• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

O

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
12,994
Reaction score
5,732
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
From the WashingtonTimes.com:

House Republicans do not have enough support to pass their debt-ceiling increase plan on their own, a top conservative said Tuesday as his party’s leaders tried to cobble together a coalition of Republicans and Democrats to put the bill over the top.

“There are not 218 Republicans in support of this plan,” Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican who heads the powerful conservative caucus in the House, told reporters Tuesday morning.
Click to expand...

Seems the failed leadership is on Speaker Boehner.
 
Boehner is in so far over his head he can't even see daylight.
 
liblady said:
the lie that they passed a BIPARTISAN bill in the house. that one.
Click to expand...

They did pass a bipartisan bill in the House. The Senate refused to allow a vote on it.
 
1Perry said:
They did pass a bipartisan bill in the House. The Senate refused to allow a vote on it.
Click to expand...

Five out of 193 Democrats voted for it. You call that bipartisan? LOL
 
AdamT said:
Five out of 193 Democrats voted for it. You call that bipartisan? LOL
Click to expand...

bi·par·ti·san   /baɪˈpɑrtəzən/ Show Spelled[bahy-pahr-tuh-zuhn] Show IPA
adjective
representing, characterized by, or including members from two parties or factions:

So yeah, it is bipartisan, as people from two parties voted on it.
 
liblady said:
the lie that they passed a BIPARTISAN bill in the house. that one.
Click to expand...

Oh, that one. Yes, I LMAO when the FoxNews commentary stated firmly, "...if you consider 5 Democrat votes [on Cut, Cap and Balance] as bipartisanship". I wouldn't be surprised if those 5 Dem votes were from Blue-Dog Dems who would have voted that way anyway.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
Five out of 193 Democrats voted for it. You call that bipartisan? LOL
Click to expand...

Compared to the vote against the presidents budget, not it is not very bipartisan. As far as any plan to raise the debt limit, it's the most bipartisan yet.
 
tessaesque said:
bi·par·ti·san   /baɪˈpɑrtəzən/ Show Spelled[bahy-pahr-tuh-zuhn] Show IPA
adjective
representing, characterized by, or including members from two parties or factions:

So yeah, it is bipartisan, as people from two parties voted on it.
Click to expand...

Ah, good to know. Henceforth we must all remember that the health care reform measure (formerly known as "Obamacare") was a bipartisan effort.
 
AdamT said:
Ah, good to know. Henceforth we must all remember that the health care reform measure (formerly known as "Obamacare") was a bipartisan effort.
Click to expand...

Bipartisan vote, democrat effort. Just like the bill Boehner referenced had a bipartisan vote, republican effort.
 
tessaesque said:
bi·par·ti·san   /baɪˈpɑrtəzən/ Show Spelled[bahy-pahr-tuh-zuhn] Show IPA
adjective
representing, characterized by, or including members from two parties or factions:

So yeah, it is bipartisan, as people from two parties voted on it.
Click to expand...

well, then i guess every vote is bipartisan. :roll:
 
tessaesque said:
Bipartisan vote, democrat effort. Just like the bill Boehner referenced had a bipartisan vote, republican effort.
Click to expand...

Exactly! The bipartisan ACA!
 
Objective Voice said:
From the WashingtonTimes.com:

Seems the failed leadership is on Speaker Boehner.
Click to expand...

This intraparty issue is probably the key factor that has tied Speaker Boehner's hands. The failure of Republicans to agree on a common goal has weakened Speaker Boehner's position. It is a problem that has festered for some time, in part, because Speaker Boehner is not sufficiently strong to bring the more uncompromising elements into reasonable compliance over a common goal. It is also a consequence of the intraparty rivalry between Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor.

That Cantor strongly backed the Speaker today doesn't mean that the corrosive dynamic can immediately be overcome. The reality is that a significant share of Republicans is probably not going to support a debt limit increase under virtually any circumstances. If, in the end, their instransigence is not met by some internal punishment e.g., concerning Committee assignments, the incentives for such intransigence could remain strong. Then, it is entirely plausible, that those holding the most extreme positions could exercise a sort of veto over Republican policy making. Such a situation would undermine Speaker Boehner's negotiating credibility and make it more difficult for the full House to forge bipartisan consensus. In turn, the absence of such consensus would promote further gridlock, leading to greater distrust among the two parties and growing frustration within each party.

IMO, it is imperative that the House Leadership make abundantly clear that Republicans must support the debt ceiling package on Wednesday and then any package that is reconciled with the Senate (the Senate version will differ) given the enormous stakes involved. Such a strong stand might be anti-democratic, but the consequences of a failure to raise the debt ceiling are sufficiently grave that Congressional leaders need to be willing to impose agreement, if necessary, to avert such an outcome. Occasionally, leaders need to take large risks and expend substantial political capital. This is one situation where such risktaking and expenditure of political capital is necessary.
 
liblady said:
well, then i guess every vote is bipartisan. :roll:
Click to expand...

Usually, yes. Doesn't mean the BILL is bipartisan, but if two parties VOTE for it the passage is certainly bipartisan.
 
liblady said:
not so effective spin.
Click to expand...

I'm not spinning anything. I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to call Boehner a liar over using the term "bipartisan" when, per the very definition of the word, the vote was most certainly bipartisan.
 
tessaesque said:
I'm not spinning anything. I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to call Boehner a liar over using the term "bipartisan" when, per the very definition of the word, the vote was most certainly bipartisan.
Click to expand...

of course it was NOT. here is what he said: "The House has passed a bill to raise the debt limit with bipartisan support. ". PATENTLY UNTRUE, when only 5 of the up votes were by dems. partisan by any stretch of the imagination, and you are off base calling it anything but partisan.
 
liblady said:
the lie that they passed a BIPARTISAN bill in the house. that one.
Click to expand...

It's a meaningless term that both parties have been using for years. It's no coincidence that politicians use the term often in those instances where the number of votes they had from the other party can be counted on one hand. Obama did the same thing when the healthcare bill was first being proposed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom