
Senate Democrats have pivoted, at times clumsily, from a universal focus on health care reform to a universal focus on jobs legislation. But is jobs destined to get bogged down by the same legislative morass that ultimately stymied health care? Democrats say not on their watch.
Yesterday, Politico reported that Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) had told Democratic leadership that he'd like to take a crack at some elements of the Democrats' burgeoning job proposal in his Finance Committee. The news gave progressives, and rank and file Democrats flashbacks to the Baucus-led Gang of Six negotiations on health care reform, which dragged on for months and ultimately failed to secure any Republican votes.
But numerous Senate aides said today that the jobs push is--and will be--different. They say the sense of urgency is greater, and that leadership is busily figuring out how to enact a meaningful jobs package as expeditiously as possible.
Where Democrats are slightly at odds is over strategy: should a jobs package--or elements thereof--be put directly on the Senate floor, or should parts of it be put through the standard legislative process--hearings, amendments, votes--which could eat up precious time.
Ultimately leadership will make that decision, and a Democratic Senate aide confirms that Baucus will support whatever decision Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid makes.
"He is definitely on board," the aide said.
Additionally it's likely that some elements of the agenda will be brought straight to the floor no matter what. The question is whether expediting the more contentious elements of the agenda will win enough votes to overcome an expected filibuster. Baucus has his doubts--and aides say that's OK as long as jobs don't become health care redux.
"His aim is always rooted in that--in trying to get Republican support," said a separate, top Democratic aide.
Aides acknowledge that Baucus' suggestion took them by surprise, and wasn't met well. There was even some speculation that he may have been guarding his territory--the Finance Committee, which he chairs, has broad jurisdiction over federal revenue. But in the day since the news broke, they seem to have reached a consensus. No matter what, the first part of the jobs package will be moving forward soon--possibly next week. Still unclear is what provisions it will include--a new hire tax credit? infrastructure bonds? money for community banks?--and whether the other pieces will be similarly fast tracked. The answer to those question is still being hashed out by Democratic principals, and we may have more answers later this afternoon.
wbgonne
February 2, 2010 1:25 PM
We'll see.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
February 2, 2010 1:28 PM
that is infuriating.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
February 2, 2010 1:31 PM in reply to nova voter
Sure is.
That observation, that Democratic aides are more interested in policies and oblivious to politics (Josh made this earlier), is spot on. Let's hope they find a way out of that oblivion because if they don't, they won't be able to focus on policy because they won't have a job.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ohyeathatsright
February 2, 2010 1:56 PM in reply to CT Voter
I expect a clause in there with special compensation for unemployed politicians and aides. There are going to be a lot of them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
concerned parent
February 2, 2010 2:48 PM in reply to nova voter
Yeah its greater because they are in danger of losing their jobs. The only problem is we still have the same limp (so-called) leadership in the senate. Am I the only progressive who hopes to see Reid lose in november?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
February 2, 2010 1:32 PM
Yesterday, Politico reported that Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) had told Democratic leadership that he'd like to take a crack at some elements of the Democrats' burgeoning job proposal in his Finance Committee
This is the most disturbing thing I've read in weeks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbe1
February 2, 2010 3:55 PM in reply to CT Voter
It's really been fun trading views with the people here. It's a good group. I'm an independent who has voted republican only once in my life (long ago). However, I have just run out of enthusiasm for this White House, an institution which, in my view, has zero remaining credibility. Maybe I'll visit again if I read that Obama has fired Emanuel and grown a pair, but not until then, and no, I won't hold my breath. Peace.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
February 2, 2010 4:16 PM in reply to rbe1
Well, this is small comfort, but I keep it in mind: whatever my disappointments with the Obama Administration are, and there are more than a few, it's still far better than what we'd have with a President McCain.
Small comfort, at times, but then events like Friday's Q & A make me remember why I thought so highly of Obama during the campaign.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
February 2, 2010 1:33 PM
Bring it directly to the floor, and let the GOP filibuster at their peril. Then make sure everyone know that they are trying to kill a jobs bill, and why.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sunnysteve
February 2, 2010 1:35 PM
Send the whole package directly to the Senate floor, label it the JOBS ACT, and pray that the cloture vote fails. Then make them filibuster. Do not recess the Senate for a minute for any reason. Every day hold news conferences lamenting the filibuster of the JOBS ACT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
concerned parent
February 2, 2010 2:57 PM in reply to sunnysteve
That would be great except reid has no backbone, let alone any leadership skills to pull off such an event.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
February 2, 2010 1:36 PM
"Don't worry, we won't spend the better part of a year working on a jobs bill only to walk away from it like we just did with HCR. So, we're cool again right? Right?"
No. If they want anyone to have any confidence in them again, they need to FINISH THE DAMN HCR BILL FIRST. PERIOD.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
February 2, 2010 1:42 PM
Forgive me if I don't believe them. When it comes to fighting Republican Congressional opponents, Democrats can't get out of their own way. They don't seem to understand that this is no hold barred war, and rules don't apply. When they decide that playing by the rules, and doing what's right, instead of what wins, then we might get somewhere. Until then, a 99 to 1 Senate majority will still shrink from a Republican threat to filibuster, and factions will make passing an acceptable bill an unnecessarily difficult task.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tpmgary
February 2, 2010 1:43 PM
give John Boehner the responsibility of creating a jobs bill. Hold him accountable for whatever failure it becomes.
It's easy for Republicans (or Democrats) to hide from responsibility as a group. Let some of the leading Republicans take individual responsibility for creating something other than saying NO.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
February 2, 2010 1:53 PM in reply to tpmgary
This sounds like a devastating Machiavellian ploy. It would kill the bipartisanship whining refrain AND it will spotlight just how obstructionist and incompetent the Party of GNOP really is. It will never happen, but it would be so much fun to watch!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
February 2, 2010 1:54 PM in reply to tpmgary
Too easy. Boner's solution? Tax cuts. What else?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
February 2, 2010 3:16 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
But only for those making more than $250,000 per year. John's nothing, if not fiscally responsible. Just ask him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
February 2, 2010 1:59 PM
I wouldn't have baucus involved in sh*t. Throw him to the side and let someone else take the lead. He is a fool and a tool. He obviously doesn't care about jobs either. How many unemployed in freaking montana????? How many people? He is bought and paid for by special interests that do not give a sh*t about people and the unemployed, which was obvious from the healthcare debacle.
Get one of the big state senators to take the lead and ram this through asap.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
February 2, 2010 2:19 PM in reply to Michael A
Montana's rate is 6.7 percent. ND, SD and Nebraska all have very low unemployment rates as well. Anybody think these deficit hawks give two sh*ts about unemployment??????
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
Get the Michigan senators to take the lead, or New York, or California. Throw baucus under the bus.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
February 2, 2010 2:03 PM
Nobody's doing anything, until they kill the filibuster.
Caveat: some say (I've always wanted to say that!) that they're not sure whether you can blast Senate rules to the heavens, without the proverbial 2/3 majority.
Here is where you take a page from that great, 100% successful political tactitican and genius, George W, Bush:
YOU JUST FUCKING DO IT.
And while the bad guys are squealing like stuck pigs in protest that "You can't DO that!" and "This is INAPPROPRIATE!", you simply (in the immortal words of Ron Suskind's legendary 2004 Republican interview) "act again".
(If Harry Reid has any uncertainty as to how to go about Just Fucking Doing It, please have him e-mail me, and I will most graciously be willing to explain it again to his face.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
February 2, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to Barry Champlain
From your keyboard to the Dems' brains. . .
It's simple and straightfward advice: just fucking do it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
February 2, 2010 6:15 PM in reply to CT Voter
You gonna have the BUTTONS made up? :-)
And here's another thing our dear Prez ought to think about: his predecessor used to do the job of the Legislative Branch, via Presidential Decree... a lot. I'm sure most of it was illegal, under the Founding Fathers' concept of what we were supposed to be all about... but who the hell ever questioned it? Plus, he installed all his government appointees whenever the hapless Congress went home for recess, and frankly, screw them.
Now I will be the first to admit that all of that was bullshit... but it worked, didn't it?
I'm sick and tired of things not working, while we're the majority. It's just wrong. Obama is fond of saying that the stuff Republicans are telling Americans is "just politics".
Those "politics" are what gave you Scott Brown, genius. DO THEM BETTER and for Christ's sake, stop feeling guilty about being "political", because how's that worked out for ya, so far?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
February 2, 2010 7:40 PM in reply to Barry Champlain
Now I will be the first to admit that all of that was bullshit... but it worked, didn't it?
And this is the dilemman, isn't it? Democrats are unwilling to behave like Republicans, and things get gummed up, pathologically so, as a result. There are multiple nominees that Republican Senators have forced delays on. If Obama weren't so intent on respecting the three branches of government, those nominees would already be at work.
I think I still prefer it this way, but the events of the last two months are making me seriously wonder about that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lamonth
February 2, 2010 2:05 PM
i am voting out any incumbent today and especially senators. the dems need to decide whether they would like a thrieving middleclass or whether they want big corporations to rule. if dems would like a thrieving middleclass then the way gov't interacts with the business community is going to have to change. the gov't is going to have to stop blindly awarding contracts to big corporations and trusting the big corps to dole out contracts to small and medium sized businesses. the gov't should restructure how contracts are dispersed to focus on germinating smaller and medium sized businesses in all states not just big city hubs. currently big corporations get gov't contracts and these contracts act as a cash cows for the big corporation and in turn the big corporation funnels money to other business units that are currently competing with small and medium sized businesses on a level playing field, thus driving them out of business or forcing them to sell.
i would suggest, since obama screwed up healthcare so bad and to save his legacy as a big thinker and not just a tinkerer. obama should launch an entrepreneurship revolution for the new economy. the entrepreneurship revolution would focus on small and medium sized business and excluding them from any federal tax for the first 10yrs of the business' existence. in addition, you would give generous capital investment write offs that can be carried forward for 10yrs. this would spur the economic engine in america and truly create an ownership society. in addition, businesses would be graded on building a better mousetrap or providing better service and not just providing the crap we currently get in the way of service or cheap goods from china
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Ragin
February 2, 2010 2:09 PM
Must be Groundhog Day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
February 2, 2010 2:15 PM
Oh. Shit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Boidster
February 2, 2010 2:20 PM
leadership is busily figuring out how to enact a meaningful jobs package as expeditiously as possible.
Pass the House bill. Done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
For Want of a Nail
February 2, 2010 2:33 PM in reply to Boidster
You're absolutely right. However, the Senate is the house of the aristocracy and has no interest in what the public wants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
VictorLH
February 2, 2010 2:27 PM
Baucus has to be oblivious to reality. After fucking the Democratic Party with the Health Care Bill he actually thought he could try to bury them for good?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
February 2, 2010 2:32 PM in reply to VictorLH
That's what a couple of hundred thousand in campaign contributions will buy you in Montana. San Jose California has almost 50,000 more people than the state of Montana, which has only 902,000 people. Let's see what the mayor of San Jose has to say. He has a vote in the US Senate, right? Oh, wait a minute, arguably baucus only represents 1/2 of the people of the state, so we are down to 450,000, which is less than Mesa, Arizona. Let's see what the mayor of Mesa, Arizona has to say.
It's time for a constitutional convention.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thomas1
February 2, 2010 2:41 PM in reply to Michael A
I agree. The Senate is an anti-democratic institution with even more anti-democratic rules. Throw it out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jim43
February 2, 2010 2:29 PM
It had better not, because a jobs bill is the only thing keeping the Dems in any sort of shape to stave off the GOP this fall.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
VictorLH
February 2, 2010 2:39 PM in reply to jim43
I wonder how they plan to pass it? The GOP is certain to Filibuster it and Reid will do nothing to put them in a bad light. Worse, assholes like Bayh will start talking about Bipartinsanship and make the Dems look bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
For Want of a Nail
February 2, 2010 2:32 PM
They have no more intention of helping the jobs problem than they did for healthcare. They will create such a watered-down piece of crap that at least they will be able to claim intention was on their side.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Docb
February 2, 2010 2:36 PM
Repubs never change--they were always the party of NO...Check the size of the stimulus that they voted for ---What would that be in todays dollars@!?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
February 2, 2010 2:38 PM
The Dems were used and played for fools with Baucus's game of bipartisan footsie. I think what Americans want is RESULTS! God damed fucking RESULTS! They do not care how the rules of the Senate work. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT FILIBUSTERS!. Results speak for themselves and will speak LOUDEST IN NOVEMBER!
Pass the Jobs Bill AND pass the Healthcare Bill NOW! You do not have any other options!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martis
February 2, 2010 2:40 PM
max fucking baucus ... represents the population of a small suburb and a bunch of cattle .. and somehow he has the power to monkeywrench anything the Dem's want to get passed. USofA Democracy ... doomed
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Max Thrax
February 2, 2010 2:41 PM
Harry Reid already has his pants around his ankles in anticipation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MyMy
February 2, 2010 2:41 PM
I don't see why everyone is SO afraid the GOP will win big in the Fall, except for the fear of massive Chamber of Commerce and financial industry support for them. Apparently it wasn't tea baggers who put Scott Brown over the top; he received $450,000 in the last week or two of the campaign from financial industry employees protecting their million dollar and more bonuses. So pass real financial reform and get the jobs bill done, with HCR along the way and I just don't see the people, apart from the 30% of Republicans who consider Obama to be everything Fox, the birthers and the teabaggers have called him , voting them out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Max Thrax
February 2, 2010 2:44 PM in reply to MyMy
"So pass real financial reform and get the jobs bill done, with HCR along the way"
Also, talking gorillas that wear suits and ride shotgun and take out the trash for all middle class families!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
February 2, 2010 2:45 PM
Just say no.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluestatedon
February 2, 2010 3:21 PM
This is why neither the DNC or the DSCC or any other official Democratic Party organization or candidate is going to get a nickel out of me. Donating or volunteering is a waste of time as long as feckless nincompoops like Reid and Baucus and Rahm are running things. Fuck 'em.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Number6
February 2, 2010 4:25 PM in reply to bluestatedon
We all follow this advice and we guarantee that we fuck ourselves.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
February 2, 2010 5:28 PM in reply to Number6
The DSCC, DCCC, and DNC are devoted to keeping incumbents in power no matter how they vote. Make donations directly to the candidates who represent your values.
Be seeing you!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
February 2, 2010 4:10 PM
According to the time stamps on this story and the one above it, the Dems took exactly 2 hours and 30 minutes to capitulate on this. THey are getting REALLY good at caving in.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calbearinillinois
February 2, 2010 4:25 PM
Tell Baucus he can be in charge the next time there's a bill on sheep raising or copper mining or celebrity fake ranching and that until then he can go to Butte and STFU.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Patriotson
February 2, 2010 5:52 PM
Well, I am shuddering at what this corrupt congress is going to do at rushing the jobs bill through. I suspect we will have cardcheck; pandering to the unions; higher taxes and backdoor deals and vote buying. Do I trust Congress to do the right thing? Hell NO! I remind you, this is still the same contemptable congress that is trying to cram a healthcare bill down our throats. If they can buy votes; have closed door deals; union pandering; higher taxes hidden, I am sure they have the opportunity to do no good once again. Look for congress to become another boil on the ass of America!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aikbay
February 2, 2010 10:59 PM
Buck*uckus is the same twit who went behind Daschle and went along with the Repubs,in secret, to vote for Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich. Does Reid or nobody else remember this? WTF is wrong with Reid? This scumball should not be the chair of any committee forget the Finance committee.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bill
February 3, 2010 7:45 AM
The Democrats have continued to govern as Republicans and Baucus is simply the most visible. Why has the transfer of wealth accelerated under Obama? These are the key questions to ask and the factual answers.
Who are Obama's 'constituencies'? Follow the decisions , find Obama’s constituencies, see where the money has gone and how voters and middle class were left holding the deficit bag.
1. Decision - Ignore previous Republican crimes, misdemeanors and profligacy – tax cuts for the wealthy: Constituencies - Republican voters and Republican Senators and Representatives he hoped would become 'bi-partisan'.
2. Decision - Support a stingy stimulus that was half of what was needed and included one-thirds tax breaks, increasing the deficit and further reducing the stimulus to one-third of what was needed: Constituencies – Wealthy investors, special interests.
3. Decision - Kill the only option that would have slowed the cost of health care & led to universal coverage – $ 753 Billions : Constituencies - Health insurance and pharmacy industries.
4. Decision - Accelerate the Bush bailout, $ 4.3 Trillions in bailouts, guarantees and purchasing assets from the private sector at well above market value: Constituency - Financial industry and banks.
5. Decision - Escalate a meaningless and fruitless war, $600 Billions: Constituencies - military and corporate mercenaries.
6. Decision - Gut real financial reform and substitute finger wagging and silly taxes and fees, while banking fees continue up, lending freezes and credit tightens - $UNK Billions: Constituencies - financial industry and the wealthy.
7. Decision - Not help people with bankruptcy and mortgages remediation – accelerating middle class decline: Constituencies - financial industry, banks and wealthy.
and
8. Decision - Fiddle around and not pass a jobs bill – accelerating middle class decline (Already spent to much money, cut taxes and increased the deficit – so, sorry, no money for the middle class and American voters): Constituencies: Wealthy and Republicans.
Obama’s constituencies are the health insurance and pharmacy industry, military-mercenary complex, the financial industry and banks, and the wealthy.
Obama’s policies have continued to transfer America’s wealth from middle class families to corporations and the wealthy.
Why has Obama lost the support of the voters? Based on the decisions Obama has made, these appear to be the reasons for the lose:
1. Republicans are better off with real Republicans, hence support Republican voters is all but gone;
2. Independents, who wanted change, see the status quo protected and coddled, hence Independents have retreated from support for Obama and the Dems;
3. Democrats see a so-called Democratic White House and so-called Democratic Congress working to continue and accelerate the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy, hence they have no reason to support the Obama and his allies in Congress.
Obama has made decisions that have hurt most Americans, and, he is either:
1. Oblivious to them,
2. Doesn’t care,
3. Surrounded himself with advisors who are up to their eyeballs in the status quo and persuade him to subsidize it with tax money and deficit spending,
4. Erroneously assumed the military-mercenary, health insurance-pharmaceutical, financial-banking industries and wealthy constituencies would remain loyal and rescue him from troubles.
It is not difficult to understand why Obama's ratings and his 'agenda' have been rejected and Democrats no longer enjoy the support of the majority of voters. Obama and his Democratic allies have accelerated the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy and the corporations. By doing so, they have closed off their options. And have doubled down on bets that have been shown by the facts to be disastrous for the middle class and the vast majority of American voters.
So, it is not going to 'fix' the Democrats abysmal performance to keep it away from Baucus, because the other Democrats will be bad all by themselves. Watch out middle class, here it comes again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
madmatt
February 3, 2010 9:22 AM
Let me guess, he has another whore/girlfriend from some affected industry that won't blow him unless she can screw thousands of workers at once!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?