Reid: TEA Party Will Disappear, After Economy Improves

This came out yesterday, but I was out-and-about and on my phone all day. I couldn’t get to a PC, where I could pull up the embed link to add to the post. Fortunately, I was, finally, able to pull the embed link, once I got home.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will be on Meet the Press tomorrow, and part of the interview has already been released, where he made a very interesting prediction about the future of the TEA Party:



Under normal circumstances, a third-party, independent movements do tend to fizzle over time, see Perotmania back in the mid-90’s. However, if Bernacke is right and it takes 4-5 years for us to see real improvement in the unemployment numbers, that could give the grassroots conservative movment some time to grow roots and become a sustainable lobby for many years to come.

Saying this will only further enrage those that are already upset at how he has governed this country, the TEA Party, and ensure that they have the desire to stick around longer. There was nothing to be gained for him to antagonize them. So, why did he do it? What was he thinking? He, arrogantly, was trying to trivialize them in the eyes of the electorate, but more people are sympathetic to the issues that are important to the TEA Party than are not. So, as long as the issues of high deficits, big government, high federal spending, and high unemployment are important, the TEA Party will be an important force to be reckoned with in the American political scene.

Reid: If Republicans or Anyone Else Opposes DREAM Act Than They're Insane or Something

If you could get past all of the all-too nauseating fluff piece from the New York Times that all-but expressed their undying love for Senator Harry Reid, (I barely could. I throw up a little in my mouth. Umm...forget that I said that.) You would've found something: a very noteworthy quote from the Senate Majority leader, which they conveniently hid down at the bottom of the love letter....I mean the totally unbiased, right down the middle news article.....Yeah, that's it:

For his part, Mr. Reid predicted, “We’ll get some things done,” naming comprehensive immigration legislation as one possibility.

If Republicans’ vulnerability among Hispanic voters does not persuade them to compromise, he noted, “they have real problems with their mental capacity.”

So, basically, all those that disagree with him are insane, he is the sane one. Of course, what was I thinking?

Of course, the New York Times reporter glossed right over this and would rather tell you what a swell guy Reid is. I'm shocked....shocked. I tell you.

Senate Republicans Hold It Together, Pork-Filled Omnibus Bill Killed

The Senate Republicans were able to hold it together and force Harry Reid to back down and pull the omnibus bill full of Christmas goodies to various special interests because of a lack of support:

Sen. GOP Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has long been known as an effective whip, and Thursday night he showed his prowess as he effectively stripped Democrats of the GOP votes needed to pass the $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill, killing the measure for good.

A visibly frustrated and angry Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, lashed out, saying that he had nine GOP senators supporting the measure, but that suddenly the support evaporated.

"This action taken by my friends on other side of aisle going to cause people to lose their job," Reid predicted.

"There's only one reason why cloture is not being filed...He doesn't have the votes.," McConnell chided, as he referred to the term for the process to shut down a filibuster. "And the reason he doesn't have the votes is because members on this side of the aisle increasingly felt concerned about the way we do business."

A McConnell aide said the leader "worked the phones" for days, pressing his members to quash the bill which contains $8 billion in earmarks (1% of the overall bill), several that belonged to the leader, himself, before he agreed to a pork moratorium.

Tempers flared in the chamber quickly, as Republicans gloated.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, crusader against pork, tweeted all day Wednesday and Thursday with earmarks he found in the bill, from money for disease-resistant wine grapes to a ceramics museum in Biloxi, Miss. And Thursday night, with a big grin, he praised GOP members for ditching the deal.

Two cheers for the Republicans for, actually, standing up for Republican principles. This bill needed to be tossed out and started anew. Hopefully, they will be able to do another one soon. Hold the pork, though.

They needed to do this to keep or regain the confidence of the people that elected them to turn things around. The GOP has been just as bad in this area over the last decade as the Democrats, which is why they got the boot in 2008. Luckily, the TEA Party was able to wake up the Grand Old Party this past year before were exiled into oblivion forever.

They are still are on probation with the voters. So, they need to keep working on being the fiscally responsible and cutting spending, if they ever want to get regain our trust for good.

Reid: It’s My Constitutional Duty to Pass This Pork-Laden Omnibus Bill

Here are some tweets coming from Washington reporter Jamie Dupree, who was at the Harry Reid press conference, today, regarding the omnibus bill , full of thousands of earmarks, that’s being debated in the Senate:

1. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) telling reporters right now that "we have a constitutional duty " to approve earmarks
2. More Reid on earmarks: "I can't understand why more conservative members want to give up their power"
3. BROADSIDE ON REPUBLICANS: Reid labels GOP Senators who have earmarks but vote against them "hypocrites”

This isn’t the first time that Reid has said that it is his “constitutional duty” to spend your money. It not shocking about how clueless that Reid is on this. True, it is Congress’ duty to appropriate funds, but he is leaving out that the reason why there is so much angst against this type of spending is that it is often wasteful, and most of them wouldn’t pass muster, if it was ever given full-debate in Congress. It is, also, a problem that many of them look like bribes to certain representatives and senators in exchange for their vote on a particular piece of legislation.

He does have a point that many Republicans that are fighting this bill, now, have earmarks in the bill that they fought for before it was cool to be against them. Although, some of them say that they have “seen the light”, after last month’s elections.

As long as they continue to fight against the bill and vote against it, I don’t think that their flip-flop here won’t hurt them too much. However, I think that they should even go a bit further and push for amendments that would strike their earmarks from the bill. In the future, though, if they return to their old ways and include any earmarks in any future legislation, then, they should be chastised and protested against for such wasteful spending.

Senate Republicans Hold Firm on Promise Not to Support Any Bill Before Taxes, Budget Are Addressed

Harry Reid tried to put two bills up for a vote today that was defeated by almost of the the Republican's voting against the measure. They did this, by-in-large, because they had promised not to let any other bill come up for a vote, until the tax and budget issues are taken care of before the lame-duck session is closed.

The first one rejected was the one that dealt with a bill that was designed to compensate 9/11 survivors' for lingering health issues stemming from inhaling dust from the World Trade Center collapse:

Senate Republicans on Thursday derailed a bill to aid people who got sick after exposure to dust from the World Trade Center's collapse in the Sept. 11 attack.

Supporters were three votes short of the 60 needed to proceed to debate and a final vote on the bill that would have provided as much as $7.4 billion in health care and compensation to 9/11 responders and survivors. The bill failed on a test vote, 57-42.

Fifty-seven Democrats voted for the bill and 41 Republicans opposed it. Sen. Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, switched his vote to 'no' at the last moment, a parliamentary move that allows him to bring the measure up again for a vote.

Backers of the legislation see this lame-duck session of Congress as possibly its last chance. The bill has passed the House.

Republican senators have promised not to consider any other bills until the Senate acts on funding the government and extending tax cuts.

That one is a bit tricky because the Democrats have already used their no votes as a way to label Republicans as not being compassionate to those who survived the tragedies of 9/11. Republicans must speak out on this to make sure that Americans know why they voted against this bill. They can't let the Democrats frame this debate without their side of the story being expressed.

Even in the next Congress, this has a chance to be passed later on, but for now, it is not an issue that must be acted on immediately.

The second bill was on the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" military policy:

The Senate on Thursday rejected a Democratic bid to open debate on repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy banning openly gay and lesbian soldiers from military service, possibly killing any chance for it to get passed in the current congressional session.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, called the vote without an agreement from any Republican senators to support the motion, ensuring it would fail.

The vote was 57-40 in favor of the cloture motion that required 60 votes to pass.

While most polls show that the majority of Americans favor the repeal, this won't be as toxic for the GOP because most Americans, also, realize that this issue doesn't need immediate attention.

Harry Reid Wants a Fire-Sale: All Environmental Bills Must Pass Now

Since Republicans will be gaining much more power next month, Democrats know that they have only a limited time to pass their liberal agenda. So, Harry Reid is trying to push over 100 bills on his liberal wishlist all at once before it's too late:

Democratic efforts to push through more than 100 public lands and water bills in the lame duck session are reaching a fever pitch, with the recognition this is the last chance many of them have to become law.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has tasked Democratic leaders on at least three committees to come up with a list of bills that could get past a GOP filibuster.

They may also need to be able to secure the two-thirds support that would be needed if the House tries to expedite the package without amendments in a tight legislative calendar.

Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) told reporters Thursday that she has given Reid a draft list of bills to consider. That evolving list is believed to include plans to provide protection to the Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, Lake Tahoe, the Gulf of Mexico and the San Francisco Bay.

“The issue is getting 60 votes, which we think we can,” Boxer said.

This is like having over 100 people try to get out of a building that's on fire through a small window. Having all of them try to get through the window all at once will just ensure that none of them will. It'd cause a major traffic jam.

The same will happen here. Lumping all of the bills is doomed to fail. While a few of the bills may have enough bipartisan support to pass individually on a normal day, all-together, there is no way.

One of the things that enraged voters this election was that Pelosi was having people vote on legislation that she said that she had no idea what was in it, and the only way that they could find out was to pass it. Even though it doesn't look like the Democrats have heard the American people, it seems that the Republicans have, and I don't see them letting that happen. Besides, Senate Republicans have already said that they're going to insta-filibuster any bill that doesn't have anything to the tax cut extensions or the federal budget.

This monster bill will be DOA on the Senate bill.

Senate Democrats Just Wasted Days Passing a Bill That Violated Constitution, Have They Ever Read It Before?

The food safety bill that was passed in the Senate two days ago may be nixed by the House because, apparently, Harry Reid nor anyone else in the Senate has ever read the document that they swore to uphold:

A food safety bill that has burned up precious days of the Senate’s lame-duck session appears headed back to the chamber because Democrats violated a constitutional provision requiring that tax provisions originate in the House.

By pre-empting the House’s tax-writing authority, Senate Democrats appear to have touched off a power struggle with members of their own party in the House. The Senate passed the bill Tuesday, sending it to the House, but House Democrats are expected to use a procedure known as “blue slipping” to block the bill, according to House and Senate GOP aides.

The debacle could prove to be a major embarrassment for Senate Democrats, who sought Tuesday to make the relatively unknown bill a major political issue by sending out numerous news releases trumpeting its passage.

Section 107 of the bill includes a set of fees that are classified as revenue raisers, which are technically taxes under the Constitution. According to a House GOP leadership aide, that section has ruffled the feathers of Ways and Means Committee Democrats, who are expected to use the blue slip process to block completion of the bill.

So, all of that precious time that was devoted to this bill was all for naught. There is very little time in the lame-duck session, and Reid wasted it by overreaching his authority.

So, either the bill will be dropped entirely, or the House will pass their own version. If the House does pass another version, then, the Senate will have to debate the bill and vote AGAIN to be able to send it to the White House for Obama's signature.

I love Ed Morrissey's line regarding this: "Yesterday, Senate Democrats were crowing about this bill. Today, they’ll be eating crow."

Harry Reid Says GOP Wants US to Fail Forgetting That He Chastised Limbaugh For Saying He Wants Obama to Fail

Harry Reid recently had a bowl of sour grapes after Republicans just said “no” to spending an extra $109B that we don’t have to extend unemployment benefits:

The morning after the Senate failed to advance a bill that responded to the recession, Sen. Harry Reid laid into Republicans who blocked it en masse.

Clearly sore after falling three votes short Thursday night of the 60 needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, the Senate majority leader from Nevada charged in a Senate speech that GOP senators "are betting on the our country to fail."
Rather than help Americans, he said, Republicans are more interested in bringing down President Barack Obama.

"The Republicans in the Senate have made the decision to do everything they can to turn the country upside down, to do everything they can to stop economic recovery because they think it may help some of their people running for the Senate around the country.

"They figure as bad as they can make the economy, the better off they will be," Reid said. "That is a pretty difficult view for people who are United States senators."
"As we learned from the health care debate, (Republicans) want everything that Obama wants to be his Waterloo."

Listen, I feel for those that are feeling the pinch of unemployment, but there has to be a point when we have to cut the apron strings and get the out-of-control spending back in black. It is a calculated risk drawing the line in the sand with unemployment benefits. It could bite the Republicans back in November. We’ll see at the polling booth, whether or not it is political suicide as the Democrats are trying to portray it.

Back to Harry Reid’s comment, he is trying to demonize the GOP by saying that they don’t care about playing politics at the expense of the common man. That’s rich for someone that wants to pass cap-and-tax and causing energy prices to skyrocket in the process in order to push their green agenda.

I, also, find it really hypocritical for him to say that they want the GOP to fail, after he went in front of the Senate to chastise Rush Limbaugh for saying that he wants Obama to fail. In fact, it’s worse. Reid implied that the GOP wants the entire country to fail. Rush only said that he wants Obama’s ultra-liberal agenda to fail not the country as a whole. The Democrats just tried to paint Limbaugh’s comment as saying that he wants the country to fail because, if you look at what he said in its entirety, that’s not actually what he said.

Reid must be pretty desperate these days considering that he pretty far behind Sharon Angle in the Nevada Senate race even though his camp denies it.

Weeks Before Going to Vegas to Campaign For Reid Obama Tells People Not to Spend Money In Vegas, Again, Update: Las Vegas Mayor Says That Obama's a "Slow Learner"

Two weeks after it was announed that Obama will go to Nevada to campaign for the Democratic Majority Leader of the Senate Harry Reid, Obama has the brilliant idea of speaking bad of an industry that is critical to Nevada's economy, yet again. It's sad to see that Obama didn't learn his lesson the first time that he criticized Americans spending money in Las Vegas, but I guess not:

President Obama is catching heat from Nevada lawmakers and business leaders regarding his comments Tuesday criticizing trips to Las Vegas.

During the president's town hall meeting in Nashua, New Hampshire, he discussed the need to curb spending during tough economic times.  "When times are tough, you tighten your belts," the president said. "You don't go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don't blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you're trying to save for college."

While his overall point of not spending foolishly is valid, he should probably steer clear of focusing on all his critical remarks at one particular city, especially one that he'll need in November to get Reid re-elected.

These remarks have drawn sharp retorts from many representatives from Nevada, including the Las Vegas Mayor:

Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said during a hastily called news conference that Obama is no friend to Las Vegas and would not be welcomed here if he visits.

"I'll do everything I can to give him the boot," Goodman said. "This president is a real slow learner."

Goodman and others are worried that Obama's words will discourage visitors from coming to Las Vegas and depress the industry further.

"Enough is enough!" Democratic Congresswoman Shelley Berkley said in a statement. "President Obama needs to stop picking on Las Vegas and he needs to let Americans decide for themselves how and where to spend their hard-earned vacation dollars."

It even caused Harry Reid, the man that Obama will go campaign for later this month, to go after the president:

Reid, one of Obama's closest allies, issued a statement headlined "Reid to Obama: 'Lay off Las Vegas'" and was unusually blunt in his reaction.

"The President needs to lay off Las Vegas and stop making it the poster child for where people shouldn't be spending their money," Reid said. "I would much rather tourists and business travelers spend their money in Las Vegas than spend it overseas."

Mayor Goodman really took Obama to school in response to the president's statement. In fact, he went so far to say that the President of the United States was no longer welcome in his city because of his comments, and if he did show up he would "give him the boot back to Washington and to visit his failures back there."

Unemployment is already high there, and discouraging people from going there for vacations will just force the tourism industry to layoff even more workers. Good job, Obama.

Most Transparent Congress Evah Strikes Again: Liberal Democrats Hold Secret Meetings to Negotiate HCR Compromise

Pelosi made the promise, after the Democrats won a heavy majority in the House, that this would be "the most transparent" Congress of all time. Since then, Congress has been everything but transparent or post-partisan. In fact, things seem to have become worse.

Now, Pelosi and other liberal Democrats aren't just keeping the Republicans in the dark. They are keeping the more fiscally and socially conservative members of their own party from the negotiating table:

Despite their claims to the contrary, the way that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have handled the healthcare bill has been anything but transparent. And, if the left-wing blogosphere is to be believed, the two congressional leaders intend to keep the deliberations secret as they try to merge the House and Senate versions of the legislation into something that will pass both chambers.

The Talking Points Memo website reported Monday that Democrats in both the House and Senate are saying the process will likely follow the path of the House taking up the Senate-passed legislation, amending it and sending it back to the Senate, which will have to pass it again. "This process cuts out the Republicans," a House Democratic aide told TPM, indicating the congressional majority intended to make sure the Republican minority would "not have a motion to recommit opportunity."

It also, say those who are following the issue, allows Pelosi to avoid having to cut deals with problematic House Democrats like Michigan's Bart Stupak, who has promised to do what he can to scuttle the final bill if it provides for federal funding of abortions.

Henry Waxman, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is saying much the same thing, according to David Dayen at FireDogLake, another prominent left-wing website.

Dayen reported that the powerful California Democrat told constituents he would be coming back to Washington Tuesday to begin negotiations with Senate leaders and the White House about what a final healthcare bill will look like—even though the House doesn't come back into session until January 12.

According to Waxman, the process for moving will not include the standard House/Senate conference committee, because the motions to select and instruct conferees in the Senate "would need 60 votes all over again." Instead, whatever agreements made could be packaged in an amendment to the bills passed by the House and Senate.

By blocking out the Republicans—not to mention House Democrats who object to what the Senate passed—Pelosi and Reid are setting up a protracted game of "ping-pong," in which the legislation goes back and forth from the Senate to the House and back to the Senate again. They may be able to prevail as far as the legislation goes, ultimately, but at enormous cost to their majorities. And that may be the biggest secret of all as far as the healthcare debate is concerned, or at least the one Pelosi and Reid are most concerned about.

Now, I don't really have any problem with this game of "ping-pong" that Pelosi and Reid are playing. It'll, hopefully, keep this monstrous bill from becoming law. Then, we can start over and create a bill that'll really make health care more affordable and available without having a negative effect on the quality of that care or "bankrupting" the country.

Harry Reid Isn't Quite Helping Hold Up Obama's Promise to Cut Earmarks

During the campaign and after , Obama promised to cut down on the number of earmarks coming out of Washington. However, his fellow Democrats aren't cooperating with the President on this. In fact, Harry Reid has increased his pork requests:

President Obama may have asked Congress to reduce the number of earmarks in its spending bills, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, isn't cutting back on his pork.

The Senate's most powerful Democrat secured 36 earmarks worth more than $89 million in the fiscal year 2010 Defense Appropriations bill, according to information provided by his office---a slight increase over the number of earmarks Mr. Reid secured in the fiscal year 2009 Defense Appropriations bill. That year, he secured 33 earmarks worth more than $83 million.

Despite pledges from Mr. Obama that his Congress would reduce the number of earmarks slipped into spending bills, Mr. Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley said in an email to the Washington Times the Majority Leader was “proud” of his earmarks.

“We’re proud of each and everyone because this money means jobs for a state that has suffered from this economy like no other,” Mr. Manley said.

He's "proud" of his sizable contribution to the federal government's massive deficit spending. No wonder Reid is having some serious troubles getting support for re-election in Nevada.

More Bad News For Reid: Trails All Challengers As Obamacare Weighs Him Down

Things are looking bad for Harry's chances to win re-election in November:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid continues to lag behind all potential Republican challengers in next year's U.S. Senate race in Nevada, according to new Rasmussen Reports telephone polling in the state.

For now at least, his championing of the president's health care plan appears to raise further red flags for the Democratic incumbent. Fifty-four percent (54%) of Nevada voters oppose the plan, while 44% favor it.

More significantly, however, those numbers include 49% who strongly oppose the plan while only 23% strongly favor it.

This represents stronger and more passionate opposition to the health care plan than Rasmussen Reports has found nationally.

While Nevadans are extremely displeased with the healthcare plan that Reid helped introduce in the Senate, it is not the only reason why Reid looks to be on his way out:

The numbers in this month's survey suggest that the race at this point is a referendum on Reid, who earns 43% of the vote against each of three GOP candidates. Incumbents who get less than 50% of the vote at this stage of the game are viewed as vulnerable. Reid, who is seeking a fifth term, received 61% of the final vote in 2004.

Forty-nine percent (49%) of Nevada voters have a very unfavorable opinion of Reid. Just 21% offer a very favorable opinion of the senator.

The Republicans remain largely unknown, further confirming the notion that the numbers reflect a referendum on the incumbent rather than a choice between competing candidates.

Liebermann, Landrieu Throw Reid & His Health Care Reform Bill With Public Option Under the Bus

Just after Harry Reid said that he's close to getting 60 votes in the senate to pass his healthcare reform bill, Sen. Joe Lieberman threw a monkey wrench into the majority leader's plans, earlier today:

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said Tuesday that he’d back a GOP filibuster of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s health care reform bill.

Lieberman, who caucuses with Democrats and is positioning himself as a fiscal hawk on the issue, said he opposes any health care bill that includes a government-run insurance program — even if it includes a provision allowing states to opt out of the program, as Reid’s has said the Senate bill will.

"We're trying to do too much at once," Lieberman said. “To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now."

Lieberman added that he’d vote against a public option plan “even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line."

His comments confirmed that Reid is short of the 60 votes needed to advance the bill out of the Senate, even after Reid included the opt-out provision. Several other moderate Democrats expressed skepticism at the proposal as well, but most of the wavering Democratic senators did not go as far as Lieberman Tuesday, saying they were waiting to see the details.

The Democrats had been courting Maine Republican Olympia Snowe to vote with the Democrats for a false sense of bi-partisanship and to be a "shield" for the Blue Dogs in their more conservative districts from being labeled a liberal, if they voted for the bill.

Now, they still seem to be having trouble even getting some of their own people to stand behind Reid's bill with the public option. Senator Mary Landrieu had some harsh words to say about the public option, as well::

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) echoed Republican criticisms of a public option today, suggesting it would bankrupt the country.

Describing the public option as a government-run, taxpayer subsidized, national insurance plan, Landrieu said it would likely replicate the problems faced by Medicare and Medicaid.

Why don't we fix the two public options we have now instead of creating a third one, she told NPR's Tell Me More.

Ouch! She hit it on the right on the head here. We already have a program much like the public option plan presented in the bills, and they are going bankrupt. We wouldn't hire the failed CEO of Lehman to run a multi-million business. Why would we get our government with an equally bad track record to run insurance for millions of Americans?

Reid, of course, jumped the gun the other day, when he all but declared "Mission Accomplished!" on the public option battle. Today, we see that is far from reality. We have not heard the last of this, yet.

There have been some polls that say that the majority of Americans like the idea of the public option, but Landrieu blasts the pollsters on how they got those results:

Asked about polls showing public support for a government plan, Landrieu said the questions should be phrased differently.

I think if you asked, do you want a public option but it would force the government to go bankrupt, people would say no, she said.

Again, right on the money. The various pollsters, especially from left-leaning organizations like Kos, intentionally ask the questions in a way to where they are more likely to get a more liberal result.

As the Democrats realize that the public doesn't like their plan overall, the more the Democrats will have to distance themselves from the public option, if they want to be re-elected.

All this does not bode well for the survival of the Reid's bill and the public option.

To Democrats: If It Walks Like A Surge, Talks Like a Surge, It's a Surge

My Thoughts

Can't they give Bush or Republicans any credit at all? They can't rewrite history. Bush and McCain were both right about the surge. The more Democrats refuse to admit this the more they will be seen as petty and juvenile by the voters.

Sen. David Vitter Goes After Canceling Automatic Raises For Congress, Amendment Fails-100th Post

Pressuring Democrats over automatic pay raises; 6:10pm Eastern: Reid tries to beat back pay raise issue; Vitter effort defeated, 52-45

By Michelle Malkin  
March 10, 2009 11:34 AM

Scroll for updates…6:10pm Eastern…Reid introduces gimmick to beat back automatic pay raise repeal…refuses to say that he has commitment to bring his gimmick to the House floor…Vitter amendment goes down, tabled…52-45
.

GOP Sen. David Vitter is causing Senate Democrats heartburn. Good.

He’s been pushing an amendment to the $410 billion omni-pork bill that would repeal the current law allowing automatic pay raises for Congress.

Doesn’t look so good for lawmakers to be enjoying the automatic perk during an economic downturn. Vitter’s proposal: How about a little shared sacrifice, fellas?

From Vitter’s office:

“Congress has been receiving pay increases most years under a formula set into law 20 years ago,” said Vitter. “At a time when so many Americans are losing their jobs and struggling to pay their mortgages, these raises just aren’t right. Most Americans don’t have a formula at their job that gives them automatic pay raises, and Congress shouldn’t either.”

The amendment would repeal the provision of law that set in place automatic raises for Members of Congress. The increase that went into effect for this year amounts to an additional $4,700 per year.

“Last year in Louisiana, the state legislature proposed a raise for its members, and Louisianans were rightfully outraged. I’ve heard from many constituents who have called to express their anger over automatic raises for Congress as well,” Vitter said. “With our economy in such a state of distress, it’s just not appropriate for Congress to continue to receive theses automatic pay raises. My amendment would require Congress to vote to approve any future pay increases.”

Vitter’s amendment is similar to a stand-alone bill he introduced at the beginning of the 111th Congress that also seeks to achieve the same goal – ending automatic pay raises.

The quandary via CQ:

The upcoming vote on Vitter’s amendment is problematic for supporters of the underlying spending measure. A vote against the amendment could put a senator in the politically perilous position of defending automatic pay increases for lawmakers at a difficult economic time for nearly all Americans. If the amendment is adopted, it could prove to be a poison pill, eroding support in both chambers for the yearlong spending measure, and forcing a House-Senate conference.

Harry Reid’s ploy is to offer a separate, stand-alone bill to repeal the robo-pay raises — to give Senate Dems cover. You can count on that separate bill never making it onto the Senate floor.

Stay tuned…

Update 6:10pm Eastern…Dingy Harry Reid pleading with Senate to pass his stand-along automatic pay raise repeal separately. “This is a serious effort.”

He’s almost choking on his own words as he says it.

6:36pm Eastern…Vitter amendment goes down…tabled 52-45.

Reid whining about how “difficult” the process has been.

---------------------------------------------------------------
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/10/pressuring-democrats-over-automatic-pay-raises/
---------------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

Since they are so concerned about capping CEO's pay and bonuses for running into the ground, shouldn't we be doing the same for those in the government that have run the economy down largely because of their policies?

Although, I will give them credit for at least getting rid of the raises for this next year.

Senate Republicans Able to Fight Off Democrats Earmark Overspending For Now

Senate bogs down over $410 billion spending bill
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – The Senate, tied up in a fight over a huge omnibus appropriations bill, will have to pass a stopgap spending measure Friday in order to avoid a partial government shutdown.

The Senate worked late on Thursday trying to pass the $410 billion appropriations bill, which was denounced by Republicans — and a handful of Democrats — who said it was bloated and filled with wasteful, pork-barrel spending projects. Democratic leaders were forced to postpone a final vote on the measure until Monday under pressure from GOP senators who complained that Democrats hadn't allowed them enough opportunities to offer amendments.

With the vote postponed, senators need to pass a stopgap spending measure by midnight Friday to prevent a shutdown of most domestic agencies. Midnight is when a temporary law that keeps the government in business, mostly at 2008 levels, expires.

Before canceling the vote, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he was one vote short of the 60 needed to close debate and free the bill for President Barack Obama's signature.

Democrats and their allies control 58 seats, though at least a handful of Democrats oppose the measure over its cost or changes in U.S. policy toward Cuba. That meant Democrats needed five or six Republican votes to advance the bill.

None of the GOP's amendments is expected to pass, but votes on perhaps a dozen are now set for Monday night, Reid said.

The huge, 1,132-page spending bill awards big increases to domestic programs and is stuffed with pet projects sought by lawmakers in both parties. The measure has an extraordinary reach, wrapping together nine spending bills to fund the annual operating budgets of every Cabinet department except for Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.

The measure was written mostly over the course of last year, before projected deficits quadrupled and Obama's economic recovery bill left many of the same spending accounts swimming in cash.

And, to the embarrassment of Obama — who promised during last year's campaign to force Congress to curb its pork-barrel ways — the bill contains 7,991 pet projects totaling $5.5 billion, according to calculations by the GOP staff of the House Appropriations Committee.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Obama's opponent in the presidential campaign, called the measure "a swollen, wasteful, egregious example of out-of-control spending" and again criticized Obama for pledging to sign the measure despite his earlier promises on such spending.

"It doesn't sound like he's willing to use his veto pen to back up his vow," McCain said.

The pet projects — called earmarks — run the gamut. They include $190,000 for the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in Cody, Wyo., $238,000 to fund a deep-sea voyaging program for native Hawaiian youth, agricultural research projects, and grants to local police departments, among many others.

While earmarks have come under attack from conservative watchdog groups and cable television commentators, lawmakers in both parties seek them, arguing that they best know the needs of their states and home districts. Under a long-standing tradition, Republicans get about 40 percent of them since they are the minority party.

Several lawmakers took to the floor during the week to defend their projects, including Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who backed $1.7 million for pig odor research. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., promised $3.8 million to preserve and redevelop part of old Tiger Stadium to help revitalize a distressed area of Detroit.

By a 52-42 vote Thursday, Democrats cleared the way for the Obama administration to reverse a rule issued late in the Bush administration that says greenhouse gases may not be restricted in an effort to protect polar bears from global warming. Another Bush administration rule that reduced the input of federal scientists in endangered species decisions can also be quickly overturned without a lengthy rulemaking process.

The big increases — among them a 21 percent boost for a popular program that feeds infants and poor women and a 10 percent increase for housing vouchers for the poor — represent a clear win for Democrats who spent most of the past decade battling with President George W. Bush over money for domestic programs.

Generous above-inflation increases are spread throughout, including a $2.4 billion, 13 percent increase for the Agriculture Department and a 10 percent increase for the money-losing Amtrak passenger rail system.

Congress also awarded itself a 10 percent increase in its own budget, bringing it to $4.4 billion. But the House inserted a provision denying lawmakers the automatic cost-of-living pay increase they are due next Jan. 1.

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/congress_spending;_ylt=AuxCYhBd9d.H7NY1HnHDXWas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJicjJic2xjBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwMzA2L2NvbmdyZXNzX3NwZW5kaW5nBHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3NlbmF0ZXJlcHVibA--
-----------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

The Senate GOP had small victory last night when they were able to stop Harry Reid from cramming another pork-filled spending orgy down the country's throat, at least for now.

They are going to try to cut some of the spending down, but it'll be a tough fight to say the least. They must keep the turncoat caucus (Specter, Snowe, and Collins) from being defecting and try to get some of the blue dog Democrats to say no to pork.

This is a battle that is very important for the Republican leadership to win.

Heath Shuler Fires On Pelosi and Reid

Pelosi, Reid have "failed,"

Shuler says Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C) has further ingratiated himself with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — not — by declaring that Pelosi and Harry Reid "failed" the bipartisanship test on stimulus. "In order for us to get the confidence of America, it has to be done in a bipartisan way," Shuler said in Raleigh following an economic forum, according to the AP.

"We have to have everyone — Democrats and Republicans standing on the stage with the administration — saying, 'We got something done that was efficient, stimulative and timely.'"

Here's the kicker: "I truly feel that's where maybe House leadership and Senate leadership have really failed."

Shuler, rumored to be mulling a '10 Senate run, was one of 11 House Democrats to vote "no" on the stimulus and was already deep in Pelosi's doghouse. Now he'll have to build a Harry Reid wing.

Amen, Heath! Preach on! You pinned the tail right on the donkey's rear ends.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0209/Pelosi_Reid_have_failed_Shuler_says.html
-----------------------------------------------------------

Manley sacks Shuler

Harry Reid spokesman Jim Manley on Heath Shuler's comment that Reid and Nancy Pelosi "failed" on bipartisanship. It's a good one:

"Let me get this straight - this is coming from a guy who threw more than twice as many interceptions than touchdowns?

"Maybe Someone should tell congressman Shuler that under the leadership of President Obama we have put together a bipartisan bill that will create or save 3 to 4 million jobs, and that we have been more than willing to work with our Republican friends. We have accepted some of their ideas and will continue to do so. But not at the expense of creating jobs, investing in our future of helping the middle class. He can stand on a stage if he wants, but senate democrats are busy trying to pass legislation that will provide essential investments designed to create and save jobs."

In four years as an NFL QB -- three with the Redskins, one with the Saints -- Shuler threw 32 INTs while tallying only 15 TDs. Shuler was the third overall pick in the 1994 NFL draft and held out for a seven-year $19 million contract, but completed fewer than half his passes -- with a rock-bottom 54.3 lifetime passer rating.

In 2008, ESPN rated him the 4th biggest draft bust in league history.

By Glenn Thrush 04:05 PM


-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0209/Manley_sacks_Shuler.html?showall
-----------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

I don't know how anyone in Sen. Reid's camp can fight back when he was the Senate leader when Congress had the lowest approval ratings EVER. How does being a QB in the NFL compare to being Senate Majority Leader? Right now, it seems to me that Shuler is doing a better job at being bipartisan than Reid or Pelosi. Then again, that isn't saying much.