Skip to main content

View Diary: Mitch McConnell to Save the Day? (59 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, McConnell is the only hope (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CTMET, dougymi, winsock, VClib, buckstop

    of getting any deal, either now or after January 1, I think.  

    If McConnell can work out a deal with Reid that gets, say, 25 Republican votes in the Senate, that will give Boehner cover to allow a vote in the House, and that will give some Republicans in the House -- not the extreme right wing -- to vote for it as well.  That's the only way I see anything even coming up for a vote in the Senate or the House -- if it really is bipartisan, in the sense that it alienates the very progressive left, alienates the Tea Party right, and gets the votes of maybe half the Democrats and half the Republicans in the Senate, and the same in the house.  

    As far as I can see, a bill that is capable of garnering only a few Republican votes will not even get to the floor for a vote.  Certainly not in the House.  McConnell's backing of a bill is the only thing that I can see that will mean Boehner allows a bill to come to the floor of the House.  

    •  Help me Obie Wan McConnell you're my only hope. (9+ / 0-)

      The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

      by CTMET on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 06:14:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Unfortunately, that's where things are right now. (0+ / 0-)

        If you want those 2 million people to keep their unemployment benefits, if you want the middle class not to owe a few thousand more this April on their 2012 returns (due to the AMT patch expiring), if you want taxes not to go up on everyone, Reid and McConnell are your best hope right now.  

        •  they can't retroactively change 2012's rates (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mark Mywurtz


          the rates are already published and printed... and deducted.

          "Kossacks are held to a higher standard. Like Hebrew National hot dogs." - blueaardvark

          by louisev on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 07:56:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Rates (0+ / 0-)

            This isn't changing rates, it's the AMT which is something of a different tax system though not.

          •  Yep, the 2012 tax bill will be affected for (0+ / 0-)

            millions of families, down to two income families of about $75,000. That is because the AMT patch expires December 31 -- and if that is not addressed, the "old" AMT will apply for 2012 income.  Millions of families will owe a few thousand more this April 15 when they file their 2012 returns.  

            It's been discussed in the media, but hasn't gotten a lot of attention in the public.  See, for example, here and here and here.

            •  Apparently, the premise of AMT should have but (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WineRev

              did not include some form of COLA or inflation element, so the minimum income for it has been dropping year after year, because the Congress patched, not effective THIS year, instead of fixing, add COLA from date X, and updating the floor numbers. There have been people with incomes as low as IIRC 28K who have been pulled in.

              The AMT is a scheme that was devised to limit the effectiveness of particular deductions beyond a certain minimum level in figuring income tax. At some point in the past, a Congress decided that people from certain states or with certain deductions were getting unfairly large deductions, and this was the fix. States with income taxes generated too many deductions and there were thought to be too  many medical deductions, that sort of deductions. So that under AMT, no matter how many real deductions of these kinds you had, you had to go back and refigure your income and tax as if you only had a much smaller amount. Basically this penalized all states with income taxes, and all people who had really financially serious medical conditions not covered by insurance. Guess what color those states are politically.

              •  President Richard Nixon (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PeterHug

                proposed the AMT and Congress agreed. Nixon said he thought it was "un-American" for a US citizen to work the tax code in such a way so he or she ended up paying NOTHING in taxes. My, how Republicans have changed.

                BTW, the first year the AMT went into effect (1969 or 1970 I believe)? Total number of filers affected?  155!

                Shalom.

                "God has given wine to gladden the hearts of people." Psalm 104:15

                by WineRev on Sat Dec 29, 2012 at 04:36:56 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  more like "let's trust Senator Palpatine" (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior, Mike Kahlow, LordMike, RUNDOWN, CTMET

        A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

        by dougymi on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 06:25:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Problem is that Boener won't survive with a 25 (4+ / 0-)

      count GOP vote. He needs upwards of 100, 125 so that he doesn't pass a democratic bill.

      It's tough to be John Bohener today.

      I suspect he doesn't survive the New Year.

      " The whole world is about three drinks behind" Humphrey Bogart.

      by flatford39 on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 06:22:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Unfortunately (5+ / 0-)

        His replacement might be worse than he is.  Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor etc....

        My Brothers Keeper

        by Reetz on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 06:25:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think that if it gets the McConnell (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior, LordMike

        approval, and half the Senate Republicans, he'll get that 100 Republicans in the House.  

        Getting McConnell and half the Senate Republicans allows it to be labeled a bipartisan bill.  A bipartisan bill can get 100 House Republican votes.  A Democratic bill, where the Republicans just cave, can't get 100 Republican votes in the House.  

      •  I think if the Bohner allows the vote in the House (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Im a frayed knot

        it passes with a fairly good-sized majority.
            It'll likely get all the Democrats, and somewhere around 100 or so Republicans because it's a popular measure with their constituents.
           Final vote would be something around 290-140, give or take a dozen or so votes.

        "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

        by elwior on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 06:28:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  And the Orangeman survives because nobody else (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Im a frayed knot, FistJab, gffish

        really wants his job at this point.

        "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

        by elwior on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 06:29:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The Pubs can vote "Present." (0+ / 0-)

        No Republican has to vote for it. You just need at least 25 Republicans to be absent or to vote present and the bill can pass with only Democratic votes (assuming every Dem votes for it.)
           All Boehner has to do is bring it to the floor, if he can get 25 Pubs to agree to the scheme.
           21 Republicans were defeated in the election and I would bet that most of them won't be coming back for a lame duck session.

    •  No he is part of the problem (8+ / 0-)

      The Republicans understand that if they stick together they will increase their chances of getting a better deal because the democrats will get antsy and cave. McConnell knows this and all the democrats who keep saying to split the difference and go to McConnell don't understand that this good/bad cop dynamic plays right into the republican hands.  Boehner and McConnell are working together and if you assume one can be a better partner you give them the power to set the terms of the deal.

      This whole dynamic is what has to change; democrats need to simply stop caving so the public doesn't keep thinking that democrats are wrong because they keep caving. It just validates the republican position. The republicans keep expecting to get their way eventually like in the debt ceiling deal. And if they don't get their way at first democrats will get antsy and think of splitting the difference, and then that becomes the starting point for negotiations.

    •  You dont think Boehner will feel (0+ / 0-)

      pressure to bring it to a floor vote right at Dec 31st deadline or beyond it?

      To me that's what would get a bill a floor vote, not the number of GOP senators who would support it.

      •  Nope, I don't. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike

        I think Boehner's committed to his caucus that he won't bring a bill to the floor that doesn't have "majority of the majority" -- the "Hastert Rule."

        I think that after the failure of Plan B, there's no way that Boehner brings a bill to the floor that is going to pass with all the Democrats and only a handful of Republicans voting for it.  Not. Gonna. Happen.  

        Pressure from the President is meaningless to the vast majority of House Republicans.  They are far more concerned about a primary challenger from the right than they are concerned about a challenger in the general election.  And November of 2014 is a long, long time away.  

        •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)

          I dont think it's pressure from the president, but the situation.

          A bill has passed the Senate that President says he will sign. We are now at the Jan 1st deadline or slightly past it. The markets are watching, and will likely tank if Boehner doesnt put the bill on the floor.

          In that situation, does he put the bill on the floor? I think so.

          He might not whip the votes for it, but he would put it to a vote.

          I think his speakership is likely safe in any circumstance, mostly because I cant see anyone else wanting the job.  

          •  I agree his speakership is safe regardless (0+ / 0-)

            I still think there's no chance that he puts a bill on the floor that gets all the Democrats and very few Republicans.  That would be a partisan Democratic Bill.  He won't let a partisan Democratic Bill pass the House.  He has no incentive at all to do that.  It would hurt him with the constituency who voted for him in the first place.  That would be something that could bring about a primary challenger from the right in 2014.  

            Now, if there's a bill that could reasonably be seen as bipartisan -- like it gets about half the Senate Republicans and would get about half the House Republicans -- that he WOULD bring to the floor.  

    •  If he's the only hope then we're already (3+ / 0-)

      doomed.

      Relying on Mitch McConnell for anything is just ridiculous.  Any Democrat who says such a thing should be reminded of what he's been saying and doing for the past 4 years.

      McConnell is getting credit already from the media and it's all a fabricated lie.

      Why are any Republicans receiving credit for anything?  They don't do anything.

      •  Nobody's giving anybody "credit." (0+ / 0-)

        I'm just being realistic.  How can you get a bill to pass in both Houses?  A bipartisan bill from Reid and McConnell is the only way I see a bill getting through both Houses.  

        •  "McConnell is the only hope..." (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MBramble

          That's not giving him credit?

          Oh, that's right, you're just being a realist.  I'm sorry, but where have you been for the last 4 years?

          McConnell has been at the front of every obstruction in our government, but now he's the only hope?

          McConnell is not the only hope?  Actually, there must be several House Republicans who deserve that title more than McConnell.  As the Senate minority leader he doesn't deserve any of the attention he's getting.

          When Boehner tells America it is up to the Senate to pass something, he's lying in more ways than one.

          •  What other Republican right now has the (0+ / 0-)

            influence to get a deal through Congress?  

            The "several House Republicans" can't get a bill to the floor of the House for a vote.  Only Boehner can do that.  And McConnell is the one single Republican in the best position to have enough influence to get something that Boehner will bring to the floor for a vote.  

            The "only hope" is not an endorsement of anything.  It is simply a statement that if he doesn't get a deal with Reid, the chances of a bill getting a vote in the House are pretty much nill.  If Reid and McConnell reach a deal that gets about half of the Senate Republicans, that will put pressure on Boehner to bring the bill to the floor of the House, and that will give 100 or so House Republicans license to vote for it.  So McConnell is in the best position of any Republican to get a bill that can get through Congress.    He can be the devil incarnate - but he's still the Republican in the best position to make legislation actually happen.  

            That's just the fact of life politically right now.  

            •  The Senate already passed a bill. (0+ / 0-)

              Be that as it may, it is the House of Representatives responsibility to pass tax legislation.  It is not the Senate's.  When Boehner passed that responsibility to the Senate he not only failed to do his job, he failed to fulfill his oath to uphold the constitution.

              Like I said, he's lying in more ways than one.

              If I were Reid or McConnell, I wouldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole.

              I can see the headlines now, Senate over reaches, betrays their oath to uphold the constitution by usurping the Constitutional power given to the House.

              I'd watch it if I were them.

              •  Actually, not exactly true. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                VClib
                The Senate already passed a bill.
                The Senate's action in passing that bill was unconstitutional, in violation of Article 1, Section 7 because it was a revenue bill that did not originate in the House.  Immediately after that bill was passed, it was Blue Slipped, which means it's been dead since then.  In fact, that's why Senate Republicans did not filibuster it back then -- because it was in violation of the constitution and would be Blue Slipped.  So there is no "Senate Bill" out there. The House can do a procedural work around, like putting the Senate bill into one they originate, or taking up an identical bill introduced in the House by Democrats, but that requires a majority vote in the House and another vote (that can be filibustered) in the Senate.    Unless and until they vote to do that, there is no Senate bill waiting on a House vote.  

                What's going on now is that the House did pass a Republican bill a while back extending all the tax rates.  If Reid and McConnell reach an agreement, they will likely take that House bill and amend it -- but that requires another vote of the Senate.  

          •  In order to be a hero (0+ / 0-)

            all McConnell has to do is not deliberately sabotage the country like he usually does.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site