Skip to main content

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) speaks during a joint news conference with Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY)(L) and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) (R) on the Republican Filibuster of Reid's debt plan on Capitol Hill in Washington July 29, 2011
Senate Democrats have a plan to replace the sequester through the end of the year ...
Senate Democrats have settled on a final plan to replace 10 months' worth of sequestration cuts, aides said on Thursday.

The plan, called the American Family Economic Protection Act, pinpoints $120 billion of savings, spit evenly between cuts and revenues, that would replace the sequestration-designated cuts to defense and domestic spending until the end of December.

... but even if all 55 Democrats vote for the measure, the question is whether five Republicans will join with them to defeat an expected filibuster.

The plan calls for $65 billion dollars in cuts, half from military spending, and half by cutting subsidies to large agriculture businesses. It also calls for $55 billion in new revenue by enacting the Buffett Rule to make sure top earners pay at least as much as everyone else and by closing loopholes for oil companies and companies that ship jobs overseas.

Originally posted to The Jed Report on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 12:56 PM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  So What. (17+ / 0-)

    Say the Senate miraculously passes this bill.  The House will not.

    Fact is the Republican Party wants to destroy America.   We should call them Traitors over and over and over.

    •  It's not America they want to destroy. (5+ / 0-)

      What they want is to nip government by the people in the bud. Because, if that takes off, if the people start selecting their own candidates for public office and funding the publicity required to advertise the best candidates, then the elected officials will find themselves demoted from petty potentate to stewards or public servants.

      On the other hand, we should not be surprised, even though the biblical exegists claim that the parable of the unjust steward is hard to understand. It's only difficult because Jesus, having already noted that the steward had been dismissed, expressed some understanding of the steward's using his remaining authority to write down what his master was owed in order to gain some credit with the debtors whom he expected to cushion his fall. Jesus' message was clearly that, despite the possibility of additional loss, an unjust steward needs to be fired. That really is the only proper response.

      So, the stewards on Capital Hill, who are misusing our national assets to give favors to cronies, need to be fired. Period.

      We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

      by hannah on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 01:45:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry they do want to destroy America, our (9+ / 0-)

        America.

      •  The Republican plan (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        glitterscale, qofdisks

        The plan that you just described Will destroy America, so the original point still holds.

        •  The America in which the people govern is (0+ / 0-)

          still a figment of the imagination, an aspiration.  We've never been there yet.

          If some of our minority communities are not entirely sympathetic to the plaint of injustice, selective law enforcement, economic oppression and serial deprivation, it's because they've "been there, done that."
          Schadenfreude is hard to resist when you've been unjustly victimized. It's hard not to say, "good, let them feel what it's like, for a while."
          "Turn around is fair play" and all that.

          The Cons have an advantage in that they know they don't want what's on offer for the simple reason that it's different from what they think they have. Whatever they have makes them feel secure and any change that's proposed makes them feel insecure. When the Cons say, "not change we can believe in," what they are saying is that they don't want change. Period.
          Children, typically, go through this stage. That's why it looks familiar. But children also grow out of it, so we expect the Cons to do that, as well. But they won't. We also expect people's verbal utterances to be positively related to their actions. But they won't be.

          It is quite possible for what people say to be totally unrelated to what they do. That doesn't mean they are lying. It is possible for them to be totally unaware of their own actions. Indeed, I think we see that in senile dementia and people suffering from Alzheimer's. Indeed, it is possible that as people become less physically adept, behavioral patterns that were present all along become more apparent and we put lables on what we ignored before.
          For example, the logical response to an obstreperous person, one who resists doing anything that's asked, is not to ask and count on imitation to elicit the desired behavior.
          Of course, when such a person becomes incompetent and even incontinent, that response is no longer sufficient and we have to resort to "Depends."

          If the question arises why we have pre-Alzheimer's people serving in Congress, I think the answer is because, whatever their practical limitations, these people are verbally adept and don't have any trouble speaking the speech as it is prepared for them.  Since there is no connection between speech and action, they have no inhibition about saying what people want--and saying it as often as needed.

          We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

          by hannah on Fri Feb 15, 2013 at 02:31:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Right You Are (0+ / 0-)

        Whether it's Rand Paul and his libertarian ilk, or the crapulent Christers, Republicans want nothing more than to destroy the American economy. The Libs because they think having clean air & water, wholesome food, education and medical care renders us weak and unhappy. The Christers think it will bring on the rapture and they'll all get to go to heaven and see Sarah Palin in the nude. Unfortunately for us, a majority of Democrats are sitting on the fence, afraid to either join the Republicans or support their own party.

  •  Sorry Reid, but I'm not falling for it... (21+ / 0-)

    You know damn well this isn't going to pass, and because you sold out on the filibuster reform this is just empty grandstanding.  

    Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 01:35:46 PM PST

  •  May Only Need 51 Votes (6+ / 0-)

    If the Dems. are smart, they will include language in the legislation which will allow them to employ "Budget Reconciliation" rules, that will provide a means to get around a filibuster.

    "Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?"

    by Doctor Who on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 01:47:16 PM PST

  •  Are you kidding me..... (7+ / 0-)

    These guys will filibuster a potty break!

  •  One more Epic Fail by Reid.. (6+ / 0-)

    I'm getting so sick of this DINO...

    Dont Mourn, Organize !#konisurrender

    by cks175 on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:36:30 PM PST

  •  Here we go again. Sham government. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Beelzebud, qofdisks, eztempo

    Harry Reid is incompetent.  Is he really on their side?

    An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

    by don mikulecky on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:37:52 PM PST

  •  Wow!. If Harry hadn't reformed the filibuster this (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, qofdisks, eztempo, Apost8

    bill wouldn't have had a chance to...oh, yeah.

    "They will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the American economy. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip."

    by TofG on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:37:53 PM PST

  •  What a joke, this is the best they could do? n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens
  •  What are we talking about? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks, Odysseus
    The plan calls for $65 billion dollars in cuts, half from military spending, and half by cutting subsidies to large agriculture businesses.
    First of all, I'm pretty sure you meant $55 billion. 27.5 + 27.5 = 55.

    Second, what does "subsidies to large agriculture businesses" mean in practice? It ends "direct payments, which are currently provided regardless of yields, prices, or farm income". I fear that will not only hit large agribusiness in its effects.

    I don't want small farmers targeted even as collateral damage to the wording, nor do I think the price of "fiscal discipline" to be higher food prices when there's the possibility of things like a financial transaction tax.

    More detail is needed.

    it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses

    by Addison on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:38:18 PM PST

  •  Picking Big Ag's pocket? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, maryabein, qofdisks

    Won't even get 55 Dems.  DOA.

    "Nonsense!" said Alice, very loudly and decidedly, and the Queen was silent.

    by RIposte on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:38:27 PM PST

  •  Reid's plan (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aquarius40

    may be to give them the rope with the hopes that they screw up bad enough that we overcome the gerrymander in 2014.
    If we do, then get rid of the filibuster. If it goes bad the the Reps take the Senate they'll think twice about getting rid of it as even with the House they won't get past Obama.

    This plan is a non-starter because big ag won't put up with it. Pure press.

    If you didn't like the news today, go out and make some of your own.

    by jgnyc on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:38:33 PM PST

  •  Nice plan, how do they get 60 votes? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    You KNOW the Republicans will filibuster.

  •  Filibuster reform? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joe B, eztempo

    Is there any amount of filibuster or filibuster of a specific legislation that might prompt Reid to revisit reform? Like this legislation.

  •  Does Reid actually think Republicans (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PorridgeGun, Joe B, qofdisks

    won't just pass filibuster reform the exact fucking second they get the Senate back, which they will eventually.  

    He needs to just fucking do it.   Why wait for them to do it on their watch, which they certainly will.  

    The tent got so big it now stands for nothing.

    by Beelzebud on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 03:57:16 PM PST

    •  Republican's don't need filibuster reform (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FredNietzsche, qofdisks, eztempo

      When they call for an "upperdown vote", Democrats will avoid filibustering.

    •  He missed his one and only chance to pass it... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CriticallyDamped, Joe B, eztempo

      in the final hour. Couldn't pass it now even if he did have a change of heart

      ...which I don't believe for a nano-second.

      "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

      by Sybil Liberty on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 04:07:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Reid blew his chance. Idiot blew it. Pissed. eom (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CriticallyDamped, qofdisks, eztempo

      Dont Mourn, Organize !#konisurrender

      by cks175 on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 04:11:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Reid knows exactly what he is doing (0+ / 0-)

      and what he wants. He is not inept just not on the side of the 99%

    •  Yes. He does think this. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      qofdisks

      It's why he's not only a cowardly, treacherous fool, he's also stupid.

      It's Stockholm syndrome after living through the Bush and Clinton administrations.  It's fear that if he actually acts like a liberal, some Limbaugh fan will try to kill him.  Or, even worse, they'll say bad things about him on the TV.

      Sometimes I think Limbaugh's most loyal listeners are the Democratic Politicians who listen out of fear.

    •  The last time they controlled the Senate they (0+ / 0-)

      didn't so I really don't believe they will if they get control in 2014.  Seems like Senators on BOTH sides of the aisle are loathe to get rid of minority power lest it come back and bite them in the backside the next time they are in the minority.  

      •  Democrats won't abuse the filibuster (0+ / 0-)

        For some reason, it just doesn't happen that Democrats (under Harry Reid) abuse the filibuster the way McConnell's Rethugs habitually do, so when (and if) the Republicans get a Senate majority, ol' Mitch McConnell really doesn't have anything to worry about.

        •  That is not true (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          eztempo

          Dems filibustered a ton of Bush judges.  It is what caused the whole discussion of changing the Senate Rules in the first place.  If it's unfair and unseemly to filibuster Dem judges and appointees, then it's unfair the other way too.

          That said, if a conservative supreme court justice unexpectedly passes away during Obama's second term, it's probably 50-50 the GOP would filibuster and just refuse to let another Justice be appointed until Obama is gone.  There have been long-term vacancies on the Court before.

          •  What's "a ton"? (0+ / 0-)

            The filibuster of 10 appellate judges by Democrats is what precipitated Republican talk of a "nuclear option" to take away the ability of Senators to filibuster a judicial appointment.

            McConnell's current cloture motion count: 392 since the beginning of the 110th Congress.

            It's true that Bush nominated a whole lot of partisan ideologues to the appellate bench, and ran into determined resistance -- slow-walked committee work, actual filibusters -- on 35 to 39 of them by my quick count, including the ten above.  But really, in the nature of scale, McConnell's obstruction of all the work of the Senate is different in quality, not just quantity.

  •  Has he cleared this plan with President McConnell? (4+ / 0-)

    Unless and until McConnell signs off on it, this is all nothing but another of Harry's little pipe dreams.

    •  This is the attitude that is killing us (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PorridgeGun, qofdisks, eztempo

      We need to pass Democratic legislation that people want, and then raise a holy, flaming corn-laden SHITSTORM when Republicans block it.  

      And then we need to do it the next day.  And the next.  And the next.

      We need the Republicans going on TV answering questions about why they want babies to die in the street.  We need Republicans to be SHAMED about blocking legislation.

      And that can't happen if we don't even bother to bring things to a vote unless we get a promise from Lucy that we'll really get to kick the ball this time.

      •  Good lord, this is sad (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        eztempo
        We need Republicans to be SHAMED about blocking legislation.
        You still think that Republicans have the capacity for shame? Have you read today's headlines?

        Fox News ridicules a 102 year old black woman who had to wait half a day to vote.
        The GOP minority depants both the President and the House Majority Leader by torpedoing Obama's second choice for Sec of D.
        Ted Nugent shows up at the SOTU speech dressed like he's dodging the next draft.
        Limbaugh riffs on Sheila Jackson Lee having an owner.....

        And you think we're going to shame these people?

        Yeah, there's an attitude that's "killing" the Dems, pal. And it sure as shit ain't mine.

  •  Never Believe a Senate Democratic "Plan"... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    ...that doesn't mention the use of lube right off the top.

  •  ha (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryabein, qofdisks
    but even if all 55 Democrats vote for the measure, the question is whether five Republicans will join with them to defeat an expected filibuster.
    Not going to happen and not going to happen. And Harry (and the majority of the Dem Sens)won't lose a seconds sleep over that fact.

    Why the pretense?

  •  The sequester is going to happen (8+ / 0-)

    for the same reason the GOP desperately wanted John Kerry to be Secretary of State and had fever dreams about Scott Brown. 2014.

    In Kerry's case, they imagined Brown would have no other choice but to run, and win them a precious Blue State seat.

    In the Sequestration's care, they imagine all the pain will be laid exclusively at Obama's feet and usher in as close to a Republican sweep in 2014 in the Senate as they can get. What could go wrong? Everybody knows that the GOP had nothing to do with the GOP outcomes and the GOP policies and the GOP bad faith that has governed the Obama era. It's not like Obama won a huge re-election and the Democrats kept the Senate because the American people rejected them and only kept the House because of Rove/DeLay tactics with House district boundaries.

    The problem with the GOP's thinking is that life is a lot more complicated than a College Republican playing beer pong and 'Red Dawn' related drinking games with his frat brothers.

    Scott Brown didn't want to run for Senate, he likes coronations and so, he wants to be Governor of Massachusetts because he doesn't see the Democrat who is going to prevent him from playing William Weld or Mitt Romney into the office. So, the cynical thugs in DC get a guy who is more liberal than John Kerry as the most likely replacement for Kerry. (And Kerry is more liberal in his policy thinking than Susan Rice, the woman they smeared to be sure Kerry was the man for the job. Kerry objects to some positions that Rice had no problem with.) So they lose lose.

    The Senate Democrats clumsy attempts at kabuki show votes for the GOP to vote down aside (might as well just float a vote to cancel the Sequestration and cite the bad economy as the reason why and say it was a bad idea because it would hurt millions. Just defy the GOP and the Village freak-out from a position of strength not pandering, since you are going to get smeared by Simpson and Bowles, Meet the Press, and the GOP anyway as not being serious about pain infliction as seriousness) they are assuming a lot.

    There is no guarantee that the pain of the Sequestration is going to be exclusively blamed on the Democratic Party or the President. There is a video with John Boehner saying he got "98%" of what he wanted to complicate the mess. And the GOP's slavish devotion to the Paul Ryan budget in rhetoric, even though it makes the Sequestration look like a high school dance.

    Might as well have shot for the moon in terms of getting around the pain. If the American people do blame it on the GOP, it's because they have 30 years worth of bad behavior coming home to roost, not because of incrementalist panders to deficit fetishists and non-show show votes that lose all sides in the PR wars. All Harry Reid is going is muddying the wankers waters with crap nobody believes he believes or wants.

    Harry Reid's biggest problem right now is that he still has pie on his face for his idiotic handshake deal that immediately blew up in his face. Nobody is afraid of Harry Reid while Mitch McConnel is still flexing his pie-throwing arm, and Sen. Levin looks like a chump for allowing the GOP to play bad faith games with the Hagel speeches demand, setting up his first-ever filibuster of a cabinet secretary. He's trying to pull this shit off while Hagel is hamstrung and the spotlight is on the Democratic Leadership for wimpy non-reform of the filibuster. Reid needs to have the ability to be taken seriously to play this game. He would need to have credibility to pander with kabuki show votes he knows can't pass and get credit for wanting them to pass even though they can't win in his own body, or in the House if they magically did.

    'Let's just pretend people respect and fear Harry Reid'.

    Good luck with that, Harry. I think Mitch McConnell still has more pies to fling. If you wanted to shake DC in its boots, proposing a vote on a bill to cancel the Sequestration, and making a fierce economic recovery case as to why, was probably your only way to avoid changing the short-term narrative.

    If we keep the Senate in 2014, it will be despite of Reid and the Democratic Leadership of the Senate, not because of him and them.

     

    I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

    by LeftHandedMan on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 04:18:01 PM PST

  •  And if it does pass (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    then we get to start over on this again next year?

    That's certainly what the headline implies.  Or am I just reading perpetual crisis into everything now?

  •  Oh rats. For a minute I thought the title of (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Max Runk, eztempo

    this diary was

    Senate Democrats unveil plan to replace Harry Reid through end of year.

  •  Feels like a roller-coaster... (0+ / 0-)

    Harry Reid has hosed this process up SO BAD that I'm amazed he isn't already being flogged in public for failing on thr filibuster refeporm. This type of crap scenario will play out the rest of the year of ad-nausea .....fix this Harry, you're too old an crabby not to..

  •  Replace Reid (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CriticallyDamped, eztempo

    And the sequester along with a whole host of other problems will take care of themselves.  Is this guy Majority Leader for life?  How do they go about tossing his pathetic, wimpy ass?  

  •  I hope this fails. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eztempo

    Democrats need to learn that there are consequences for their cowardice.  And I'm with Dean on this one:  we need to cut our military budget by any means necessary.

  •  Senate Democrats Unveil Plan to... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks, eztempo

    I know I can stop reading at that point. Whatever follows does not matter.

    Alpacas spit if you piss them off. So don't do that.

    by alpaca farmer on Thu Feb 14, 2013 at 05:22:06 PM PST

  •  THE PROBLEM is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks, eztempo

    that jackass in the middle of the picture.  If he had fought for true filibuster reform then the Senate MIGHT actually be able to pass something besides gas.

  •  Forget about 5 senate Republicans. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coffeetalk

    What about those 218 House Republicans?  And while I am on this point so whenever the House is controlled by Republicans we can expect them to do ...nothing?

  •  It Looks Good (0+ / 0-)

    "Senate Democrats have a plan to replace the sequester through the end of the year"

    From what I read up above, the Democratic plan seem very sensible and feasible.  At least it is more than the Republicans have been able or willing to accomplish.

    "but even if all 55 Democrats vote for the measure, the question is whether five Republicans will join with them to defeat an expected filibuster."

    If they don't then I suggest that they hogtie Harry Reid spreadeagle to a couple of the desks on the Senate floor and ram the paper that the bill is printed on up his miserable worthless ass.

  •  The Senate just cares about their little club .... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    as long as Reid looks good to his Senate buddies he's OK with this show of weakness elsewhere.

    It's like with the old Genovese Crime Family boss Vincent "The Chin" Gigante who would walk around the streets in a bathrobe and peeing in the street; as long as the Mafia world recognized him as the smart, ruthless boss that he was - and he was - then he didn't one crap if the rest of the World thought of him as "The Oddfather."

    It's all about their World.

  •  Why Are They Talking About Cuts? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    Is there someone who still thinks cutting social programs is the right way forward? Cutting these programs just offloads the burden on the taxpayers.

    What are these people doing about the problems that cause this spending? So far, nothing.

    There's a reason people need things like Medicaid. It's because they aren't being paid enough.

    The President offered $9/hour. In many large cities a living wage is over $20/hour.

    His proposal is unworkable. You can't support a minimum wage in the U.S. while we continue to move steadily toward more and more free trade. As long as it is our national policy to move wealth-producing jobs overseas and depress wages we will continue to see more and more poverty in this country.

    But it's a starting point. Maybe if we start there we could eventually get to only being poor.

  •  Harry Reid has already doomed this plan (0+ / 0-)

    Majority Reid handed the keys to the Senate floor to Mitch McConnell.  Mitch McConnell has already filibustered the president's nominees to DoD, the consumer protection agency won by Elizabeth Warren, NLRB Commissioners and sundry other things within a couple of weeks of duping Harry Reid into pissing away his chance to reform the filibuster.

    Harry Reid is a credulous and ineffective Majority Leader that will not be able to even get these proposals to the Senate floor for a vote.  He must be removed and replaced as Leader for the president to have any success in this second term.

  •  The truly frightening thing... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Apost8
    The plan calls for $65 billion dollars in cuts, half from military spending, and half by cutting subsidies to large agriculture businesses.
    ...is that we can achieve $32.5 billion in cuts just from subsidies to Big Ag. How much are we paying Monsanto, ADM and Cargill, anyway?

    Atlas shrugged. Jesus wept.

    by trevzb on Fri Feb 15, 2013 at 07:37:14 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site