Why didn't we pass middle class tax cuts when we had a super majority?

Anyone know why we didn't pass a middle class tax cut extension and unemployment benefit extension when we had a super majority?

The "spineless" and "incompetent" memes need to be put out to pasture once and for all.

"We" didn't pass a middle-class tax-cut because we weren't in charge. The kinder, gentler version of the corporate butt-lickers was. And we aren't their constituents.

If this wasn't obvious to one and all some time ago, I hope it's finally sinking in.

that the dlc was in charge, not the Dems, and that the dlc is just a little better then the GOP?

... that in general there is a fundamental misunderstanding about who many members of Congress (not all, mind you) actually serve. Hint: It ain't us. And the phenomenon definitely isn't limited to the Republican side of the aisle.

Some time ago, thanks in part to people like Tony Coelho, elements of the Democratic leadership discovered that it was far more lucrative to turn their backs on the party's core constituency and seek out corporate money instead. From a financial standpoint, the strategy was a huge success. From the standpoint of poor and working class folks, it has been a disaster.

peace and low stress

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

. . . short of (THANK GOD) privatizing SS.

It's because many of the Dems are actually Repukes by world standards and ALL of the Republicans are batshit insane lunatics (by ANY standard). Very, VERY few actual progressive Democrats like Sherrod Brown, Dennis Kucinich, Marcy Kaptur and Bernie Sanders (3 of those 4 are from Ohio, yet most of the high offices in this state have unfortunately been a sea of dark stupid Faux News Red) populate the House and Senate. NO Republican today is even an Eisenhower moderate who would go along with ANY issue left of Joe Leiberman's approval. They're ALL about the "Party of the Rich, NO one else".

Republican, Batshit Insane Lunatic, symbolic (some call "wasted") vote. That's your menu in 21st Century America. Sad.

When comments like RufusTFirefly's become more the rule & less the exception, the Progressive Movement will be well on their way to get what they want.
It's been thousands of years coming but it will happen when the people stand together & demand it.

Remember, this goes way beyond the United States of America. This goes back to the beginning of Civilization.
John Lucas

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

about as telling as anything else that has happened during these past two years.

It should never have happened!!!

My co-worker and another person asked me why it wasn't done. They both thought it was by design..

how I miss him.

. . . of our own party enabling republican obstruction.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Dem's wanted to NOT give the uber-rich their tax cut. The top Dem's are the uber-rich.

At least in the Senate. We had support in the House.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

nothing has changed yet the new congress doesnt come into session till january. We didnt have the votes then and now when people know they wont be coming back next term we still dont have the votes.

So back when we had a super majority (before Teddy died) we didn't have the votes?

EVER!

Are you not paying attention? It only takes 40 in the senate to stop anything and with dems like lieberman and nelson and landrau we never had a chance at it. It is the reason for almost all of your dissapointment and why there has had to be so much compromise from the get go but like the majority of the naysayers on here you continue to refuse to acknowledge that fact and blame Obama.

I agree..

The truth is that a lot of our "Democrats" aren't.

Tesha

version of the tax cut on Saturday. What does that say?

peace and low stress twilightgardener..

Those are some pretty ridiculous standards you got there.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

As usual.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

We should have done it then.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You can apply this to just about everything anymore.

"why" invites arguments, excuses and even defensive reasons for behavior.

Consider how asking how can make a difference.

How are they doing this? What is the underlying process? The ever-changing contents serve as a distraction.

Once I know that, "how" will be clear enough.

Once I know "why", then something can be done to change that...til then, nothing will change.

Because the Republicans objected with just a handful of votes, even just one senator, deciding he or she would obstruct any legislation the "supermajority" intended to pass.

Don't you remember? It was in all the papers and on TV.

I thought we had enough votes in both houses..

....proposed by the Democrats or anyone else.

The Republicans wanted the Bush tax cuts - especially for the wealthy - to become permanent. That wasn't in the plans for the Democrats.

I thought we had the votes back then..

The Republicans wanted the Bush tax cuts to become permanent and would settle for nothing less.

You must understand that one senator can obstruct no matter if 99 other senators all agreed.

It's the rules of the Senate that obstruct the democratic process and that can tie up any legislation advancing.


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/09/100809fa_fact_packer

We didnt have 60 votes....

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

That was the plan, anyway, let the Senate debate HCR until the last second of the 60 vote majority, then hold a vote. Nothing else mattered, or could be done.

It was never going to happen. It's easier to blame current politics now for why it can't be done which I think is why the subject is at the fore front.

No good excuses back then for it failing.

-p

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Dem raised taxes!!

And instead of rushing in with our own ads-- Cruel Repub voted against a middle class tax cut!

Foolish Repub voted to keep all the Bush Tax Cuts that wrecked our economy! -- they cowered and lost anyway.

I do think the whole Democratic legislative team shares the blame. These are tough times with more destructive obstinacy than we've ever seen in Republicans. We need to fight them. We needed to get more Democratic legislators in line to vote with the American people.

Lawrence O'Donnell raised some good questions about that in his show last night.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

you know, against the sinister & dark forces of whatever?

WTF is going on, anyway?????????????????

Remember Blanch Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, Liebermann.....? Need I say more?

Congress committed to pay-go. This means that bills had to be in line with the budget resolution (such as it was) or, if they constituted increased spending they had to be "paid for" by some other budget reductions or a revenue increase or a combination of the two.

There's an exception to this: Emergency spending.

If you know 6 months in advance that you'll need to extend unemployment benefits and act like you know by doing something silly like submitting a bill to that effect you have pay-go to deal with.

If you suddenly realize a few weeks in advance that you need to extend unemployment benefits, then you don't need to sweat pay-go. You can still maintain your illusion that you would never, ever do anything to increase the deficit. Even as you add $50 or $200 billion to the deficit.

That's my hunch. Other, more cynical views are that they were too busy with far, far more important things like trying to win elections, debating other bills and measures and resolutions, etc. Or that there was no way to reach this compromise--or even a better compromise--months ago given the diversity of opinion in the House and Senate.

peace and low stress..

just enough recalcitrant dems who take pleasure in voting with republicans....and because our leadership loves to go on teevee and announce every "we're-a-gonna-do-this ", instead of getting their ducks in a row privately, and then just doing it.

and then there is also the fact that right wing media is enormous, effective, and mean as hell. They would rather see good legislation shot to hell, than to allow a dem to get credit for it.

Democrats will get a super majority again. I just hope they do not fritter it away again. The condition of the economy was front and center, as it floundered, tea partiers gained clout across the country.

If people here don't know this then we are in serious trouble.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/28/barack-obama/tax-cut-95-percent-stimulus-made-it-so/

Bill

Facts don't matter.

Opinion, outrage, and speculation are way more powerful. They're like blood in the water to sharks...


:shrug:

they why are they both expiring?

imho, I don't know of one thing the "stimulus" did - it sure didn't seem to do much in my ghetto of Newburgh NY.

Lets take a look at that link..

Thank you.

Bill

cut taxes for working people, and those taxes expire at the end of this year?

* passed one that expires, President Obama passed one that we are still enjoying. I noticed it in my paycheck right away, as he adjusted withholding so we had a bigger check. * mailed his out in one shot, remember? Less impact on the economy, but more impact on popularity, from the looks of things.

Bill

peace and low stress..

Besides the 41 GOTB votes that didn't waver or compromise, there were anywhere from 10 or more Democrats who also couldn't be counted on. Folks like Ben Nelson and the soon departed Blanche Lincoln. Reid's poor leadership is as much to blame here as Obama's. There should have been a vote on the tax breaks and extending UI benefits BEFORE the election but that position was squandered as was the election as was any chance of either being passed. A weak White House took the only deal it could and it's the middle class that pays the price for poor strategy.

that didn't cover everyone. So we would have still needed one Republican.

It was a calculated move to HOPE the Republicans would just let them expire without a fight, or something.

Should have started this fight a long time ago.


I didn't realize that HOPE was his go to political tactic.
:rofl:

:)

Politics is a huge stressor for me, and I have given up all TV. I don't follow politics like I once did.

Why didn't we pass middle class tax cuts when Teddy was alive? Did we try and have the DLC beat us down?

Enlighten us. We can all benefit.

They used all the procedural tricks against progress, and fought dirty, and we would not sink to their level (except possibly using reconciliation to pass the health care bill)...

We keep trying to take the high road, like we'll somehow be rewarded for it at some point in the future, like in Heaven or Valhalla or the Miss Congeniality voting. But that day will never come, and it's leading to the collapse of this country.

To force themselves to pay higher taxes. It's called planning. They knew the Republicans would fight for the tax breaks for the wealthy and that would allow them to say we had to compromise to get you the tax breaks. You're 100% right they could have and don't believe any other b.s. The sad thing is most would not sacrifice their tax break to prevent the wealthy from getting theirs.

:hi:

On the other hand, Snowe voted against them. Maybe she would've been persuaded back when the President was more popular.

And then Obama let HCR "reform" drag on forever. That should have been wrapped up before the August '09 recess, we would have gotten a much better law, not the monstrosity we're looking at now.

It's not like there would have been 60 votes for the PO before August.

Even under the theory that Obama can do whatever he wants, as long as he "fights" and "uses the bully pulpit" and etc etc etc, wouldn't it have taken LONGER to get a better bill?

I agree that things would have been much better politically for Obama if they did this before August, but I don't see how even under the theory of some here that the bill actually would have been better before August.

As hard as it may be for many of you on this board to hear, the Democratic Party is not in your corner.
Neither are the Republicans obviously.

People are in serious denial about how this system works.
Neither of those political sports teams (Cowboys/Redskins, Lakers/Celtics, Yankees/Red Sox) have any concern about the plight & problems of those who toil to make this country run.
They never have been, they never will be.

And if you think the answer lies within the mythical 3rd party savior, you're wrong there too.
They'll become just like the Big Two we all complain about.

The only time change came was when the rulers feared the angry numbers of those they ruled over.
When this happened, they conceded a few perks to the ruled. You were never intended to get the full deal.

It all boils down to this.
Human beings are selfish at heart. All of 'em.
Only through their weaknesses are they able to learn cooperation, empathy, & compassion.
Once a person gains enough power, chances are he/she will revert strongly to that self-serving programming.

The self-proclaimed elites believe this world is all theirs for the taking. Extreme selfishness.
They think that the only reason we should exist is to toil in order to make their lives easier.

Because of that, there will never be ANY governmental form that will be just if it doesn't address direct payback for bad actions.
It's like this. If a ruler messes up, then the ruler pays for his mistake PERSONALLY.
There's no accountability from your rulers so how can you expect them to take any of this seriously?
They have no skin in the game. They don't have to answer to anyone really. Of course they're gonna do whatever they want to do.

But Elite by definition means Few. So they are always afraid of the day when the masses get tired of this abuse en masse.
It takes strong numbers into the millions to get that 'en masse'.
That's when they give up a little bit of the good life. In order to preserve more they give a little.

This Democrat vs. Republican game is Political Broadway. It's just a play.
They change the actors from time to time to keep it fresh but the script is already written beforehand.

Take a track list of the last 40 years to see what significant measures the Democratic Party have made in that time.
They haven't accomplished much & the Republican way has become the American way in the meantime.
You don't know a thrown fight when you see one??

Don't get so caught up in the 'Democratic' of this site logo.
Concentrate more on the 'Underground' because that's where the action is gonna take place.
The Progressive Movement & the Democratic Party are not, have never been, & will never be One & the Same.
John Lucas