How did House Republicans Come Out AGAINST the Payroll Tax Cut?

I'm still having trouble understanding why the Democrats view this as a win. From my perspective it's lower taxes at the expense of Social Security funding, and an excuse for Republicans to accuse them of raising people's taxes when they eventually return to normal... whenever that will be. I understand that the economy is hurtin', and that there are few places to look for quick cash now-a-days (thanks, 40 years of political ignorance), but to underfund such a vital program... a program Republicans want to dismantle... it's just too nuts for me to understand how they can view it in any way other than a Republican victory.

 

Boehner had nothing to do with it:

Speaker John Boehner came under fire from the blogosphere Wednesday after allegedly ordering the cameras C-SPAN uses to shut down during a moment of high drama on the House floor.

As House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer attempted to bring a two-month extension of payroll relief up for a vote, C-SPAN viewers suddenly saw the feed go silent and then shift to unrelated footage of the Capitol building’s exterior. Shortly after, the cable network Tweeted that they have “no control over the U.S. House TV cameras.” Instead, the Tweet read, “the Speaker of the House does.”

The progressive news outlet The Raw Story followed up on the occurrence with the headline “Boehner’s office cuts off C-SPAN cameras as GOP takes verbal beating” and the story quickly circulated across the web.

However, Boehner’s office denies having a hand in the incident.

“The House Recording Studio, which works under the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives, operates the cameras in the House chamber,” a Boehner spokesperson told the Talk Radio News Service. “The Speaker’s office had no involvement in this matter.”

When contacted for clarification, a C-SPAN spokesperson explained that the Tweet was not intended to hold Speaker Boehner culpable. Instead, the spokesperson said, the Tweet was aimed at emphasizing that the cameras inside the lower chamber are owned and operated by the House itself, not C-Span.

Update (3:49 pm) Dan Weiser, the Communications Director for the Chief Administrative Officer, confirms that the Speaker’s office was not involved in the decision to end the live feed.

Weiser told TRNS that Hoyer’s statements on the floor came after the House was officially adjourned, which is typically when the cameras stop rolling.

“While there are seconds of live broadcast prior and subsequent to each meeting, on Wednesday, December 21, the broadcast continued for approximately 57 seconds after adjournment,” Weiser said. “That length of time is atypical and unintended and the office of the [Chief Administrative Officer] takes full responsibility for it.”

 

Because it gives them political advantage for a few news cycles.

Well, we are 15 trillion in debt with no plan for, or hope of, paying it down. When you are adding a trillion dollars in debt a year, talking about any program being actually funded is a joke. So these 'temporary' tax holidays and cuts are just another political tool that need not take into account our actual financial situation.

The 2 parties are more than happy to retain an approximate 50% control in government and to continue swapping back and forth amongst themselves. That is the real goal and why the 2 parties are more alike than different in so many things. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors meant to maintain just enough difference between the partys to keep people rooting for their team.

This is Cynical Friday, right? If it is not and I have my days mixed up, please disregard this posting.

 

Except that ....

Social Security does not, and cannot by law, add a penny to the federal debt. It, by law, cannot pay benefits unless it has sufficient income to cover the cost, and it has no borrowing authority to make up any shortfall.

 

But the reality is that it was underfunded at the old rate and is just 'more underfunded' at the current, lower, rate. So, no biggie to the people making the decisions on the payroll tax cut because nothing in our government is really funded.

 

What posting?

 

I must be the only one that understood what was going on. This is a comment I'd expect to see at the bottom of a Yahoo news article. This is the worst I've ever seen an issue twisted around to try to make somebody look bad, by leaving out the full facts. They were against a "2 month" payroll extension. They had a problem with the duration of it. Boehner was trying to get another full year for us. That's all they wanted! A year is greater than 2 months so that = GOOD! They were trying to put more money in our pockets and the dems didn't want to do that. But somehow that's lost in the discussion and people can only focus on the negative that they voted down a two month extension. If they could have got it done for another year, then they wouldn't have to waste time 2 months from now starting all this over from scratch. There would at least be clarity for people Maybe some other business could have been taken care of? Not now though!

My personal belief is that even though it would have cost us all, it should end this month AS WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN! Temporary, means temporary! Yeah, taxes were going to be raised. But only back to the level they're supposed to be at that people have been paying their whole lives. And SS is still broken as a result. Are we supposed to believe these cuts are permanent now? This only serves to add confusion to peoples lives and we would have been better off letting it expire. Now, who knows what income we'll get to keep this year?

 

We have millions of people who are coming across the border to retire on our SS and medical benifits with money even being taken out of bank accounts from direct deposit in Mexico. Lets get real, besides fighting Sunni wars what is bankrupting this nation is the money give away with cash, housing, education, medical/social services, and police/prison costs of what is coming over the border. Before anyone calls me racists, look at how Mexico treats illegals.

Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years' imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years' imprisonment..... Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process .

or for more information:
http://www.examiner.com/human-right...rs-from-central-america-facing-rape-and-death

 

Apparently NOT!

You speak as if your only source of information is Fox so called news. That inevitably leads to being about as uninformed as one can be. It was never just a 1 year vs. a 2 month extension that was on the table but you have bought into the false talking point just like so many Fox viewers do. I don't care where you actually get your Right-wing views from whether it is O’Reilly, Beck, Limbaugh or whoever, you are simply misinformed.

The real issue was:

Interestingly, this isn’t a Democrat versus Republican issue on its face: the Democrats, including President Obama, initially supported a full year payroll tax cut extension. But it became political as both sides insisting on holding the deal hostage by tacking on other “stuff” such as Keystone Pipeline XL approval and the so-called “millionaire tax”.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2011/12/18/boehner-pushes-for-one-year-extension-on-payroll-tax-cuts/

 

I'm well aware that the other stuff was tacked on. That is typical. I did not see that mentioned in the OP though. All I hear is people complaining about republicans voting down a 2 month payroll tax cut so "they want to RAISE taxes." Which is a joke. This wasn't about raising taxes.

 

Really? Because this statement from your post would actually contradict that:

"They were against a "2 month" payroll extension. They had a problem with the duration of it. Boehner was trying to get another full year for us. That's all they wanted!"

 

The whole episode, amusing as it was, seemed to me to be a lot of GOP smoke and mirrors. WHY were they fighting the tax cut? Because Obama favored it. Because the wingers feared folks continuing to see a few extra and much-needed bucks in their paychecks might, you know, appreciate Obama pushing for it. ALSO the tea partiers wanted to include a bunch of other garbage in the bill to extract their pound of flesh for giving middle-class folks a tax cut, such as reducing the amount and duration of unemployment insurance benefits, requiring drug testing for all welfare and UI receivers, and a bunch of other mean stuff. I think they got hoisted on their own petard, so to speak.

 

If it's a Republican idea, just consider it dumb and move on. 99% of the time it's the best thing to do. So I say Obama should lift his middle-finger up to the Republicans and tell them to get bent. Time to quit pretending Republicans want what's best for the country, they don't.. they're too selfish and greedy to do what's best for anyone other than themselves.

 

I think, to the GOP, the thought of actually having to take some responsibility for solutions to this country's problems, and actually participating in governing, is just terrifying to them. Their mantra has always been to take care of their wealthy, corporate friends, here and abroad, and the rest of the country is here apparently to simply serve that interest. Greed has destroyed this country's first principles. Very sad.