The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

House Passes Fiscal-Cliff Deal 257-167

Posted on | January 1, 2013 | 41 Comments

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:

Category: Barack Obama, Budget, Congress, Senate, Taxes

Comments

41 Responses to “House Passes Fiscal-Cliff Deal 257-167”

  1. Bob Belvedere
    January 1st, 2013 @ 9:20 pm

    So…the GOP is determined to Whig-Out, eh?

  2. sheryl
    January 1st, 2013 @ 9:42 pm

    Seriously? How many more times are we going to allow these people to disappoint us?

  3. Becca Lower
    January 1st, 2013 @ 9:49 pm

    You left this one off of your Previously list, Stacy.

  4. Finrod Felagund
    January 1st, 2013 @ 10:01 pm

    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.

  5. Patrick Carroll
    January 1st, 2013 @ 10:22 pm

    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.

  6. David Riddle
    January 1st, 2013 @ 10:42 pm

    David Riddle liked this on Facebook.

  7. Weeper Boehner votes yes on tax hikes – crap sandwich fiscal cliff bill passes House 257 TO 167 : Fire Andrea Mitchell!
    January 1st, 2013 @ 11:11 pm

    […] 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 […]

  8. Becca Lower
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:14 am

    The roll call.

  9. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:30 am

    They disappoint me.

  10. Rick20033
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:32 am

    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.

  11. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:33 am

    I prefer my Wiig with a Kristen in front of it.

  12. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:52 am

    Did you ever read Peanuts? Did Charlie Brown ever get to kick that damn ball?

  13. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:53 am

    Our new GOP-
    Whig Mascot. I would name him “Failure.”

  14. K-Bob
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 1:04 am

    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.

  15. JeffS
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 1:07 am

    Here’s the roll call for the House vote.

  16. JeffS
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 1:08 am

    Whups! You beat me…..I just posted the same link. My bad.

  17. Far-right squish
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 1:36 am

    piss and moan

  18. Adjoran
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 1:45 am

    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.

  19. Becca Lower
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 3:14 am

    It’s fine, Jeff. Someone who was listening to our radio show tonight happened to share it in the chatroom.

  20. AnonymousDrivel
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 4:36 am

    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!

  21. scarymatt
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 5:10 am

    Not really. This law has a legitimate claim to bipartisan support.

  22. Lightwave
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 7:02 am

    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.

  23. SDN
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 7:38 am

    Well, at least my Rep, Sam Johnson, voted against this thing.

  24. Bob Belvedere
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 8:15 am

    Ewwwwww!

  25. Bob Belvedere
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 8:15 am

    Bravo!

  26. Bob Belvedere
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 8:16 am

    I fear that you’re right, but I pray otherwise.

  27. Bob Belvedere
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 8:21 am

    Bingo!

  28. Bob Belvedere
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 8:22 am

    Really…did we expect any different?

  29. Da Tech Guy's Blog » Blog Archive The House Cliff Vote: A preview of coming attractions » Da Tech Guy's Blog
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 8:32 am

    […] Stacy McCain has the best line: Just don’t say they were “spending like drunken sailors.” At least sailors spend their own […]

  30. PhillyCon
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 9:24 am

    Rush has been making a similar point. If Obama cannot own the last four years, how will he own any of this?

  31. PhillyCon
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 9:26 am

    Sigh. No, you could see this stuff from a mile away, almost in slow motion.

  32. Cube
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 9:35 am

    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.

  33. scarymatt
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 9:46 am

    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.

  34. McGehee
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 10:37 am

    They flinched. Animals.

  35. McGehee
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 10:39 am

    My congressman voted no. It’s sad that I felt the need to check.

  36. McGehee
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 10:43 am

    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.”

  37. Rick20033
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:40 pm

    Big fences make for brave little dogs. The internet is a very big fence, little dog.

  38. Paul H. Lemmen
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 12:48 pm

    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 …

  39. Quartermaster
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 1:10 pm

    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.

  40. The Demographics of Envy : The Other McCain
    January 2nd, 2013 @ 3:09 pm

    […] 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 […]

  41. Rich Vail
    January 3rd, 2013 @ 5:44 am

    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…