Tax Compromise Passes Senate Filibuster Hurdle

I was going to wait till the vote closed but after 3.5 hours, I lost my patience. By a vote of at least 83-15, the Senate invoked cloture on President Obama’s tax package. Those voting no were mostly Democratic: New Mexico’s Jeff Bingaman, Wisconsin’s Russ Feingold, Vermont’s Patrick Leahy, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Ohio’s Sherrod Brown, Colorado’s Mark Udall, North Carolina’s Kay Hagan, Carl Levin of Michigan, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and Bernie Sanders, a Vermont Independent who caucuses with the Democrats (and who mounted his own 8.5-hour filibuster last Friday).”I’m opposing this deal in its current form because right now we need to focus on the middle class, who are always left behind, not the people at the very top, who are doing just fine in this economy,” Gillibrand said in a statement following the vote. Sanders also released a statement:

It makes no sense to me to provide huge tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires while we drive up the national debt that our children and grandchildren will have to pay.  I further object strenuously to the lowering of rates on the estate tax, which only benefits the top 0.3 percent, the very, very wealthiest people in this country. I also am concerned about a significant precedent which diverts $112 billion in payroll taxes away from the Social Security trust fund. Our goal now must be to strengthen Social Security, not weaken it. Of course we must extend unemployment benefits and the tax breaks that the middle class desperately needs, but in my view we could have and should have negotiated a much stronger agreement.

The only Republicans so far to vote against the deal were Nevada’s John Ensign, who is facing a tough reelection battle in 2012; Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn, Alabama’s Jeff Sessions and South Carolina’s Jim DeMint, who opposed the bill because of the unfunded financing of unemployment benefits; and retiring George Voinovich of Ohio.

A couple of senators who’d previously expressed reservations about the compromise negotiated between Senate Republicans and the Obama Administration voted to proceed. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, said she still planned to vote against the measure on final passage but she nevertheless helped block a filibuster attempt. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat, also voted for cloture today despite criticizing the package last week. Harkin was likely swayed by the addition of an ethanol tax credit important to Iowan farmers.

In a brief statement, President Obama hailed the “strong bipartisan support” as proof “that both parties can work together.” He said the definition of compromise is “sacrificing something that each of us cares about to move forward on something that matters to all of us.” He said the vote was a “substantial victory” for the middle class and urged the House to act swiftly.

Final passage in the Senate is expected Wednesday, followed by House consideration by the end of the week.

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: bush tax cuts, Barack Obama, Congress, Economy, Republican Party, Senate, Taxes, White House
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • gysgt213

    Thanks for the Tweets too JNS.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    It’s amazing that only 6 members of the Senate are in harmony with 40% of the party.

  • deconstructiva

    Jay, thanks for your coverage here and on twitter, appreciate it. Good luck with final Senate vote; it should be more interesting. Next time they drag the vote on and on and on, play the new Call of Duty: Black Ops to keep busy. Or take a nap. Or start working on your book.

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks for your coverage of this substantial, important issue, Jay Newton-Small.

  • walkingfunny

    Sorry if someone already made this point:
    .
    why is the tea party not all over the deficit issue? I thought one of the pillars of the movement was reducing debt, what do they think about giving tax breaks that will be paid for by the children to the really wealthy? I have not heard so much as a whimper from them, or maybe I just missed it.

  • Art Pepper

    If sending goes up while revenue remains constant, it increases the deficit.
    .
    If revenue goes down while spending remains constant, the deficit stays the same.
    .
    If you understand this, then you understand Tea Party economic theory.

  • apr2563
  • Alex Vallas

    It is absolutely absurd to extend the tax cuts to the very wealthiest Americans. They don’t need it nor will the spend it to bolster the economy. If anything they should have raised the amounts from $200,000/$250,000 to $1 milion. That way, small businesses that would be affected would be given consideration. People have to realize that many “small businesses” consists of Law Firms, Medical Practices, etc that did not incorporate while making millions.

  • http://rbmatudan.wordpress.com rbmatudan

    The role of the government is to blame ALL the misfortune that of this country to its people. Why don’t they blame themselves just for once…. http://www.pathtoasia.com/jobs/

  • freeinpa

    “If revenue goes down while spending remains constant, the deficit stays the same.”
    .
    And the chances of spending remaining constant are zero. If spending goes up 6% instead of 8%, it’s a draconian “cut”. That is liberal economic theory

  • freeinpa

    “They don’t need it nor will the spend it to bolster the economy.”
    .
    So what is it with liberals? god complex or just universal busybodies? Who the he11 are you or anybody to decide what any other citizens needs or what to do with their OWN MONEY!

  • freeinpa

    Simple. Too many people have a vested interest in a large and growing government. To admit failure would devastate any argument for more more more!

  • freeinpa

    Mark Udall- D

    “Tax cuts for the wealthy for the last 10 years has caused high rate of home foreclosures.”
    .
    Tax increases for the wealthy would not go to spending but to deficit reduction and “investment” in people.
    .
    The economic acumen of the left is mind-boggling. Low tax rates is spending but actual spending is investment

  • garylk

    The Tea Party really has nothing to do with this issue, since their winning candidates have not yet taken office. Doing this tax thing now was really a smart move by this lame duck session. Both sides get the opportunity to put forth their best effort at preserving the staus quo without much interference from the TP. They have kicked the can down the road far enough to ensure that the newcomers will be properly schooled before it comes up again.

  • http://2thirdsrocks.wordpress.com 2thirdsrocks

    “nor will they spend it to bolster the economy”
    .
    Jeepers! Those selfish bastards!

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, McCain and virtually every other republican argued the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (I’m not sure I’d call everybody who makes $250,000 wealthy) must be extended in order to boost the economy. But if the wealthy won’t even spend it…
    .
    2/3, you are officially an idiot.

blog comments powered by Disqus