Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

madfloridian

(88,117 posts)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:19 PM Jan 2013

Could this be why Biden entered the fray?

From Ryan Grim at Huff Post.

Harry Reid Threw Obama Fiscal Cliff Proposal Into Burning Fireplace

Shortly after 7:00 Saturday evening, the offices of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) were still trading offers. McConnell left the Senate for the night, and Reid's staff said they'd get back to him by mid-morning.

The White House sent Reid a list of suggested concessions as his staff debated what to send back to McConnell. Reid looked over the concessions the administration wanted to offer, crumpled up the paper and tossed it into his fireplace. The gesture was first reported by Politico and confirmed to HuffPost by sources with knowledge of it, who noted that Reid frequently keeps his fire going and is fond of feeding a variety of proposals to it.

Reid's staff then called McConnell's office with a simple message: Our last offer stands. There will be no further concessions. McConnell took to the Senate floor, complaining that he had no "dance partner" in Reid, and called Vice President Joe Biden, a man he assumed would be more willing to give. McConnell was right.

Perhaps the most important concession he wrangled from the administration, which Reid had been unwilling to make, was a two-month extension of the sequester, automatic cuts to defense spending and domestic programs that were supposed to be triggered Jan. 1. Reid wanted much more, worried that the two-month period will simply set up another colossal showdown that will also rope in the debt ceiling and funding for the government. "The deal itself is OK, but sets up Democrats for [a] worse fight and strengthens Republicans' hand for what they really want: cuts," said a Democratic source close to Reid. "Biden gave away the store on timeline. Two months and we're back at this and in worse shape."


13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

demwing

(16,916 posts)
1. Again with Huffpo hyperbole
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:25 PM
Jan 2013

Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:13 PM - Edit history (1)

in this deal, we've given little and gained much.

How is that considered giving away the store and leaving us in worse shape? Huffpo reporting smells like a dead dog on a hot day.

Lochloosa

(16,063 posts)
8. Actually....Yes, he is.
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:53 PM
Jan 2013

Under the Constitution, the Vice President is President of the United States Senate.[4] In that capacity, he is allowed to vote in the Senate when necessary to break a tie. While Senate customs have created supermajority rules that have diminished this Constitutional power, the Vice President still retains the ability to influence legislation (e.g. the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005).[4][5][6] Pursuant to the Twelfth Amendment, the Vice President presides over the joint session of Congress when it convenes to count the vote of the Electoral College.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States

bigtree

(85,986 posts)
10. you know that's just used these days to break ties and other semi-functional duties
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:04 PM
Jan 2013

swearing-in and the like. No way in hell are Senators going to let him assume any more of a role than he already has; as a negotiator or a go-between representative of the WH.

Baitball Blogger

(46,699 posts)
3. So, Reid wanted to take advantage of the fiscal cliff leverage they had, which they won't
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:29 PM
Jan 2013

have in two months? Won't there be less Republicans in the House in two months?

CakeGrrl

(10,611 posts)
4. HuffPo - of the "Obama CAVES!" sensationalism
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:32 PM
Jan 2013

Of course, they put this as the big lede to predictably generate more left handwringing, taking the focus off of GOP anger and infighting over this first phase.

Can't say it doesn't work. To wit...

madfloridian

(88,117 posts)
5. There are some very good writers at Huff Post. What sources are acceptable now?
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:42 PM
Jan 2013

Just like there are some good writers at most media sites.

Could you let me know what is acceptable?

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
6. And once again, the only real critique of the deal is speculation regarding the next deal
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:47 PM
Jan 2013

This is really an odd way to do assessment - unless the goal is to be able to say anything, since anything "might happen" next time.

There's no doubt that a 1 year delay on the sequester would have been favorable, but to characterize the two month sequester as giving away the store" is simple nonsense. Simple nonsense. It's very clear that Huff Po has decided - yes, made a conscious editorial decision - to feed some "Obama caved" narrative into all of its stories. This is pure propaganda.

Harmony Blue

(3,978 posts)
11. It is a massive victory
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:07 PM
Jan 2013

if the only critique is about "what about next time"... Call me crazy I will take the real deal any day over speculation or highly unlikely possibilities.

madfloridian

(88,117 posts)
9. The sequester matters to companies with government contracts. Layoffs coming.
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:55 PM
Jan 2013

A recent conversation with someone from a big company...he said that they were relying on Obama's words in which he said there would be no sequester.

The impact will probably now be felt on those awaiting layoffs if contracts don't go through, if there is another waiting period.

I did not realize Huff Post was no longer acceptable here.



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Could this be why Biden e...