Senate Republicans Who Used To Support PAYGO Now Vote Against It (passed 60-40)

[ProSense]

Senate Republicans Who Used To Support PAYGO Now Vote Against It

In his State of the Union address last night, President Obama urged the Senate to adopt pay-as-you-go rules (PAYGO), which essentially stipulate that all spending increases will be offset by either cuts elsewhere or tax increases. “When the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason for why we had record surpluses in the 1990s,” Obama said.

Today, the Senate followed through, and considering all of the deficit fearmongering that has been going on in Congress, you’d think that it would have passed by a fairly wide margin. But no. Instead, the rules passed on a party line vote of 60-40.

And the blanket Republican opposition is particularly interesting considering that some Senate Republicans used to support PAYGO, even when it was opposed by their own party. For instance, in 2004, three current Senate Republicans — Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) — joined 47 Democrats in adopting PAYGO, against the majority Republicans’ wishes (although the rule was ultimately scuttled when Congress failed to pass a budget). The next year, the same three senators were joined by Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) in a failed attempt to implement the rule.

Yet all four of them opposed the rule today. Here’s what they’ve had to say in favor of PAYGO in the past:

more

[Jennicut]

1. Because they are the party of no...against everything to do with the President.

It is obvious. I bet Snowe and Collins are threatened in Repub meetings, fall in line or else.

[Cosmocat]

6. And the liberal press is just killing the Rs about this ...

RIGHT?

All over CNN I assume, the major network news, the covers of the major newspapers, articles in Newsweek, Time, ect ...

Yeah, we will hear more of BO owning friggen Bush's economic and budgetary disasters ...

[livetohike]

2. The Senate Republicans have no clue what to do now that

they got their asses kicked in the SOTU. They are trying to hold on to their "just say no" to everything mantra and they are going to look foolish not voting for things they say they are for.

I'm loving it :-).

[impik]

10. Yep. Obama fooled them again. They can't just start say Yes

because it'll make them look "weak". And now that America know the truth about them, we'll see how far that "Always say no" shtick will take them.

Seriously, aren't they're the "fiscal hawks"????

[livetohike]

11. They think they are, but my husband said that it's the Democrats

who are the real money managers. The Republican administrations get us into a deep hole and economic catastrophes and it's up to the Democrats to figure out how to fix everything.

Really, I think we are all going to get some big laughs out of their scrambling around. I saw Cantor on tv this morning complaining that he gave the Pres. a stimulus proposal. What the hell was that? That one page document with two bullet points on it? :rofl:

[high density]

3. My senators in Maine are worthless

When they come up for re-election the media will remind us daily about all how "moderate" they are. On election day shitloads of Democrats will gleefully fill in the dot for one of these idiots.

[WCGreen]

4. The reason they do this is to not jeopardize their fund raising...

Which really means they don't have to work all that hard to raise money if they toe the party line...

[WritingIsMyReligion]

5. Snowe and Collins are a pair of increasingly obnoxious pricks.

Earliest they're up again is 2012 (for Snowe; 2014 for Collins).

Goddamn.

[quakerboy]

7. Wait one second

So, we can force through pay-go in one day before the new senator is chosen. But we better not consider passing health care without the input from the new republican, even though we've all spent a year working intensively on this.

How does this make any sense?

[ProSense]

9. On health care:

what would they be voting on?

Reconciliation will result in a stronger bill, and it only needs 51 votes.

[quakerboy]

14. That is irrelevant to my question.

The should go to reconcilliation, seeing as its the only chance of passing a decent bill.

But my question is" why would it be necessary to wait until after Brown is seated to do health care, particularly when reconcilliation renders his vote in the matter immaterial, but not for this, where the vote he was not there to cast was the margin of victory?

[impik]

8. God, what a bunch of losers

[Lord Helmet]

12. Genius strategy getting the Rs on record voting en bloc against Pay-Go.

It'll make one hell of a campaign ad.

[agentS]

13. I guess Grayson was right after all

The House of Lord/the Senate has 50 to 60 people winning to do something while the rest just vote no on everything.
That not government; that's 50% automation.

Why show up if you're just going to push the NO button all the damn time? Just duct tape the button down and fund-raise the rest of the fucking time! On voice votes, just hire a bum to stand in line and shout NO once during the roll call!

Honestly, what's the point of being there for Republicans? Glory? Glamor? The money? The off-chance something historic happens?

[Yurovsky]

15. Money... Money... Money ...

follow the money. That's why the far right sticks around. And in the off chance they ever get back into power, it'll be like they hit the lotto as the corporate thugs bring in the wheelbarrows full o' cash.

Thank you, SCOTUS...