Tax bill gets 60 votes, set to pass first Senate hurdle

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: MSNBC

WASHINGTON — Legislation to avert a Jan. 1 increase in income tax rates has gained 60 votes in the Senate, the level needed to advance toward a final vote.

The roll call is continuing, and the test vote is not final. But the bipartisan show of support is a strong indication the measure will be passed and sent to the House, possibly as early as Tuesday.

The bill provide a two-year reprieve in the tax increases that are scheduled to take effect on Jan. 1 at all income levels. It also reduces Social Security taxes for every wage earner in 2011 and extends an expiring program of jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed.

The bill would provide a two-year reprieve in the tax increases scheduled to take effect on Jan. 1 at all income levels, reduce Social Security taxes for every wage earner in 2011 and extend an expiring program of jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed. The estimated cost, $858 billion over two years, would be added to already-huge federal deficits.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40637568/ns/politics-capitol_hill/

[itsrobert]

1. Thank God it passed

so far.

:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[cleanhippie]

3. Damn, thats HARSH!

But not necessarily undeserved.

[rhett o rick]

31. God favors the rich. They earn it. nm

[L. Coyote]

4. ***** Official LIVE BLOG Senate = Tax Cuts Debate II *****

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9765534

[dkf]

5. We can only get 60 votes with this package?

The Republicans still hate it?

[Amerigo Vespucci]

7. They hate the fact that the cuts are for 2 years, not "permanent."

There have been a number of them stepping forward in the last couple of days with that complaint.

[TheEuclideanOne]

13. Yep, so give them what they ask for and they still hold it against you.

What assholes! And all the democrats voted in favor of it too? Geez. You know, it is not as though it is only Obama pushing this ridiculous bill, but what about all of these democrats supporting it too? Sick! There needs to be some accountability here.

[rhett o rick]

19. This is what happens when you deal with blackmailers. nm

[smiley]

28. The only time the two parties agree...

is when it comes to screwing the american people. Which is what this bill will do in the future if it to pass.

[RKP5637]

22. The damn R's always complain. One could give them 100% of what they want and

they would still complain.

[TheEuclideanOne]

34. He did

They are

[earthside]

33. Balderdash.

No matter what they say publicly, the Repuglicans LOVE the fact that they get to run on being in favor of tax cuts for everyone two years from now during a presidential election year.

[bongbong]

35. Deficit concerns

repigs have found the new Wedge Issue of "Deficits!" that they can trot out whenever there is an election coming up. It avoids the messier Wedge Issues like abortion.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

8. Obama is for it

and the Repubs are against Obama.

[n2doc]

9. This allows for maximum grandstanding

But I am sure they had it all worked out ahead of time. If someone had not voted yes, someone else would have changed their minds about it. They know that this deal stinks for the average American.

[rhett o rick]

15. As long as the Democrats do their work for them, they can hate it forever. Now the Demo's own this

piece of shit.

[Devil_Fish]

44. They hate that it extends un-employment benifits.

[No Elephants]

85. Really? They've voted to extend UI 4 or 5 times before this.

[n2doc]

6. Always easy to pass something that helps the rich and divides the dems

Always.

[Sherman A1]

10. Do we have a list of the Yeas & Nays?

[Amerigo Vespucci]

11. Couldn't find one yet...still looking. n/t

[L. Coyote]

12. This only means the Senate is closing debate, albeit it is seen as a test vote. The HOUSE

will determine the outcome and the final version of any bill.

[Still a Democrat]

14. A victory for our party and working class people

K&R

[rhett o rick]

17. This is a disaster for working people. $800 billion of their money is going to

the billionaires. How can you be happy about that? And this will continue to happen, give the working class a dollar and the ruling class a billion. This is not a sustainable method of operation.

[Still a Democrat]

20. 13.5% of the package goes to the wealthy

Through estate or income tax cuts

[rhett o rick]

30. Well I am glad you're happy. You and Mitch. nm

[bongbong]

36. Nope

Wrong, over 50% of the benefits go to the richest 1%

[Still a Democrat]

43. Link?

n/t

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

84. Iow, 700% of their 2%.

It goes without saying that that 11.5% is going to come out of someone elses hide.

[mike_c]

27. explain to me again why the wealthiest Americans deserve more income redistribution...

...from the working class?

[defendandprotect]

40. ..which we have to cover by borrowing from China and Japan ...!!!

[martymar64]

42. In what respect Charlie?

This bill does not create job one and adds almost a trillion to the deficit to China.

Now, explain how this will help the American Worker. Especially the one that make between $10-20K per year who will see their taxes actually go up. How will it help them?
Also how will this bill help the 99er's?

This bill sucks ass. Pure and simple, and you suckers fell for it.

[Scurrilous]

16. K & R

:thumbsup:

[no limit]

18. Another trillion dollars our children will get to pay. WOOOOOHOOOOO!!!!!11

[progressoid]

21. Phew! I was worried if I died my children would be burdened with a huge tax debt because of my asset

[EndElectoral]

23. A trillion bucks of debt...for upper class tax cuts...I'm sick.

[FailureToCommunicate]

24. We've been hoodwinked! We've been had! We've been took! We've been

led astray, led amok! We've been bamboozled!

-As a great American once said.

[eridani]

25. Disgusting. n/t

[fascisthunter]

26. more tax cuts for the rich.... bigger deficit... yay!

sick and stupid

[NorthCarolina]

32. And a plan to REALLY weaken Social Security too!! A DLC/GOP wet dream. nt

[bergie321]

29. Do you think

That Democrats would get a clue that their base is against this if we all switched our party registration from Dem to Green?

[Jefferson23]

37. Oh goodie, now I can sleep easier knowing the wealthiest remain secure. n/t

[defendandprotect]

38. NOTE: Obama has finally broken the 60 vote block ...!!!

:eyes:

[defendandprotect]

39. This is right wing criminal .. it will destroy more jobs -- and Social Security ....

[tpsbmam]

41. Only eight senators "stood against the deal" (named)

and here they are:

The vote is being held open to accommodate senators arriving in town, but the package already had 66 votes in favor of moving forward shortly after 4:15. Eight senators stood against the deal: Republican John Ensign (R-Nev.); Democrats Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Russ Feingold (Wisc.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Pat Leahy (Vt.) and Mark Udall (Colo.); and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who spoke for hours against the bill on Friday.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/13/senate-tax-cuts-for-rich-move-forward_n_796108.html

[Omaha Steve]

45. Tax cut bill easily clears Senate hurdle

Source: MSNBC

WASHINGTON — Far-reaching legislation to avert a Jan. 1 income-tax increase for millions won overwhelming support in a Senate test vote on Monday, backed by an uneasy and unusual alliance between the White House and lawmakers in both parties.

Even before the vote was complete, President Barack Obama said the show of support "proves that both parties can in fact work together to grow our economy and look out for the American people."

Senate passage, expected within a day or two, would set up a final showdown in the House between Obama and liberals in his own party who want the White House to scale back the billions the bill includes in relief ticketed for the rich.

In his remarks, the president gave no indication he was willing to accept further changes to the measure he negotiated with senior Republicans.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40637568/ns/politics-capitol_hill/

[arcane1]

46. "gave no indication he was willing to accept further changes to the measure"

Does that mean he would veto the bill if the top 2%'s cuts were removed? :shrug:

I'm guessing the answer is "no"

[CJCRANE]

51. I thought that bill (without upper rate cuts) had already failed

in the Senate.

[bergie321]

52. "failed"

Now defined as getting 53 votes. Incidentally, that is more votes than the second round of Bush tax cuts for the rich passed with.

Pass the middle class tax cuts with reconciliation.

[TheWraith]

54. You can't pass more than one reconciliation bill per year.

It was already used for healthcare reform.

[FBaggins]

58. Per calendar year or per fiscal year?

[TheWraith]

60. Calendar year. nt

[former9thward]

83. That is not the problem.

Only can use reconciliation with a budget resolution. There is no current budget that has passed. The budget is being funded by a continuing resolution.

[jaxx]

47. This is also 13 months of unemployment extensions.

It was worth it.

[Doremus]

55. When the SS 'holiday' is extended and expanded until SS falls apart

come back and tell us how those 13 months of unemployment extensions were worth it.

:eyes:

[jaxx]

59. I'll tell you now, it was worth it.

And LOL at the conspiracy. Did anyone ever mention that not everything the pundits write is true?

[TheWraith]

63. And when winged monkeys start flying out of my ass...

...oh wait. That isn't going to happen. :eyes:

[skyounkin]

56. No, it wasn't.

[Hawkeye-X]

61. for a 2% tax holiday on SS payments?

No I don't think so. It immediately increases the deficit by 120b EACH year.

Hawkeye-X

[TheWraith]

64. Uh, no. There's at least two wrong things in that statement.

"It immediately increases the deficit by 120b EACH year."

1. The recompense does not have to be instantaneous.

2. It's a 1 year event, not "each year."

3. Even if it did increase the deficit, who the hell cares in the middle of a recession? Have we become the Tea Party all of a sudden?

[Hawkeye-X]

70. Think about it - the Republicans will own the word "tax increase" and the 2% SS tax holiday

is not for one year, it might as well be permanent. Unless the D's grow some spine or balls, and increase taxes on the rich - gross income instead of net income and in FDR levels.

When was the *LAST* time a Congress, (either a D/R) made a across-the-board tax increase?

Hawkeye-X

[TheWraith]

73. Try speaking in complete sentences.

Then you might get be able to argue on ideas.

[brentspeak]

82. What an intelligent rejoinder

When confronted with inescapable facts -- insult the one who presented them.

You really convinced me.

[customerserviceguy]

80. You are so very right

The Bush tax cuts were supposed to be temporary. No doubt the Repukes will come up with another reason to continue to gut Social Security at the end of 2011.

All for 13 months of unemployment benefits that won't help the 99'ers, anyway. And there will be a lot more 99'ers at the end of 2011 who won't get shit.

[No Elephants]

87. I don't believe it was for unemployment insurance. Please see Reply 86.

[aquart]

74. Sigh.

Lunch money for a pittance of unemployed middle class workers will NOT jumpstart the economy. It will merely keep local supermarkets and stores going. Keep the pittance in their homes UNTIL IT RUNS OUT AND THERE ARE STILL NO JOBS BECAUSE THE RICH WON'T INVEST IN SUCH AN UNSOUND ECONOMY.

And then they will be 99ers with nowhere to turn.

But thanks for your support.

[TheWraith]

75. Your beliefs aren't facts.

People who study actual facts know that unemployment benefits are among the BEST ways to stimulate economic growth.

[Hawkeye-X]

62. for a 2% tax holiday on SS payments?

No I don't think so. It immediately increases the deficit by 120b EACH year.

Hawkeye-X

[No Elephants]

86. No one believes Rethugs were going to vote against extending benefits, esp. this close to

Christmas. See also, Reply 85.

[whosinpower]

48. He is going to apply pressure to.....

The 52 democrats who have lost their seats. Combined with all the republicans, it should clear the house.

Understand? The ones who have been fired will be responsible for this abhhorrent piece of crap. The ones who are left holding the bag are the ones who will take the blame. Republicans are rubbing their grubby hands with glee over this.

[FBaggins]

53. So you invent a fictional scenario and then tell us how to interpret it?

Support in the House is much higher than anything that would need arm twisting.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[sirthomas66]

67. Let's see who ends up right--

[FBaggins]

66. So you get called out for a strawman argument and you move on to a bigger one(

Where did I say anything about Social Security (or even supporting the bill)?

All I said was that our scenario was ridiculous. It isn't a handful of arm-twisted democrats plus all the republicans. It's closer to a majority of democrats. If anything, the arm twisting went the other way since the lame duck democrats were reportedly not given a caucus vote.

[sirthomas66]

71. If it was a handful or the entire Sentate, the package was pro-offered

by a Democrat President and will be okayed by a Democratic Senate and House. Do you really think the Republicans will not use this in 2012? I can almost hear their words. "We don't feel that the Tax Holiday to Social Security as authorized by the Democratic Party should expire, thereby raising taxes of the American People."

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

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

[sirthomas66]

79. With the deletion of my lead post, I am not interested in talking to

you anymore. My educated guess is this: the extension of the Tax Holiday will be voted on in November to December, 2011. Both the Republicans and the Democrats will vote to keep it the same--because the first wants to; the second will tag along. The amount will be the same because there will be no COL increase again in 2011. That $2120.00 will turn to $4240.00 of non-funding by the end of the second year. Figuring just those two years combined, the future value of this non-funding into the account for 20 years @ 3% interest=7657.90, 30 years=10291.59, 40 years=13831.04.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[whosinpower]

76. I got that from Washington Post

And we will see won't we.

If it is the 52 democrats who vote with the republicans - then you will know how the wind blew.
The caucus already rejected it. So, what is with this high support. It isn't there - unless Obama can give them cover by using the 52 who are gone anyways.....and he will.

[FBaggins]

77. The caucus only "rejected" it after excluding those 52 votes.

Which makes it pretty clear that the position didn't even represent a majority of the caucus.

[truedelphi]

49. What the President means when he uses the term "the show of support"

Four billionaires and sixteen millionaires called and told him how their Campaign Funding Checks were in the mail.

In other related news, Oprah gives a "747" to every member of her audience, as with this legislation underway, she can afford it now.

[autorank]

50. The plot to destroy social security

http://agonist.org/fdrrollsover

Moving along according to plan...

[mvd]

68. I guess the House can still make changes

And if they do, I want the same kind of treatment from the President that he gave the Repukes.

There was no way IMO that the Repukes wouldn't extend unemployment benefits if we kept the clock running right until Christmas. I'd gladly give up a very small tax cut, too. These two more years of tax cuts make it harder for spending on infrastructure, the social safety net, etc. And in two years, I think there will probably be another extension. It's playing right into Repuke hands. I have great concerns about the unemployment benefits, but the more I thought about it, the more the Repukes were backed into a corner. And we'll never get our message right, it seems.

[No Elephants]

88. I agree. Please see reply 86.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

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

[placton]

81. my sentators from MI both voted for this

I will now work to deny them renomination, and/or re-election. Fuck it.