Forget the party; a letter by a name means nothing anymore -- unless it is anything other than an R or D (but sack all incumbents regardless).
"Key bipartisan unemployment bill passed" by Associated Press | March 16, 2010
WASHINGTON — A bipartisan bill that would provide tax cuts for businesses that hire unemployed workers cleared a GOP filibuster in the Senate yesterday, opening the way for final congressional approval.
The Senate voted, 61 to 30, to end debate on the measure. The Senate is expected to vote on final passage today or tomorrow, sending the bill to President Obama for his signature....
The $35 billion bill blends $15 billion in tax cuts and subsidies for infrastructure bonds issued by local governments with $20 billion in federal transportation money.
Like we need to get ripped off paying investors back (plus yearly interest payments) when we are already bleeding tax loot.
The Senate passed a similar measure in February. The House made minor changes when it passed the bill, requiring its return to the Senate for approval.
And yet they shove through a health care pile of poo... ooooooh, stop right there!
Passage would give Obama a much-needed victory while highlighting Democratic efforts in Congress to address unemployment....
I'm sick of everything always being ABOUT HIM and HIS POLITICAL HEALTH, especially since his is nothing but an agenda-pushing tool of Zion.
--more--"
And the political hoorahs, etc.?
Can't take those anymore.
"Democrats buoyed as Senate clears $18b jobs bill; Measure gives incentives for firms to hire" by Ben Pershing, Washington Post | March 18, 2010
WASHINGTON — The Senate cleared an $18 billion jobs bill for President Obama’s signature yesterday, a down payment on what Democrats hope will be a significant election-year investment in boosting the economy....
Yeah, BANKS GET BILLIONS inside a WEEK; the WARS are FULLY FUNDED FOREVER; ISRAEL gets the checks cut pronto; and INSURANCE COMPANIES were just awarded a siphoning stream from your wallet for the foreseeable future.
And yet you have been waiting and waiting and waiting on jobs, 'murkn!
The Senate had passed the measure but the House tweaked it, requiring the second Senate vote before it could go to the White House....
Though extremely small compared with last year’s economic stimulus package, the measure represents the first clear legislative shot in months aimed at persistent unemployment... and bogged down in the health care debate. Democrats are eager to pivot to the economy, which polls regularly identify as Americans’ most pressing concern....
They could have dropped that health bill we did not want at any time and pivoted, so I'll say I'm insulted and leave it at that.
The centerpiece is a program giving companies a break from paying Social Security taxes for the remainder of 2010 on any workers they hire who had been unemployed for at least 60 days. Employers would also get a $1,000 tax credit for each of those workers who stays on the payroll for at least one year. The measure includes a one-year extension of the law governing federal transportation funding and would transfer $20 billion into the highway trust fund.
It also extends a tax break allowing companies to write off equipment purchases and expands the Build America Bonds program, which helps state and local governments secure financing for infrastructure projects. Some critics have questioned whether the package is big enough to make a dent in the nation’s persistent unemployment problem, arguing that the new payroll tax break is unlikely to spur much hiring that wouldn’t have otherwise occurred. Many Republicans suggest the bill uses accounting sleight of hand to make the measure appear to be budget-neutral.
They both do; depends on who holds the gavel.
Democrats counter that the measure will give employers a tangible and immediate incentive to add workers, citing studies suggesting that a payroll tax break could encourage the creation of hundreds of thousands of jobs.
So sick of hearing that when the things have been flooding out by the hundreds of thousands. Promises, promises, and away the tax loot goes.
Democrats at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue vow that this is only the first part of their broader “jobs agenda.’’
But beyond this first jobs measure, the way forward is murky.
Both chambers have approved jobs packages in the neighborhood of $150 billion. But the bills reflect starkly different priorities, making it difficult to craft a compromise. Along with extensions of unemployment insurance and COBRA health benefits, the Senate measure includes a large package of extensions of tax breaks popular with the business community. The House bill omits the tax extensions and adds significant new spending for infrastructure projects as well as several billion dollars to help prevent state and local governments from laying off teachers, police, and firefighters.
Many liberals in the House are contemptuous of the Senate bill’s emphasis on tax breaks, and Congressional Black Caucus members have been outspoken in calling for more money for poor areas and the chronically unemployed. But Republicans and moderate Democrats in the Senate appear unlikely to back a compromise bill that includes the House’s preferred priorities.So WTF is going on and WHY MUST YOU WAIT AGAIN, American?
Can't even bail yourself out with your money.
--more--"
So WHAT HAPPENED?
"9,200 in Bay State lose access to jobless benefits; Democrats seeking to pass an extension" by Matt Viser, Globe Staff | April 6, 2010
WASHINGTON — Nearly 9,200 Massachusetts residents lost access to federal jobless benefits yesterday, and they could remain without their federal lifeline if Congress does not act quickly next week to resolve partisan differences over how to pay for the benefits.
Because the Senate did not pass an extension before leaving last month for a two-week break, benefits were halted, at least temporarily, for more than 212,000 unemployed residents throughout the country this week, according to estimates by the National Employment Law Project.
Oh, so THEY SCURRIED OUT of TOWN for a TWO-WEEK VACATION on YOUR DIME while the "public servants" let YOUR UNEMPLOYMENT LIFELINE run out, America!
I'll say WHAT a SLAP in the FACE because I'm JUST FEELING SO SAD for YOU, my countrymen and women!
In addition to the Massachusetts residents who lost unemployment benefits, there are about 1,300 others throughout New England.
“There are people who will not get a check this week,’’ said Andrew Stettner, deputy director of the National Employment Law Project.
Yeah, and PLENTY of PEOPLE who WILL (mentioned above)!!!!
“There are people counting on a check this week and they won’t get it. If they needed it for April rent, for gas to go to a job interview, they’re not going to have it.’’
But we ALL KNOW WHO WILL!!!
Lawmakers are scheduled to return to Washington next week, and the Senate plans to take up the measure Monday afternoon.
How do you feel being HUNG OUT to DRY while THEY VACATIONED, America?
I wish they had STAYED OUT of TOWN!
But Republicans are largely opposed to it unless a source is found for the $10 billion cost of the extension.
Yup, REPUGLICANS to the END!!!
They AIN'T WORRIED about BANK BOOSTING-LOOTING or WARS WITHOUT END and are always their with the checkbook for Zionist or corporate AmeriKa.
Because Democrats have 59 votes, they will need at least one Republican to avoid a filibuster, and focus will probably turn to several moderate Republicans from New England, including Olympia J. Snowe and Susan M. Collins of Maine.
No wonder what's-his-face was up here doin' some stroking.
And I AM OFFENDED by the INVOKING of THAT MANEUVER after the HEALTH CARE FARCE and Brownie's erection, 'er, election.
Senator Scott Brown, Republican of Massachusetts, who has tried to strike a bipartisan tone, echoed comments by other Senate Republicans in expressing concern over how the extension will be paid for. “Senator Brown believes it is important for colleagues on both sides of the political aisle to work together next week to come up with a fiscally responsible way to extend unemployment benefits without adding to the national debt,’’ his press secretary, Colin Reed, said in a statement.
Every time you turn around the ghost of Fat Ted is kicking us in the a** around here!!!
The comments were blasted by an aide to Senate majority leader Harry Reid, and also put Brown at loggerheads with Senator John F. Kerry, who strongly supports the extension.
“This has nothing to do with liberal or conservative. This is common sense,’’ Kerry said in a statement. “We’re talking about people who have been working their whole lives until the economy hit the skids.’’
That's correct about our political system. It's one-party, two-factions, in service to corporations, banks, and the higher-ups who control them!
One in 10 workers in Massachusetts was unemployed in February, according to the most recent statistics compiled by the state. There were nearly 38,000 new and additional unemployment claims filed, and about 143,000 people who continued their unemployment claims.
A spokesman for Reid called Brown’s stance “the classic zig-zag.’’
“What in the world do they have against the working class families in this country in demanding the budget be balanced on their backs?’’ said the spokesman, Jim Manley.
Same could be asked of you guys.
Democrats largely argue that the benefits are so important, and the economy so shaky, that they should be extended regardless of whether they add to the long-term debt. Republicans disagree, saying the benefits should be extended only if a source to pay for them is found. The House has already approved a version of the extension, and Senate Democrats had tried to approve the extension on the last day of the session in March....
But they can strong-arm the health tax through, blah, blah.
I've made it clear where I am for cutting, etc. This grows tiresome.
If a deal is reached, the effects, while grist for partisan battles, might not be dire. Senate Democrats are hoping to make the payments retroactive.
Yeah, but the point is YOU ARE WAITING and NEED YOUR MONEY NOW, America!!!
Banks got it after.... oh, never mind!!!!!
But if an agreement cannot be reached, the implications are far-reaching and more workers will begin to lose their unemployment checks.
You better get looking for that nonexistent job NOW!
And GUESS WHOSE CHECKS will STILL be GETTING CUT from YOUR CHECKBOOK, unemployed (yes, you must pay taxes on unemployment compensation here in AmeriKa) taxpayers?
"Earmarks rule likely to have little effect" by R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post | March 16, 2010
Related: House Democrats Bite the Corporate Hand That Feeds Them
Oh, so the BIG POLITICAL PRODUCTION was a BIG PILE of POOP, huh?
Sorry, readers, I lost it just for a second there, arrgh!
WASHINGTON — Twice in recent years, House Appropriations Committee chairman David R. Obey helped obtain earmarks totaling $3.2 million for a home-state university to study how to make military jet fuel from plants.
It's what we are all about no matter what heading the loot is labeled.
I'm sure that is a "green" investment.
Standing behind that nonprofit work, however, is a for-profit Chicago firm that often partners with universities to reap part of their earmark benefits. Similar collaborations between private companies and nonprofits will pose tricky questions under a policy intended to end earmarks to profit-making firms, which Obey, a Democrat of Wisconsin, helped shepherd through the House Democratic caucus last week.
One might almost say conspiracy.
That new rule was widely touted as a crackdown, but in reality it could leave untouched almost 90 percent of typical earmarks.
I suspected it was (can't say it).
The reason is that, like Obey’s earmarks, most of the billions of dollars in earmarks approved by Congress each year involve handing out funds to state or local agencies or to nonprofit institutions, which then dole out part of the money to private contractors. As a result, the new Democratic rule, and a proposal by House Republicans to stop all earmarks for one year, are unlikely to significantly curb Washington’s booming earmark industry, experts said....
After last week’s announcement, road-builders, architectural and engineering firms, construction companies, scientific researchers, and myriad private firms exploring obscure or unrequested projects will probably expand cooperative ventures with nonprofits, Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonprofit that has criticized earmarking, and others said....
In making their announcement Wednesday, the Democrats estimated that about 1,000 earmarks — or 11 percent of those in this year’s appropriation bills — would have been cut if their new policy had been in effect. That would have left in place around 8,400 earmarks, worth about $8.3 billion. Eliminating those requested solely by House Republicans would have cut another $800 million, leaving the vast majority of earmarks unscathed, Ellis’s group said.
Moreover, neither the Democrats’ ban or Republicans’ proposal would cover much larger, congressionally directed grants and contracts to major federal contractors, worth another $5.9 billion in the 2010 appropriations bills. That is because lawmakers narrowly defined what constitutes an earmark to include only entities that did not compete for funds.
Sadly, it is all taxpayer loot as the citizen-taxpayer is neglected by this government and its "public servants."
That leaves out big-ticket defense programs expanded or kept alive annually by lawmakers to boost home-state employment or to meet less-than-urgent needs of the Defense Department.
Why is that NO SURPRISE at ALL?!!
In 2010, these included 10 unrequested C-17 transport planes costing $2.5 billion, unrequested all-terrain vehicles costing $825 million, 14 other unrequested planes costing $732 million, and an unrequested second engine for the F-35 jet costing half a billion dollars.
Ellis calls these “undisclosed earmarks’’ because they were added to the budget at the request of lawmakers and defense contractors who had competed to win the initial contracts. In another loophole, the Senate, which seems not to share the House’s anxieties about earmarks, can reinstate what the House has banned and those seeking access to public funds could shift their lobbying and related campaign spending to the Senate. “If the Senate doesn’t go along . . . it will make these changes toothless,’’ Ellis said.
Yeah, but we know who is taking a big bite to the derriere, don't we, taxpayers?
Whether the administration will intercede to force change is unclear....
I wouldn't be waiting around for them.
--more--"
