What’s behind GOP House plan to vote down payroll tax compromise

House Speaker John Boehner said Republicans will vote down the bill when it comes to the floor later today.
REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
House Speaker John Boehner said Republicans will vote down the bill when it comes to the floor later today.

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (6)

  1. Submitted by Bernice Vetsch on 12/19/2011 - 02:43 pm.

    I believe what the Senate passed was the Reid-McConnell Amendment which, “in the nature of a substitute,” reads that not just the payroll tax but all the Bush tax cuts plus tax breaks for the energy industry that otherwise will soon expire will continue for two months. It could be that the House Republicans want a one-year extension to please the oil-gas-coal and nuclear folks, even though some continued aid for renewables is also in the bill.

    I don’t know if the original bill included these items or not, but if not they certainly were part of the bill as passed.

  2. Submitted by Diane Clare on 12/19/2011 - 04:57 pm.

    I think we have to really question what the Senate is up to. They certainly don’t seem to have main street’s best interests in mind with the few bills that come up for vote. They don’t want a working annual budget, they force continuing resolutions instead of appropriations, and they ignore the House’s attempts to legislate any jobs bills. Do we really need them?

  3. Submitted by Gerald Abrahamson on 12/19/2011 - 09:36 pm.

    Dems have a voting majority in the Senate–so any bill that can “get to the floor” FOR a vote can be passed with their simple majority. The REAL problem is the Reps–they will allow NOTHING to
    “get to the floor” for precisely that reason. Hence, the Senate Reps are the real problem–because it requires 60 votes to *force* an end to their talking and bring ANY bill up for a vote that one party (or the other) does NOT want.

  4. Submitted by Alonza Fronczak on 12/19/2011 - 09:50 pm.

    We need to get the Keystone pipeline in place, currently the Canadians can only sell in the upper mid-west and the price could be a lot more if only we provide them with a pipeline through our country to the gulf where it can be shipped to China and other locations placing the oil into the world market. When that happens the cost of gas in the mid-west will also go up by at least 20% right away.

    Will Canada allow the shipping of ore from Poly-Tech to Canada to use the acid baths to remove the ore and not worry about the large acid pools being placed on the open ground?

  5. Submitted by Richard Schulze on 12/20/2011 - 07:08 am.

    Keystone just isn’t that important. It won’t destroy the atmosphere or revive the economy. And how can an international pipeline make America energy independent?

  6. Submitted by Bernice Vetsch on 12/20/2011 - 09:24 am.

    1) Keystone IS important because of the damage it has and will do to the environment in both Canada and the US, while the oil will probably be shipped to China or wherever. It will be of zero benefit to our country and the president must refuse to let it happen.

    2) This morning, William Gould of Stanford was on Democracy Now to discuss his December 17 NY Times article — one which may explain why the House hasn’t voted on the Senate bill.

    The National Labor Relations Board cannot make decisions except by majority vote (I think he said this is a new rule; not sure though). At the moment, it has only two members and so cannot conduct any business. The House is refusing to vote on the Senate bill by insisting on a full-year extension instead of two months. As long as there is NO bill passed, the Senate has to remain in Washington in case there’s a new conference version to vote on or the House approves the version the Senate passed.

    As long as the Senate is in session during a recess period, which usually means a pro forma one-minute session to open and then close for the day, the president cannot make recess appointments to fill the open NLRB positions (or any other vital appointments).

    It is perhaps the most blatant anti-worker move yet on the part of the Right, since workers may lose their right to organize or to get rulings on employer abuses.

Leave a Reply