Senate Democrats now living in a 59-41 world on Stimulus II

posted at 10:18 am on February 6, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

The headline says it all — Democrats Scramble to Draw GOP Support for Jobs Bill.  The change in tactics from the we-won strategy of 2009 comes from the loss of the Massachusetts seat to Scott Brown, stripping Harry Reid of his 60-vote supermajority, which actually never produced a major bill that passed into law.  Suddenly, they need to woo at least a few Republicans, which means that a jobs bill will have to have significant GOP input:

Senate Democrats are working hard behind the scenes to draw Republican support for their first official jobs bill — a struggle forced upon Democrats by the GOP upset in Massachusetts this month that snatched away their filibuster-proof majority.

Negotiations have been ongoing for weeks, as Democrats try to incorporate GOP ideas, like a popular package of tax extenders.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., while not expected to tackle any legislation in his own committee, has been working to get the support of his committee’s top Republican, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, as well as other committee Republicans, like Orrin Hatch of Utah. Hatch has joined fellow committee Democrat Chuck Schumer of New York in offering a jobs tax credit that is likely to be included in the bill, according to leadership sources.

The irony here is that if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had allowed Republicans to contribute to the first stimulus bill (and the health-care overhaul), they probably wouldn’t have lost Massachusetts at all.  The failure of Porkulus to stimulate economic growth and job creation would have been on both parties instead of the Democrats and Barack Obama.  Instead, Pelosi and Reid high-handed the GOP and took all of the risk, expecting to get all of the reward — but instead wound up with the blame,  and the anger of the electorate.

However, the good news is entirely contained to process.  The next stimulus package — what Democrats insist on calling a jobs bill after the utter flop of their first stimulus package last year — will be a smaller-scale Porkulus, only this time with more tax cuts and credits to get Republicans on board.  Last February, there were plenty of Republicans who wanted to vote for a stimulus package but wound up voting against Porkulus in exasperation after being locked out of the process. Now that they’re on the inside, Republicans will wind up spending money in much the same manner as Democrats in Porkulus I, to much the same effect.

Take the jobs tax credit that Senators Hatch and Schumer will propose.  If it’s anything like what Obama outlined in his SOTU speech, it will be completely ineffective.  A $5000 tax credit won’t incentivize an employer to hire someone without having the demand necessary for the new hire in the first place.  A hiring decision costs many times more money than just $5000.  That credit will subsidize hiring decisions that would have taken place without the credit anyway.  They would do better to lower the capital-gains tax rate for small business investment, or eliminate it altogether, as a means to create actual private-sector growth.

The end result of the Brown election will be that Reid and Pelosi will have to do what they promised all along, and which they didn’t deliver at all: engage with the opposition.  That won’t necessarily mean a big improvement in legislation, especially on government stimulus packages, which are almost always more damaging than helpful.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Brown or no Brown, keep burning the phone lines, faxes and intertubes. The one take-away from this is to keep the pressure on these people, Republican or Democrat, and let them fully understand that business as usual is over – and that we are on the warpath against “progressives.”

J.J. Sefton on February 6, 2010 at 11:50 AM

Yeah what he said !

sonnyspats1 on February 6, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Archimedes, you’ve nailed it.

We need representatives who will pass laws that DIMINISH Federal power. Neither party has any interest in returning power to state and local government. If the GOP won’t change they’ve got to be defeated. The Third Party has got to be on the table.

rcl on February 6, 2010 at 12:06 PM

The irony here is that if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had allowed Republicans to contribute to the first stimulus bill (and the health-care overhaul), they probably wouldn’t have lost Massachusetts at all.

Karma baby, KARMA!

GarandFan on February 6, 2010 at 12:10 PM

Peter Schiff explains how and why the next round of stimulus legislation will only cost more jobs:
http://www.businessinsider.com/peter-schiff-why-the-next-round-of-government-stimulus-will-only-make-the-jobs-crisis-worse-2010-2

Government spending will destroy our economy. Period.

onlineanalyst on February 6, 2010 at 12:19 PM

“On the warpath” is right.

The debt figures I heard are roughly $40,000 per US citizen, or $100,000 per family.

Any legislator who does that to us is in trouble, I don’t care what brand they wear.

jodetoad on February 6, 2010 at 12:26 PM

On one of the FOX financial shows this morning, the liberal stooge was shouting over everyone and bleating that conservatives are ignoring what got us into this crises to begin with. He railed against the “trickle up” economics theory.

I’m not an economist, most of it confuses the hell out of me but…..

It seems to me that our current condition is a complete vindication of tickle down. The way I see it, governments at all levels are facing huge shortfalls and are having to reexamine their budgets, cut as much as possible and most are considering ways to tax or impose more fees to cover the gap.

Now, the rich are still paying their taxes. The shortfalls are from property taxes not being paid, payroll taxes not being paid, lack of sales tax because of lack of sales, income taxes not being paid due to no income.

All these things are hurting because the poor and middle class are hurting. It proves that when money is tight, the rich don’t hire and spend less and it is those down the income line that suffer.

When more people are working and everyone has more money in their pocket, they spend more and the economy grows. I may be wrong but that is how I see it.

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 12:33 PM

This is why the Tea Party movement got started in the first place. If these idiots get any Republican to join them we should actively work to defeat them in their next election. We all know that this porkulous bill will not create jobs but the long lasting damage to our economy will hurt us all for years to come. Don’t these people have a learning curve?

inspectorudy on February 6, 2010 at 12:35 PM

“trickle up” should read “trickle down” sorry.

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 12:33 PM

The Community Reinvestment Act with subprime loans kicked off the housing bubble. Lender greed did the rest. Dominoes falling.

a capella on February 6, 2010 at 12:40 PM

The Community Reinvestment Act with subprime loans kicked off the housing bubble. Lender greed did the rest. Dominoes falling.

a capella on February 6, 2010 at 12:40 PM

I realize that it started with rising gas prices that caused other prices to rise which strained the budget of many households. When the ARMS adjusted, it was the straw that broke the camel’s back. This all began at the bottom and has trickled up.

My point is that Ronald Reagan said that when the people at the top of the financial food chain were spending, it trickled down so that the people at the bottom had more.

I think we see the reality of that in this current economic state. The crises started with the poor and middle class, has since affected the rich. Until the rich feel comfortable spending again, i.e. with investments, jobs and
goods, the poor and middle class will not recover. The government can’t do it, as we have all now seen.

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 12:47 PM

Ed, if a small increase in the minimum wage cuts employment (as I’m sure you will agree the evidence amply shows), then a small decrease in the cost of employment will increase it.

There are some reasonable arguments against this particular tax cut, but the claim that it won’t make any difference at all is dumb. Statistically speaking, there will be some employers who’re right on the edge of hiring who will find the $5K persuasive.

edshepp on February 6, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Has anyone mentioned that the spending portions of porkulus 2 could be incorporated into the budget? 51 votes is all they need. IIRC, tax hikes can be done through reconciliation. Again, 51 votes.

toliver on February 6, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Has anyone mentioned that the spending portions of porkulus 2 could be incorporated into the budget? 51 votes is all they need. IIRC, tax hikes can be done through reconciliation. Again, 51 votes.

toliver on February 6, 2010 at 1:04 PM

OOF!

a capella on February 6, 2010 at 1:12 PM

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 12:47 PM

I know what you mean. My point was that this crisis was precipitated by toxic loans forced on lenders which tied up the crdit supply. Gas prices hurt us, no doubt about it, but we could have absorbed it gradually without going into free fall, excerbated by more government meddling.

a capella on February 6, 2010 at 1:19 PM

a capella on February 6, 2010 at 1:19 PM

I definitely agree that this crises was in the making for years before it finally exploded.

It just irks me that the liberals insist that it came about by the Bush tax cuts and the WOT and not because of the house of cards they built over the years.

It also irks me that Republicans are so bad at countering that BS with a simple explanation of economic reality.

As I said, I am not an economist, but I’m smart enough to realize that RR was right and I think our situation now proves it rather than the opposite.

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 1:30 PM

THE PUBS just got their 41st vote a couple days ago. The dems could have done anything without the pubs til then. It is a joke that the President blames them.

CWforFreedom on February 6, 2010 at 1:38 PM

edshepp on February 6, 2010 at 1:03 PM

I respectfully disagree. Benefits are about $6 per hour or
$11,520 per year. That’s before wages. 5 grand is not that much of an incentive.
Now $20 grand, that would be great…..

mad scientist on February 6, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Obama blew it.

- The Cat

P.S. He’s the guy that has the ball, runs 70 yards, stops to smile at the camera and get’s tackled. When the fans look at the clock, times up.

MirCat on February 6, 2010 at 1:58 PM

P.S. He’s the guy that has the ball, runs 70 yards, stops to smile at the camera and get’s tackled. When the fans look at the clock, times up.

MirCat on February 6, 2010 at 1:58 PM

+10

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Has anyone mentioned that the spending portions of porkulus 2 could be incorporated into the budget? 51 votes is all they need. IIRC, tax hikes can be done through reconciliation. Again, 51 votes.

toliver on February 6, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Turn out the lights the party’s over Democrats if you vote for Porkulus 2.

yoda on February 6, 2010 at 2:23 PM

You must let your so-called representatives in Washington know that you are watching them and you expect and demand them to cut spending. Be a pain in the neck, write them once a week, or once a day. If they’re up for election, write their primary or election opponents as well. Keep up the pressure! If there’s a good candidate running somewhere else, contribute to their campaign.

Look at this if you need to remind yourself why this is important.

mr.blacksheep on February 6, 2010 at 2:55 PM

here are some reasonable arguments against this particular tax cut, but the claim that it won’t make any difference at all is dumb. Statistically speaking, there will be some employers who’re right on the edge of hiring who will find the $5K persuasive.

edshepp on February 6, 2010 at 1:03 PM

That’s probably true, but will the benefit be commensurate with the cost? How many will take the $5,000 for positions they were going to add anyway? I’d say 100%. For how many will the $5,000 be the deciding factor in whether or not to employ? Nowhere near as many. So, what is going to happen is that there will be a few more jobs than there might otherwise have been, but they will be expensive.

I think it might be better to take all that money and retire some debt. The future interest saved on the retired debt will probably far outweigh any increase in tax revenue that the few borderline jobs that this creates will ever generate. If the debt isn’t retired, the future interest will cost jobs as tax rates have to be raised to pay for it.

mr.blacksheep on February 6, 2010 at 3:01 PM

As I said, I am not an economist, but I’m smart enough to realize that RR was right and I think our situation now proves it rather than the opposite.

Jvette on February 6, 2010 at 1:30 PM

For someone who is not an economist, you sure have hit the nail on the head with your email string. Even without a media that would put them on air, it never did seem like the Repubs had any desire to come out and easily refute the BS coming from the lefties about where the majority of fault lies for the economic meltdown. I think you get it just fine.

outnumberedinparadise on February 6, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Here’s the new, tough Republican ‘deal’ with liberals on a “Jobs Bill”:
1. Cancel All of the remaining unspent stimulus $. No new ‘jobs bill’ until you do.
2. ‘Jobs Bill’: Cut payroll taxes for individuals and small businesses. Give tax credits to any size business that ADDS workers to their payroll.
3. NO Earmarks or Pork in this bill, or NO Republicans will vote for it. No exceptions.

CatyMac on February 6, 2010 at 6:33 PM

If they pass another stimulus, this will be the third consecutive year with one. How about we save the taxpayer some money and JUST SAY NO.

El_Terrible on February 6, 2010 at 6:49 PM

You want a jobs bill with some of that money? KEEP the Constellation program, then you actually WILL have “svaed or created” jobs.

Daemonocracy on February 6, 2010 at 7:24 PM

I guess now we will see what Scott Brown is really like.
Will he be wooed (did I spell that right?) by the Democrats? Will he be taken in by them if they put their arms around him, invite him to parties, introduce him to their special friends in the press? Will he revel in the power of being another McCain? Will he be enticed to bash the GOP so that he may gain the new Maverick label and become the mainstream media’s suddenly new favorite Republican?

JellyToast on February 6, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Scott Brown’s KARMA ran over Harry Reid’s DOGMA…

Khun Joe on February 6, 2010 at 7:56 PM

Power Grab Pauses in U.S. Senate: Senator Scott Brown’s Swearing-In Day: http://mittromneycentral.com/2010/02/05/power-grab-halts-in-u-s-senate-senator-scott-browns-swearing-in-day/

dnlchisholm on February 6, 2010 at 8:28 PM

The irony here is that if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had allowed Republicans to contribute to the first stimulus bill (and the health-care overhaul), they probably wouldn’t have lost Massachusetts at all.

Bingo!

Houston we have a winner!

DSchoen on February 7, 2010 at 6:16 AM

Comment pages: 1 2