Bernie: "Not good legislation…{but} the alternative…much worse.

[Jackpine Radical]

At 2 a.m. on Jan. 1, the Senate passed a congressional version of a New Year’s resolution. “This was not good legislation,” Bernie said. “Unfortunately, the alternative of not passing the bill would have been much worse.” In addition to making sure most Americans do not see an increase in their income taxes and that 2 million workers will continue to receive unemployment compensation, the bill raises taxes on the wealthy and continues credits for families that need help caring for children and sending their kids to college.


What's Next?
So what comes next? President Obama’s initial proposal called for $1.6 trillion in new revenue. The bill that passed only brought in $620 billion – 40 percent of what the president originally requested. This not only means that no progress was made on deficit reduction, but that the Republicans (and some Democrats) will be increasingly aggressive about wanting to cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans’ programs and other vitally important programs for working families. Bernie intends to lead the fight against these devastating cuts. As soon as the new Congress reconvenes, he will introduce legislation that will require corporate America to start paying its fair share of taxes.

[1StrongBlackMan]

1. IOW ...

“This was not good legislation,” Bernie said. “Unfortunately, the alternative of not passing the bill would have been much worse.” In addition to making sure most Americans do not see an increase in their income taxes and that 2 million workers will continue to receive unemployment compensation, the bill raises taxes on the wealthy and continues credits for families that need help caring for children and sending their kids to college.

"This legislation was the product of the divided government governing process."

I can live with it ... so can the millions of working class folks that benefitted from it; even if, as always happens, non-working class folks, also benefitted.

Heard during during serving at a homeless shelter's kitchen, in response to a discussion of the fiscal cliff (held by some volunteer):

Mannnn, I'm starving ... I live on the street. What do I care that someone living up the hill gets a meal, too?

Sometimes, those of us living "up the hill" forget that simple reality.

[hootinholler]

2. I would like to see Bernie, Al Franken and Elizabeth Warren

get together and form a caucus.

[ProSense]

3. This is

a negative?

“This was not good legislation,” Bernie said. “Unfortunately, the alternative of not passing the bill would have been much worse.” In addition to making sure most Americans do not see an increase in their income taxes and that 2 million workers will continue to receive unemployment compensation, the bill raises taxes on the wealthy and continues credits for families that need help caring for children and sending their kids to college.

Most critics of the the deal didn't think the alternative was "much worse." The rest is all positive.

Here is Sander's official statement:

Sanders Statement on Passage of Fiscal Bill

WASHINGTON, Jan. 2 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement after Congress approved legislation that extends green energy incentives as part of a bill to preserve tax cuts for working families:

“This agreement preserves incentives for the development of clean energy by encouraging companies that are creating jobs in America and helping reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming. That is a win-win for our economy and our environment. In Vermont and across the country, hundreds of wind manufacturing plants already are producing wind turbines, and the industry is providing jobs for 75,000 American workers. The fact that we have doubled wind generation since 2008 is an American success story. Extending the Production Tax Credit means we can continue the tremendous growth in wind and other safe, clean, renewable sources energy that must be developed if we are to reverse global warming.

“This agreement also is a major victory for Social Security recipients and for disabled veterans. Despite an eleventh-hour bid by Senate Republicans, the final bill does not include their proposed change in how cost-of-living adjustments are calculated. As the founder of the Defending Social Security Caucus and the incoming chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, I am proud that organizations representing seniors and veterans worked together to block the switch to a so-called chained CPI as a way to cut future benefits for more than 55 million Americans.

“Social Security has not contributed a nickel to the deficit, has a $2.7 trillion surplus and can pay all benefits owed to every eligible American for the next 21 years. It makes no sense to balance the budget on the backs of seniors and the disabled. I will continue fighting to make sure cuts in Social Security are not part of any future budget deal.”

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=5ca2f3ee-8db8-4d38-af91-b6d187c71e35

[woo me with science]

4. That's how the corporate game is played.

There is *always* an option that would have been worse. But the option we get *always* moves us rightward.

600 billion from just a fraction of the rich who SHOULD be paying, while the remainder of the FOUR TRILLION demanded by this deal will be extracted from the rest of us. And our negotiating position for the coming hostage deal is already weakened by pre-emptively making 85 percent of he Bush tax cuts permanent.

Guess who they will be coming after?

[ProSense]

5. I can't figure out

why this is being ignored:

"Perhaps the best prism through which to see the Democrats’ gains is inequality."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022123732

Comments welcomed.

[bahrbearian]

6. Explain to me why Obama asked for 1.6 Tillion, Boner offered 800 Billion and now its 620 Billion