Though the House considered proposing amendments to the bill (including $300 billion in spending cuts), they ultimately decided against it. House Republicans believed that the Senate would reject any such amendments and that all fingers would point towards them for blocking the plan that is supposed to stop the fiscal cliff.
By the looks of it, the House will vote on the deal anytime now. You can stay updated with CNN's political tracker.
What do you guys think of the House's decision to avoid proposing amendments? Is it just a political move meant to save House Republicans from the wrath of the antsy public at this point in the journey of fiscal cliff dealings? Does it spark any sort of hope that the country will slowly deviate from so much polarization? Do you think that the deal will pass at all? Leave your comments and hang in there--it looks like the fiscal cliff phenomenon is nearing its end.
4 comments:
Wow, what a terrible way to spend the New Year. In all seriousness, I don't think that this will put an end to polarization. If anything, it shows that Congress can be as polarized as it wants, as long as it manages to push some half-baked bill out before a deadline. It encourages shoddiness and partisanship more than anything, which is a shame.
I agree with Rachel in that this situation is not evidence of and end to polarization. Rather, I think it's simply an effort by Congress to appease the public. I see it this way... With all of the attention the media has given this supposed "fiscal cliff," it would be suicidal for Congress to vote against a solution. I foresee that those 8 Senators that voted against the bill will be criticized severely in their upcoming elections. Who would vote for a Senator that voted against tax decreases? I know I wouldn't and I'm willing to bet that a good majority of Americans feel the same way. I think this "deal" that Congress has come to is just further evidence of the role reelection plays in a member of Congress's decision making.
It seems I had my facts mixed up... This new deal doesn't lower taxes, it raises them. That just goes to show what I know about politics. My apologies for any confusion.
A quick tag-on:
This article in the SF Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Fiscal-cliff-bill-filled-with-pork-4163166.php) points out that the bill came through with a fair bit of mehhh. Though pointing out the extraneous strings, article seems to call more into question the efficacy of partisan politics, log-rolling, pork barrel spending in the mix, etc.
Post a Comment