With little more than a week for lawmakers to avert huge tax increases and spending cuts, attention is turning from the gridlocked House to the Senate, where some Republicans on Sunday endorsed President Obama’s call for a partial deal to insulate most Americans from the tax increases but defer a resolution on spending.Uh:
Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas and Johnny Isakson of Georgia, both Republicans, implored Senate leaders to reach an accommodation with Mr. Obama when Congress returns on Thursday, even if that meant that taxes would go up for those with high incomes and that spending cuts would be put off.
Mrs. Hutchison, appearing on the CBS program “Face the Nation,” said the tax cuts signed into law by President George W. Bush should be extended “at a reasonable salary level.”
- I must have missed the part of the Constitution where the Senate passes a bill and it goes to the president's desk.
- Speaking of the Senate passing legislation, the Senate has already passed legislation doing exactly what these guys are asking for. Back in July, the Senate approved extending all Bush tax cuts for income up to $250,000.
- Yes, these guys voted against the bill that they are now endorsing.
- But again, even if the Senate passed the bill all over again, it wouldn't matter, because there's this thing called the House of Representatives. And I don't seem to recall either of the these guys calling on the House to take action when it mattered.
But despite all that insanity, at least we're not talking about spending cuts. Sure, we might not to be talking about doing the things we really need to do to strengthen our economy—things like extending unemployment insurance, increasing infrastructure spending, and taking care of Hurricane Sandy victims—but at least we're not talking about how to inflict maximal harm.