Senate Defeats Harry Reid's "Billionaire Tax"

CSPAN | 10/11/11

[pabianice]

The US Senate just voted to defeat Harry reid's 5.6% added income tax on "billionaires" (those making over $1M/year). Two Dems joined 46 Repubs to kill the bill that needed 60 votes to continue.

[pabianice]

Reid will, of course, now shout that Repubs only want to help the rich.

[princess leah]

So, how’s that “nuclear option” working for ya Harry!@

[jivin gene]

Pubbies doing what they were elected to do, in spite of the verbal attacks that they knew were coming from the pimp child and his whores.

[Kevin in California]

You mean with STINKY HARRY and his nuclear option and the fact the DIMWITS control the Senate it still went down in flames?

Bush’s fault maybe? Or maybe the tsunami?

[crazyhorse691]

This is the headline from Yahoo news;
Senate Republicans vote to kill Obama’s jobs bill.

[Gator113]

Reid will not quit, he will find another way to cheat.

[justlurking]

Out of curiosity, who were the two Democrats?

[Personal Responsibility]

5.6% added income tax on "billionaires" (those making over $1M/year) ---------------------------------------------------------

[DTxAg]

Inconceivable!

[Atlantan]

Who were the two Dems?

[SparkyBass]

[BobP]

 Obama -- My policies are based on a robust economic model: A big sinking ship raises the water level
 for smaller ships. Millionaires don't have a right to keep any of their hard-earned cash. At a certain
 point you've made enough money. And trade in that gas-guzzling SUV.

Countdown until Zer0 leaves Office: 466 days as of October 11, 2011.

[Vinnie]

That would be called a bipartisan defeat.

[Secret Agent Man]

I don’t think they need 60 votes anymore. I thought Harry changed the rules to simple majority to bring bills to the floor for a vote(went nuclear).

[MN Mitch]

I wish I knew more about this, but from what I gather he didn’t use the Nuclear Option to change the filibuster rules. Rather he used it to change the rules on amending bills.

Still the precedent is there for some future Senate to use for changing filibuster rules. It’s unfortunate in a way. Needing 60 votes helps to give the Senate consistency from one election to the next. (If 60 Senators support it today, odds are that you won’t get 60 to repeal it next year.)

Hopefully we can get enough Dems to support repealing Obamacare without needing to change the filibuster rule.

[CPT Clay]

he can screw up a lot more in 466 Days.

[pabianice]

This “nuclear fart” means that the Repubs are not allowed to add amendments to bills if 51 senators say no. It had been 60.