And so the moment slips from Boehnor
Dec. 29th, 2012 10:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drwexhttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/us/politics/key-meeting-looms-as-scaled-back-fiscal-deal-is-explored.html?hp&_r=1&
The most significant item here is not that there's still no progress, it's that Boehnor is no longer in the driver's seat. Now it seems that it's up to the Senate (which isn't even supposed to be the body that originates financial legislation) to come up with a compromise.
This is interesting from so many angles. The Senate is in Democratic control, true, but the Republicans have been able to use various legislative moves - most notoriously the filibuster (about which more soon I promise) - to keep things from happening that they don't like. In addition, the Senate is much more a bastion of traditional (machine) Republican politics. The Tea Party has had remarkably little success there compared to the House, though most of the moderate Republicans (and many aisle-crossing Democrats) have left.
If in fact the Senate can come up with a deal, the House will be under the gun. Boehnor will have to figure out how to meld a coalition to pass some version of whatever the Senate has agreed to. This will be affected in some part by some House members' desire to 'move up' to the Senate and not wanting to alienate people there. This will also be affected by the degree to which the Senate plan - if it comes to be - is seen to be bipartisan. House Republicans will have to know how bad they're going to look if they block not a "Democratic" plan but a "bipartisan" plan. Will that be enough to bring the hard-liners to heel? I don't know. I believe it's possible for House members to Abstain or vote "Present" which would let them go home and claim they didn't vote for a tax increase while still letting the bill pass the House. I believe that if a proposal gets bipartisan Senate support then House Democrats will line up behind it, at least enough of them to pass it with some Republicans. This will be doubly true if, as the Times article suggests, what comes out of the Senate is purely a tax bill that defers work on the spending side.
The most significant item here is not that there's still no progress, it's that Boehnor is no longer in the driver's seat. Now it seems that it's up to the Senate (which isn't even supposed to be the body that originates financial legislation) to come up with a compromise.
This is interesting from so many angles. The Senate is in Democratic control, true, but the Republicans have been able to use various legislative moves - most notoriously the filibuster (about which more soon I promise) - to keep things from happening that they don't like. In addition, the Senate is much more a bastion of traditional (machine) Republican politics. The Tea Party has had remarkably little success there compared to the House, though most of the moderate Republicans (and many aisle-crossing Democrats) have left.
If in fact the Senate can come up with a deal, the House will be under the gun. Boehnor will have to figure out how to meld a coalition to pass some version of whatever the Senate has agreed to. This will be affected in some part by some House members' desire to 'move up' to the Senate and not wanting to alienate people there. This will also be affected by the degree to which the Senate plan - if it comes to be - is seen to be bipartisan. House Republicans will have to know how bad they're going to look if they block not a "Democratic" plan but a "bipartisan" plan. Will that be enough to bring the hard-liners to heel? I don't know. I believe it's possible for House members to Abstain or vote "Present" which would let them go home and claim they didn't vote for a tax increase while still letting the bill pass the House. I believe that if a proposal gets bipartisan Senate support then House Democrats will line up behind it, at least enough of them to pass it with some Republicans. This will be doubly true if, as the Times article suggests, what comes out of the Senate is purely a tax bill that defers work on the spending side.
