NO VOTE-COUNTER, HE:

Dodd: Crucial 2 years ahead for Democrats (PAUL HUGHES, 11/10/06, Waterbury Republican-American)

U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., says the next two years will provide Democrats a chance to shine or give themselves a shiner.

Democrats in Connecticut and across the country campaigned on a promise of change this year, and change is what voters wanted.

“I think we have an opportunity to prove that this wasn’t just talk, but we can actually get things done,” Dodd said Thursday. […]

Within the first 100 hours, he said the new Democratic Congress should pass legislation to raise the federal minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $7.15.

Dodd also said the Democrats should vote to roll back some of President Bush’s tax cuts. He would only retain ones that benefit the middle class.

Dodd said Democrats need to overhaul the Medicare Part D program, such as allowing the federal government to directly negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies.

He also advocated action on universal health care, trade policy, transportation, housing, job creation, defense production and manufacturing.

Does he really see two-thirds of the Senate over-riding a tax hike veto?

Advertisements

10 Responses to NO VOTE-COUNTER, HE:

  1. John Thacker says:

    Does he really see two-thirds of the Senate over-riding a tax hike veto?

    Well, one question is how many of the tax cuts expire, like the estate tax and like the 529 plans did until extended. The Byrd Rule from 1990 allows any spending increase or tax cut that would still have effects ten years in the future to be challenged by a point of order and hence require cloture (60 votes) to pass. The way around the Byrd Rule is the ten year sunset clause.

    So the Democrats can just let certain tax cuts expire, which wouldn’t take a veto. Of course, many of those aren’t coming up for expiration until 2011, so there will be more elections first.

  2. AWW says:

    The GOP needs to be aggressive on the tax cuts. The Dems were
    able to thwart the GOP despite only having 45 members. The GOP
    should be able to do the same with 49.

    The way to force the Dems to vote on these (as opposed to just
    letting them expire) is to keep bringing them up/attaching them
    to bills/etc. The situation was the same in 2001 when a “weak”
    president faced a 50-50 senate. So it can be done.

  3. AWW says:

    A few other notes:

    The minimum wage is a tough one. It should be opposed on
    economic grounds. But given that the measures in MO and MT
    passed overwhelmingly (and may have contributed to GOP losses
    there) does the GOP pass it (hopefully tied to tax cuts) to get
    it out of the way?

    Only retain tax cuts that benefit the middle class – GOP should
    be able to accuse Dems of class warfare here, point out how any
    taxes they want to raise affect the middle class.

    Universal health care – please please bring back HillaryCare in
    time for the ’08 election.

  4. AC says:

    The minimum wage gets passed as part of the guest worker/amnesty/
    normalization bill that is such a no-brainer. The Democrats have
    been talking about minimum wage and making college tuition tax
    deductible–i.e., small potatoes stuff. For Dodd to come out
    belching a laundry list of non-starters shows what a moron he is.

    With respect to taxes: yes, all the Democrats have to do is let the
    tax cuts sunset, and yes, there’s no way a “rollback” doesn’t get
    vetoed–but shouldn’t the Republican majority have already addresses
    this?

  5. Orrin says:

    How? The point is that after the GOP took over in ’84 the Democrats made it so that anything significant requires 60+ votes. Now it comes back to bite them.

  6. John Thacker says:

    but shouldn’t the Republican majority have already addresses
    this?

    Not possible, thanks to the Byrd Rule of 1990 (named after You Know Who) it requires 60 votes to make any tax cut permanent. (The budget bills are exempt from filibusters, but the Byrd Rule says that “extraneous” amendments can be filibustered, which includes anything that changes revenue or expenditures at least ten years in the future.) They got 60 votes for the 529 plans to not expire, but not for most of the others.

  7. jim hamlen says:

    Harry Reid just said (after meeting with the President) that Congressional oversight is his no. 1 priority.

    And the German state (national?) prosecutor is apparently going to charge Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Tenet, and others
    with war crimes.

    The Democrats and the Germans….will the French be far behind? And just wait until the Chinese start.

    The GOP’s big issue in 2008 is going to be sovereignty, it seems. OJ, you should sign up early with McCain to
    get a head start. If it is played right, every Dem can be cornered like Kerry was two weeks ago.

  8. Bruno says:

    It’s 50/50 Bush would even veto it.

  9. Bob says:

    “Congressional oversight is his no. 1 priority”

    Yawn.

    “And the German state (national?) prosecutor is apparently going to charge Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Tenet, and others
    with war crimes.”

    Double Yawn.

    Neither thing can possibly make a lick of difference. Ask Ollie North about “oversight” hearings. Great Beltway sport, totally meaningless. As for
    war crimes trials, assuming that Merkel lets a farce like that proceed, how exactly will extradition occur?

  10. Orrin says:

    He won’t veto it if they package it with stuff he wants.

%d bloggers like this: