Dems block Obama's Save-my-Job's Bill

[sirs]

Oh, the irony
------------------

Senate Democrats forced to block Obama's jobs bill
by Stephen Dinan
Published on October 4, 2011

Senate Republicans tried to make Democrats hold a quick vote on President Obama's jobs-stimulus bill Tuesday, but were blocked by Senate Majority Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who is sponsoring Mr. Obama's bill but who said other matters take priority.

Mr. Obama has traveled the country calling for Congress to pass his plan immediately — including most recently Tuesday afternoon in Texas — but the tax increases included in his bill are opposed by Republicans and even many Democrats.

With that in mind, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, tried to force a vote, which presumably would have resulted in a humiliating defeat for the White House.

"I'd like to give him that vote," Mr. McConnell said.

The Senate is currently debating a bill that would push for compensatory tariffs on exports from countries that manipulate their currency — which is designed to punish China.

Mr. Reid said that bill has been waiting for years, and takes precedence over the president's jobs-stimulus. He tried to get an agreement to short-circuit a filibuster and bring up the president's bill later this month, but Mr. McConnell objected that.

"What a charade we have going on here," Mr. Reid fired back, calling Republicans' effort "ridiculous on its face."

Mr. Reid said "a majority of the Senate" supports Mr. Obama's bill, and said the president's repeated calls for immediate action were aimed at Republicans last month, when Congress was fighting over how to add emergency disaster relief to a stopgap spending bill.

"Of course the president was calling for his jobs bill, recognizing that what was going on here … was a waste of time," Mr. Reid said.

But even after the disaster funding situation was resolved, Mr. Obama has continued to pressure Congress.

Meanwhile, the White House has refused to say whether it supports the China bill Mr. Reid has prioritized ahead of the jobs measure.

Article

[sirs]

Elisabeth touched on this development below, but certain ironies are too delicious not to explore further.  Let's begin by recalling the president's urgent exhortations for Congress to pass his warmed-over, unpaid-for, numbingly expensive so-called jobs bill "right away:"
 
The entire point of Obama's antagonistic performance before the joint session of Congress last month was to convince the American people that he's doing something about the nation's chronic unemployment rate (which is forecasted to decay, then hold through next year, by the way), and to cast Republicans as a pack of intractable do-nothings. 

The White House's political calculus was straightforward:
- Obama offers a plan (the details of which are almost immaterial),
- Harry Reid's Senate votes on it (best case scenario: Republicans filibuster),
- and House Republicans refuse to take up the bill (or, even better, defeat it). 
When that tableau played out, Obama's spinmeisters plotted, Obama would pounce on the GOP's inaction and browbeat them at campaign stops in "every corner of this country."  As I wrote at the time, the purpose of the speech was not to introduce a jobs-creation plan; it was to deploy a job-preservation strategy for himself.

But the brilliant ploy has hit a snag: Congressional Democrats aren't cooperating. 

Numerous vulnerable Democrats have balked at the plan, forcing Senate Democratic leadership to concede that they don't have the votes within their own caucus to pass the bill.  Even better, the White House's top legislative priority has exactly zero co-sponsors in the House of Representatives.  Obama can carp about Eric Cantor all he wants, but the fact of the matter is that Cantor's Democratic counterpart, Steny Hoyer, hasn't bothered to co-sponsor the bill Cantor's crew is supposedly blocking.  Cantor, incidentally, hasn't ruled out broad Republican support for certain elements of the president's plan.  What an obstructionist.

Speaking in Dallas today, Obama griped that "Congress" (read: "Republicans") should "at least put this jobs bill up for a vote so that the entire country knows exactly where every Member of Congress stands."  Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell decided to oblige.  "I'd like to give [President Obama] that vote," he said, moving to attach the president's fully-intact plan as an amendment to another piece of legislation -- thus ensuring the "jobs" bill would receive a vote in the upper chamber.  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid promptly blocked the manuever by "filling the tree" on the original bill, which prevents any amendments from being added.  He called the GOP's attempt to comply with the president's demands a "publicity stunt."  When Republicans tauntingly countered that they were simply bowing to Obama's request that Congress act on his bill "right away," Reid responded with his patented brand of buffoonery: "Right away is a relative term."  I kid you not.  I'll let Reuters deliver the final punchline, from a story entitled, "Obama's jobs bill falls to pieces in Congress:"
 
"Nobody is all that excited about the president's jobs bill," a senior Democratic aide said.

So Obama's jobs act doesn't have a single Democratic co-sponsor in the House, and Democrats in the Senate have pulled out all the procedural stops to block even a vote on a bill their party's president insists must be passed right away...and the Obama campaign is blasting out emails ripping Republicans for obstructionism.  Pardon me as I laugh my ass off at the ineptitude. 

Speaking of ineptitude, let's also take a moment to reflect on Senate Democrat's 8-8-8 plan.  No, I'm not talking about liberals' alternative to Herman Cain's tax proposal, I'm talking about the 888-day anniversary of the last time Harry Reid's motley crew deigned to introduce a budget, which they're required by statute to do every year.  Good work, guys.

Op-ed

[R.R.]

There is nothing but silence from XO.

He was so worried about Cain not being able to pass his 9-9-9 plan, but his own boy, Obama, cannot even pass his own legislation with the Dems in power in the senate.

[sirs]

So true, so true.

-------------------------------

The Obama campaign sent out an email today asking supporters to urge Congress to at least vote on the president’s jobs bill almost immediately after Democratic majority leader Harry Reid blocked a vote on the bill in the Senate.

On the Senate floor today, Republican leader Mitch McConnell asked for unanimous consent to proceed on voting on the bill. Reid, who has struggled to find enough votes for the bill in the Democratic caucus, objected to the motion and killed the opportunity for a vote.

About ten minutes later, Jim Messina, Obama’s 2012 campaign manager, emailed this message to supporters:

President Obama is in Dallas today urging Americans who support the American Jobs Act to demand that Congress pass it already.

Though it's been nearly a month since he laid out this plan, House Republicans haven't acted to pass it. And House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is out there actually bragging that they won't even put the jobs package up for a vote -- ever.

It's not clear which part of the bill they now object to: building roads, hiring teachers, getting veterans back to work. They're willing to block the American Jobs Act -- and they think you won't do anything about it.

But here's something you can do: Find Republican members of Congress on Twitter, call them out, and demand they pass this bill.

So will the Obama campaign be asking its supporters to "call out" Harry Reid and "demand" he and Senate Democrats pass the bill?

[Xavier_Onassis]

I have never worried even the teensiest bit about Cain's cockamamie plan. It will never be even presented to Congress, because Cain will never be nominated.

I am all for Obama's plan being passed. If it takes a delay to drum up the votes, that is just fine with me. Harry Reid knows his party and the Senate better than I do.

[sirs]

Not the point now is it.  The point is how disengenuous Obama and the Dems, (& YOU) are being in trying to paint the GOP as obstructing this save-Obama's-job's-bill, when its the Dems that did precisely that

[Xavier_Onassis]

That is simplistic.

What one might expect from a simpleton.

Reid's goal is not to satisfy your snotty musings, it would be to pass the President's bill.
He doubtless understands more about the Senate than you.

[sirs]

You're apparently confusion simplistic with reality.  Not so surprising in your cavenous land of denial, where you can't find even 1 accomplishment that Obama and the Dems can hang their hat on, come 2012

Obama's goal is to save his job
Reid's goal is to try and save his majority without making Obama & the Dems look like completely transparent idiots, that a current vote would have made them out to be
Your job is to keep drinking the coolaide

How many times did Obama demand to "pass it now!!" in that speech a month ago?  Now the head of his own party in the Senate has other "pressing needs", when the GOP was ready to vote??

Hope that coolaide is tasty, at least

[BT]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203476804576612930412626412.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

[sirs]

You're apparently confusion simplistic with reality.  Not so surprising in your cavenous land of denial, where you can't find even 1 accomplishment that Obama and the Dems can hang their hat on, come 2012

Obama's goal is to save his job
Reid's goal is to try and save his majority without making Obama & the Dems look like completely transparent idiots, that a current vote would have made them out to be
Your job is to keep drinking the coolaide

How many times did Obama demand to "pass it now!!" in that speech a month ago?  Now the head of his own party in the Senate has other "pressing needs", when the GOP was ready to vote??

Hope that coolaide is tasty, at least

So, what's the latest to come from the Chosen, at his latest conference, to try and save his job?  NO MENTION of the Dems having actually blocked a vote on his bill.  No, its now how the GOP's plans would "gut his reforms" aimed at wall street, because of course that's what we need more of..government regulations, bureacracy, and its continued "wet blanket" effects on the entire private sector & corporate America, complete with ongoing uncertainty, that literally is preventing business from hiring anyone or investing in anything

ergo....status quo....way to go.....O

[sirs]

So, what's the latest to come from the Chosen, at his latest conference, to try and save his job?  NO MENTION of the Dems having actually blocked a vote on his bill.  No, its now how the GOP's plans would "gut his reforms" aimed at wall street, because of course that's what we need more of..government regulations, bureacracy, and its continued "wet blanket" effects on the entire private sector & corporate America, complete with ongoing uncertainty, that literally is preventing business from hiring anyone or investing in anything

ergo....status quo....way to go.....O

I laughed out loud at Erika's succinct recap of Obama's press conference, but I suppose I should more substantively address some of what the president said today.  In opening remarks and Q&A lasting well over an hour, Obama urged Congress to pass his jobs bill straight away.  Haven't we heard that message somewhere before?  The big-spending, unpaid-for Stimulus 2.0 is dead on arrival in the House, but will reportedly be taken up (finally) by the Democrat-controlled Senate later today, where it faces bipartisan opposition and is expected to fail.  I'm told the vote will likely come before 5:30 pm ET.  Democrats will then mobilize on an alternative piece of legislation that -- surprise! -- imposes a huge tax hike on "millionaires and billionaires."   Harry Reid's proposal won't do a lick of good to create jobs, but it'll make the Occupy Wall Street crowd feel all warm and gooey inside. Oh, and Reid's bill has zero chance of becoming law, as at least one Senate Democrat has already vowed to filibuster it.  Resentment-based Obamanomics at its finest. 

And with that, let's hit on a few major points from the presser:
 
(1) "Pass this bill."   The president trotted out this tiresome trope again today, claiming (falsely) that his plan is "fully paid for."  It's not, and disputes over funding mechanisms is the primary reason that many Democrats have refused to embrace it.  Obama's rhetoric on this point would lead viewers to believe that Republicans control both houses of Congress, attacking Mitch McConnell several times by name, without ever acknowledging the real reason his legislation has stalled in the upper chamber: Democratic opposition. 

He claimed that he'd "love to see" and consider Republican ideas on job creation, if they existed. They do, of course; he just doesn't like them.  Obama scolded the GOP for its supposed stubborn refusal to play ball with him on anything (getting shut out of stimulus, healthcare, and cap & trade discussions tends to do that), yet later acknowledged that Congress has already passed patent reform and will soon act on three long-delayed (by Obama) trade agreements.  Both of these were elements of Obama's jobs plan that he mentioned in his pitiful speech last month.  Now that they've advanced with Republican help, the president is downplaying their significance.

The president said there are bridges across the country that are "literally" crumbling because of inadequate infrastructure spending.  I wonder how accurate this scccccary assertion is, but it still begs the question:  How is this even possible after we spent over $800 Billion just two years ago on a "stimulus" bill that was sold as a gargantuan infrastructure spending effort?  Maybe because only a tiny sliver of that money actually went to the so-called "shovel-ready projects," that we now know didn't really exist.  Don't ask me, ask President Obama.  This is all part of a broader, blindingly obvious point:  Democrats had a near trillion-dollar bite at the stimulus apple in 2009.  They failed.  Americans and Republicans are right to be "cynical" (to invoke the descriptor the President employed repeatedly today) about coughing up another $450 Billion in borrowed money to fund more of the same.  In this pitch for Stimulus 2.0, "body-snatcher Obama" doesn't even acknowledge that Stimulus 1.0 happened, let alone fell flat on its very expensive face.

Finally on this point, Obama eagerly cited the consensus of "independent economists" from "across the spectrum," who supposedly say this bill will "jolt" the economy and create jobs.  It goes without saying that quite a few respected economists dissent from this view, but even if you accept the premise, these optimistic pro-jobs plan economists project that the new spending program would cost between $250,000 and $1.6 million per job "saved or created."  A helpful, efficient use of taxpayer money?  I think not.  Forgive my cynicism.

(2) Occupy Wall Street "expresses the frustrations the American people feel."  Obama expressed tentative solidarity with the incoherent "occupy" mob's general sentiments, but stopped short of an endorsement.  He probably worries things may get violent, and that the public will come to realize this "movement" is largely comprised of the same anti-American, anti-capitalist, Marxist hooligans who throw violent conniptions with regularity.  The president also stated that there have been no indictments or convictions of Wall Street executives in the wake of the economic collapse because their actions were "immoral" and "reckless," but not necessarily illegal.  He praised the Orwellian Dodd-Frank law for righting many of those wrongs.

(3) "Complete confidence" in Eric Holder on Fast & Furious.  Obama repeated the claim that neither he nor Attorney General Holder knew any of the details of the disgraceful gunrunner program that has wrought untold death and destruction -- both in Mexico and on our own soil.  If they'd known what was going on, Obama said, they would have been "very unhappy."  Except....Eric Holder was briefed on the program's details in at least five distinct memos nearly a full year before he told Congress -- under oath -- that he'd first been looped in. 

None of the journalists raised this disrepancy, nor did they ask why White House and DOJ spokesmen berated CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson for accurately reporting this story.

(4) Solyndra "pre-dates me."  In other words, Blame Bush.  Except...Bush-era Energy officials unanimously rejected the failed company's loan application, and many Obama-era bookkeepers recommended doing the same.  Obama again expressed "confidence" that the vetting process for Solyndra was sound, and that taxpayer money was doled out "on the merits."  In this case, the government's "bet" (his word) simply "didn't work out."  Funny, I don't remember all the warnings of bets and risk when the Stimulus 1.0 was being peddled by this administration.  Now, apparently, we're supposed to accept that huge losses and bad federal gambles are necessary facts of life.   This all may sound convincing to someone who isn't familiar with this scandal, but to those of us who are paying attention, it sounds vexingly and intentionally misleading. 

Red flags were deliberately ignored on at least three separate occasions for political reasons, failures were covered up and papered-over, and the bad bet was restructured to help protect a prominent Obama donor.  None of this came up in the press corps' questions, nor (obviously) in the president's answers.  Instead, he quickly pivoted to defending the overall federal "green energy" subsidy program, which he claimed is working well.  There's much evidence to the contrary.  The president's main point seemed to be that we can't let China out-subsidize us on exploring and developing future clean technologies, so we must borrow more money from them to outspend them.  Wonderful.

(5) Delicate dancing on Pakistan.   Our "allies" in Pakistan appear to have harbored Osama bin Laden for years, tried to out a CIA station chief in Islamabad in retaliation for the bin Laden raid, gave China access to US military technology left behind at the compound, released one of bin Laden's close associates, and continue to whip up anti-American sentiment in the national media.  They also have nukes and major strategic value to the US and our allies, especially vis-a-vis Afghanistan.  Obama walked a fine line between condemning Pakistanis for their treachery and emphasizing their indispensability.


In summary:  Pass this bill.  It's paid for.  Republicans have no ideas.  Mitch McConnell controls Congress.  Independent economists love it.  Millionaires and billionaires.  Fair share.  Not my fault.  Japanese Tsunamis.  I didn't know.  Bush.  Pah-kee-stahn.  Pass this bill.  Is it 2012 yet?

[sirs]

Stick a fork in it.  So much for PASS IT NOW, when he can't even get his majority led Democrat Senate to pass it

But watch the Obama, the pundits & MSM paint this as the GOP having somehow blocked it again

[Plane]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203476804576612930412626412.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

   This would have a better chance of passage if it included an exception for Senators.

      Tax law with few loopholes remains unlikly because Congressmen and Senators are still overwhelminly Lawyers who make a lot of income and investments and accept many contributions.

      There is a simple reason that these guys don't want tax law to be simplified.

[Christians4LessGvt]

[Christians4LessGvt]