spending. They are such fucking retards! Of course the media doesn't report that!

[democracy1st]

50. dems should be all over the networks selling their ideas and plan

[BklnDem75]

40. So if it's not filibuster proof, it can't go to the floor?

Any wonder why they're targeting Reid?

[uponit7771]

44. Yeap, it can go to the floor it's just Reid wont allow it because he sKeered of filibusters...

...the make him pee on himself

[uponit7771]

43. There are PLENTY of enough votes if Reid would make them filibuster the bill for a month or two

...then pass the thing.

[Two Americas]

48. I thought "we won?"

Strange times. The Republicans were able to do everything they wanted to do with less of a mandate and no more seats and no more popular support than the Democrats have now.

And this is a dire crisis they are dealing with here. The Republicans were just passing wish lists for their wealthy clients. How can it be that the Republicans were more aggressive and more successful doing that then the Democrats are when it comes to saving the people? "Priorities," I guess.

I know, I know, it has only been two weeks or 20 minutes or whatever. Except it hasn't - it has been 20 years anyway of rolling over for the right wingers. I know, I know, we need to be practical and bipartisan. So we will negotiate with the mass murderer, and get him to only kill half of his hostages - for now. Hey, that is progress, isn't it? That is better than nothing, right? I know, I know, these things take time and can't happen overnight. Might take centuries at this pace. I guess we could settle for "baby steps," but is it too much to ask that those steps at least be going in the right direction?

The Democrats have all sorts of power now, and no one can stop them. They can roll over, cave in, back down and move to the right without any opposition. The Republicans won't stop them - we are all on the same post-partisan team now. The Left can't stop them, because we are forbidden to criticize ***Our Sacred Party*** (may the gods and goddesses of the free market look down upon them with favor, bless them, and guide their every step) lest we be attacked by our own for our poutrage.