Earlier today, it was reported that House Republicans would insist on adding spending cuts to the version of the fiscal-cliff deal that the Senate passed. However, faced with the likelihood that President Obama would denounce such a measure, and the Democrat-led Senate would reject the House version, the decision has now reportedly been made to permit a straight up-or-down vote on the Senate bill. It is currently being “debated” on the House floor and is expected to pass.
UPDATE: Darrell Issa has an interesting theory on the Republican Senators who voted for this deal:
BLITZER: All of those 89, including all of those conservative Republicans, including Pat Toomey and others, they were wrong?
ISSA: You know, Wolf, frankly I can’t account for what happens after midnight and all of that partying and revelry and drinking that goes on on New Years Eve at 2:00 in the morning.
Just don’t say they were “spending like drunken sailors.” At least sailors spend their own money.
They just began one hour of final debate on the bill at 9:46 p.m. ET, which means the vote should conclude shortly after 11.
UPDATE II: And they just voted to pass it, 257-167, with Democrats voting overwhelmingly in favor, and Republicans voting against it by about a 2-to-1 margin.
PREVIOUSLY:
- Jan. 1: Fiscal-Cliff Kabuki Nears Final Scene UPDATE: House GOP Wants More Spending Cuts Before Final Vote
- Dec. 31: ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Deal Rumored; Obama Supporters Cheer Tax Increases on Rich
- Dec. 28: Objectively Worse: Democrats to Blame for the Hyper-Partisanship They Decry
- Dec. 28: Civility, He Says: Steny Hoyer Compares Republicans to Hostage-Takers
- Dec. 26: Greedy Corporate Swine at Starbucks Cleverly Market Altruistic Image
- Dec. 10: Two Weeks Until Christmas and Three Weeks Until ‘Fiscal Cliff’
- Dec. 1: Happy Fiscal Cliff Holidays
So…the GOP is determined to Whig-Out, eh?
Seriously? How many more times are we going to allow these people to disappoint us?
You left this one off of your Previously list, Stacy.
Vote. it. down.
Or table it to committee or whatever. If they’re going to force-feed us tax hikes, tie the damn spending cuts to it, period.
I expect spending to continue its asymptotic ascent towards infinity, while taxes will go up, a little bit.
The upside to all this is that not all the money in China can support this trend. It will end. The downside is me and my neighbors will have to start make plans for our personal Dien Bien Phu.
Democrats. Jesus.
David Riddle liked this on Facebook.
[…] really surprised that the Republicans caved? That’s all they ever do. So called conservative, Paul Ryan also voted yes on this crap. The final vote in the House was 257 TO 167. Just 151 Republicans voted against with 85 actually […]
The roll call.
They disappoint me.
Anyone who doesn’t support a primary challenger for each of the Republicans who voted for this is just as responsible for destroying the country as they are.
I prefer my Wiig with a Kristen in front of it.
Did you ever read Peanuts? Did Charlie Brown ever get to kick that damn ball?
Our new GOP-
Whig Mascot. I would name him “Failure.”
I just realized this vote was a preview of the selection for Speaker next Congress. Same 80-odd “climbers” on the R side voting Bone Head. Big bunch of Dems voting for him, too, except for the hardcore, sick-minded, Grayson types.
Here’s the roll call for the House vote.
Whups! You beat me…..I just posted the same link. My bad.
piss and moan
There was and is no good alternative. The amended version with spending cuts would not have been presented to the Senate, and the Let It Burn option would bring even more tax hikes and the spending cuts would be devastating to Defense.
Blame whoever you wish, when America reelected Obama and enough Democrats to keep control of the Senate, she ensured no meaningful spending cuts and no serious entitlement reform would happen for at least two more years, and probably four.
It’s fine, Jeff. Someone who was listening to our radio show tonight happened to share it in the chatroom.
Kabuki all the way. There is no opposition party. It’s an illusion.
Actually, let me rephrase: There is an opposition party… the entire Congress. It’s opposed to taxpayers except for their money.
This country has failed. Not everyone understands this yet. Happy New Year!
Not really. This law has a legitimate claim to bipartisan support.
Very, very disappointed in Paul Ryan. No reason for him to vote for this at all. Are there any serious primary challengers who could face him for 2014? That’s a question we need to answer very quickly.
Well, at least my Rep, Sam Johnson, voted against this thing.
Ewwwwww!
Bravo!
I fear that you’re right, but I pray otherwise.
Bingo!
Really…did we expect any different?
[…] Stacy McCain has the best line: Just don’t say they were “spending like drunken sailors.” At least sailors spend their own […]
Rush has been making a similar point. If Obama cannot own the last four years, how will he own any of this?
Sigh. No, you could see this stuff from a mile away, almost in slow motion.
For small values of Republican votes, yes. Would it be considered bipartisan if it were something the right wanted and the vote totals were flipped?
Oh wait, its only “bipartisan” when Democrats get their way or need political cover.
89 is not what I’d call “small.” Sure, not a majority of them, but still quite a few. And then there’s the Senate…
But yes, if that many Democrats voted for something reasonable, I’d say it had bipartisan support. Which I put at a lower hurdle than, say, “consensus” or anything with an “overwhelming” modifier.
Frankly, I can’t get worked up about Yea or Nay House votes. As @Adjoran:disqus mentioned, this was about as good as the House could get, given everything else. The bill was somewhat of a Kissingerian situation where I think we were all hoping that both sides would lose.
They flinched. Animals.
My congressman voted no. It’s sad that I felt the need to check.
Proposed constitutional amendment: “Any person serving in Congress must be occupied in a career or trade that requires his attendance in his district not less than 200 days each year. The houses of Congress shall adjust their rules and work schedules accordingly.”
Big fences make for brave little dogs. The internet is a very big fence, little dog.
You can’t call Bingo with only one ball selected on the new card for 2013. That requires, at the least, 5 balls be drawn from the drum …
I would have been disappointed if they had not caved. Disappointed in a good way if they hadn’t, but it would have been completely against their political DNA not to cave.
[…] with common sense to expect us to buy into this hustle.So last night, as the House debated the “fiscal cliff” deal, I was insulted when Charles Rangel got up and began ranting about how wrong it was for Republicans […]
As long as the current leadership of the GOP remains in place, we will NEVER get “meaningful spending cuts.” They have gone along to get along, for so long that they don’t know how to NOT spend other people’s money.
It’s time to dump the GOP and start fresh. The GOP leadership in DC are part of the problem and will never be part of the solution. They’ve never seen a tax they didn’t like.
We need to dump the GOP and start fresh…