Republicans Block Bill to Aid Small Business (McCain, employment, Feingold)

[SourD]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

Based on who is trying to get stuff done and who is obstructing, no.

I do not see them as one and the same.

What's the matter? Not enough Dems voted for it?

[Oerdin]

Originally Posted by lorrysda

Geez! I would also vote NO! I give accolades to those politicians, whatever party, who will stand up and vote NO against very bad legislation that bodes very ill for our country. Quit the spin crap!

It was a bipartisan bill which gave tax breaks to small businesses and expanded small business credit and financing. That's it. How exactly is that a bad bill?

[Oerdin]

Originally Posted by SourD

What's the matter? Not enough Dems voted for it?

All Dems voted yes but the Republican leadership strong armed all Republicans into voting no including the two Republicans who helped write the bill. The reason is the Republican leadership doesn't want Democrats to get any more credit for doing anything but also because it is now defacto Republican policy to try to make things worse just so they can blame the President/Democrats.

That's the sad truth.

[Wapasha]

Originally Posted by tigerlily

The party of "no" has again blocked a bill with the sole intention of denying the democrats a win before the midterms. The reason given was that the dems refused to add several "relative" amendments to the bill. Examples of the "relative" amendments included the estate tax, nuclear loan guarantees, border security and the expiring Bush tax cuts.

The bill would have created a $30 billion lending program within the Treasury Department, to be administered through local banks. It would also provide more than $12 billion in tax breaks, and would expand or enhance existing lending programs. It's laughable that the republicans advertise themselves as the party that supports small businesses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/us...gewanted=print

I could not find the quote from any republican to back up the author's claim that republicans were doing this simply to "deny Democrats any further legislative accomplishments ahead of November’s midterm elections"

This is just another example of dishonest journalism, from a newspaper with a politically bent, partisan agenda. They do not report the news, they distort the news.

[tigerlily]

Geez, the bill was even backed by some of the Republican Party’s most reliable business allies, including the United States Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business. Several Republican lawmakers also helped write it.

[SourD]

Originally Posted by Oerdin

All Dems voted yes but the Republican leadership strong armed all Republicans into voting no including the two Republicans who helped write the bill. The reason is the Republican leadership doesn't want Democrats to get any more credit for doing anything but also because it is now defacto Republican policy to try to make things worse just so they can blame the President/Democrats.

That's the sad truth.

If all the Dems voted yes, why didn't it pass? They have the majority, no?

[Wapasha]

Originally Posted by Oerdin

All Dems voted yes but the Republican leadership strong armed all Republicans into voting no including the two Republicans who helped write the bill. The reason is the Republican leadership doesn't want Democrats to get any more credit for doing anything but also because it is now defacto Republican policy to try to make things worse just so they can blame the President/Democrats.

That's the sad truth.

Which republicans wrote the bill? Did you see any quotes from the republican co-authors of the bill, as to why they voted against it? Did you read any quotes from any republicans, besides the one lone, partial quote about a lack of amendments, as to why republicans voted against the bill?

No, the answer is no to all the above, because this was not a real news article, there was no what, when, where, why, or who.

No wonder the NYT is losing so much readership, the context of its articles are as empty its profit margins.

[rbohm]

Originally Posted by Oerdin

It was a bipartisan bill which gave tax breaks to small businesses and expanded small business credit and financing. That's it. How exactly is that a bad bill?

really? what else was in the bill? these days NO bill goes through congress without riders, and other amendments attached, or other legislation that would otherwise not make it through congress. for instance a tax reduction bill, which most people would agree is a good thing, might have attached a bad piece of legislation that would say reduce maximum sentences for hundreds of thousands of hardcore criminals. so do you vote for the good part? or against the bad part?

also how are these loans going to be paid for? the federal government should not be loaning out money, period. so what was really in thins bill that senate republicans refused to vote for it?

[SourD]

Maybe this is why they said no and I don't blame them:

"Reid said Democrats have agreed to consider three Republican amendments -- one by Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah), a one-year extension on research and development tax credits, a second by Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa) on the biodiesel tax credit and a third by Sen. Mike Johanns (Neb.) to nix a provision requiring any taxpayer with business income to issue 1099 forms to all vendors from whom they buy more than $600 of goods or services in any year."

The Dems wouldn't add those things and they especially wouldn't remove the 1099 thing.This is what always happens, they say they will "consider" amendments, then end up doing this:

"Reid said Democrats would offer alternative amendments to those offered by the GOP"

So who REALLY is the party of NO?????

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mone...ntil-next-week

[Oerdin]

That was the excuse McConnell used. The majority leader wanted to limit amendments and riders to just three while McConnell wanted to load up a ton of amendments on it. When Reid told him no McConnell made all the Republicans vote against the bill.