After reading this entire thread, I think there are a few things that need to be clarified.
1. The original bill that came out of the House was H.R. 3630. This bill would have done 5 things:
a) extend the payroll tax cut for all 12-months of 2012.
b) extend unemployment benefits for the full year, 2012.
c) paid for the payroll tax cut extension by closing some tax loopholes on millionaires and pay imposing a fee on first-time home buyers under Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loan guarantee programs.
d) give the President 60-days to determine if he would approve the KeystoneXL pipeline project under the September 2008 permit and the August 2011 environmental impact study. If approved, up to four EPA regulations dealing with boilers and approved in March of this year would be suspended. (Have no idea what boilers have to do with the pipeline, but that's Congress for you...sticking stuff in legislation where it really doesn't belong).
2. H.R. 3630 was passed by the House and sent to the Senate, whereby the Senate decided to table the bill and instead vote on an amended bill, S. Amdt 1465 which only included:
a) 60-day review period for the President to approve KeystoneXL pipeline w/same caveats as HR 3630.
b) extend payroll tax cut for 60-days
3. House receives S. Amdt 1465 and rejects it presumably because Tea Party Republicans wanted the payroll tax cut extended for the full year.
Now, here's the thing...
Most people believe this payroll tax extension argument is nothing more than a redherring. You would be right. To that, I have to give tessaesque, AdamT and 00timh credit. IMO, they've come closest to figuring out the real deal behind all the political wrangling than anyone else. Truth is, the way HR 3630 was structured was a ploy by House Republicans but botched by Sen. McConnell.
Speaker Boehner wanted H.R. 3630 to pass because it would have done two things for the image of the Republican party:
1) Showed they weren't just for tax cuts for the wealthy, but that they could be compassionate towards the working-class as well.
2) Box the President into making a choice: Accept a bill that contained the payroll tax cut for the full-year OR follow through on his veto threat against any legislation that contained a provision on authorizing the KeystoneXL pipeline.
Sen. McConnell screwed him by ensuring that Sen. Reid and the Dems would not receive the super majority vote needed to pass HR 3630. So, instead he agrees with Reid to approve the amended bill, S. Amdt 1465 assuming the House would pass it.
Boehner initially voices his okay, but then recants once he learns that GOP Tea Partiers were against a 60-day stopgap measure on extending the payroll tax cut. Now, here's where the Republican leadership screwed themselves out of a moral victory...
Political end-fighting. In truth, McConnell's S. Amdt 1465 was toxic for the President. Either he approves it and accept the pipeline project or he rejects it and cost middle-class taxpayers a tax cut. (Anyone really think the 60-day payroll tax extension wouldn't have been extended for the full-year had the President accepted the pipeline project?) But there's more to this than most people would ordinarily consider. To that, I give credit to Gill. He's the only one who grasped the "process" associated with sending HR 3630 as well as S. Amdt 1465 up for a vote. In seeking a conference, Boehner (and Cantor) hoped to achieve gridlock on HR 3630 (which I'm sure they would have since the bill passed with very little Democrat support) and force the President to get involved in negotiations. The idea being to try to paint the President as inaffectual. Why do you think Boehner has been insisting that the President recall Congress in session? Problem here is the President can
only call Congress back into session under "extraordinary occasions" per Art 2, Sect 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Thus, the question becomes: "Does extending the payroll tax cut meet the test of an 'extraordinary occasion'"?
This entire ordeal has turned out better for the President and much worse for Republicans. Not only does it illustrate that Boehner still doesn't have full control over the GOP in the House, it also shows that the Republican leadership moreso than the President are, in fact, playing politics.
Bottom Line: The GOP wound up tripping over their own feet on this one in their attempt to back the President into a corner. The stupid part is he was ready to capitulate on behalf of the middle-class...or was he?
You can review the vote count and both bills, HR 3630 and S. Amdt 1465 at
GovTrack.us
EDIT: Just thought I'd add this quote from danarhea from the
thread.
And of course, although I disagree with Obama on a lot of things, sometimes strongly, I have to say that he is right on this one. After all, Speaker Boehner originally kicked this over to the Senate, demanding that Democrats compromise. Democrats in the Senate DID compromise to the extent that the unemployment tax bill passed the Senate with a LOT of Republican support. When it came back to the House, Boehner could not keep the extremists in his party in line, and the compromise failed. I can't fault Boehner for attempting to kick this back to the Senate, and demand more compromises again, even though GOP Senators managed to already extract compromises. Boehner is over a barrel, and his leadership is weak. In the end, almost all of the House Republicans revolted against the bipartisan Senate plan, which was endorsed by no less than Mitch McConnell himself.
Now, instead of forcing Obama's hand, as they hoped to do, House Republicans have put themselves in the hot seat, because the failure here is certainly going to be a red meat issue for Obama and the Democratic party in 2012. When you only hold one House and not the Presidency, "my way or the highway" is not going to work. This was a serious miscalculation on the part of House Republicans, who will suffer consequences for their actions next year. This can still be avoided. Don't attempt to call Obama's bluff. Just go back into session and pass the damn thing. You will look like heroes if you do, and goats if you don't.
Article is here.
