Senate Republicans filibuster Buffett Rule

[pampango]

The Buffett Rule, a bill backed by President Obama that would ensure millionaires pay a comparable tax rate to middle-class Americans, fell to a Republican filibuster in the Senate this evening, despite a new poll showing it to be overwhelmingly popular.

While the rule, named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, earned a majority vote of 51-45, it didn’t get the 60 votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) was the only Republican to vote yes, while one Democrat, Mark Pryor (AR), voted no. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) did not vote, but put out a statement opposing the bill.

The vote is no surprise as Republicans vowed to block it, but Democrats wanted to put the GOP on the record as yet again filibustering to preserve lower tax rates for the wealthy. A CNN poll released today found that 72 percent of Americans — including 53 percent of Republicans and almost 70 percent of independents — support the Buffett Rule.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/16/465461/senate-republicans-filibuster-buffett-rule/

No surprise indeed, but good that the repubs were forced to go on record as opposing this popular and necessary bill.

[annabanana]

1. There's the headline: "REPUBLICANS BLOCK BUFFETT RULE"

uh.. now, where to find that headline? Will it be front page of the Times or the Post? Will that be the crawl on CNN or MSNBC?

Where will most Americans GET THE WORD that that was the headline?

[FightForChange]

3. Good Point

I hope somebody out there is spreading the word amongst the average Americans. It's about time they knew who it is that is continually blocking this act AND making Congress completed useless with all their filibusters.

[pampango]

5. James Fallows just posted on the headlines in NYT, WaPo and Forbes.

Today a majority of the Senate voted in favor of the "Buffett Rule," but the 51-45 "Yes" vote was not enough to overcome the Republicans' threatened filibuster.

Here is how the NYT, to its credit, reported and billed the story:



If you want a reminder of the path the NYT did not take, all you have to do is check out this lamentable Forbes.com report of the same development. The story is fine. But this flatly wrong headline???



"Fails" in the Senate? Unt-goddam-uh. It won majority support but was blocked in the Senate. The NYT has shown how easy it is to put it just that way. And the Washington Post too, with the "rejects consideration" terminology:



Thanks, Times and Post! We are clearer now about what is actually happening.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/04/false-equivalence-watch-nice-work-by-the-times-and-post/255993/

[freshwest]

2. Will they remember in November, though? No surprises, they don't believe in taxing themselves.

[DetlefK]

4. 2 questions about filibusters:

Could Reid circumvent a filibuster by simply removing all other bills in the Senate from the agenda?

What if Reid asks for further votes of cloture on the "Reagan Rule" ( ):
* 4 times a day
* every single work-day