Democrats say they're angry, but will they put their debt deal votes where their mouths are?

[ProSense]

Democrats say they're angry, but will they put their debt deal votes where their mouths are?

by Jed Lewison

Washington Post:

President Obama and House Speaker John A. Boehner rushed Thursday to strike agreement on a far-reaching plan to reduce the national debt but faced a revolt from Democrats furious that the accord appeared to include no immediate provision to raise taxes.

With 12 days left until the Treasury begins to run short of cash, Obama and Boehner (R-Ohio) were still pursuing the most ambitious plan to restrain the national debt in at least 20 years. Talks focused on sharp cuts in agency spending and politically painful changes to cherished health and retirement programs aimed at saving roughly $3 trillion over the next decade.

More savings would be generated through an overhaul of the tax code that would lower personal and corporate income tax rates while eliminating or reducing an array of popular tax breaks, such as the deduction for home mortgage interest. But the talks envisioned no specific tax increases as part of legislation to lift the debt limit, and the tax rewrite would be postponed until next year. <...> Congressional aides, speaking on the condition of anonymity to detail private discussions, said the White House acknowledged that the emerging agreement is “to the right of the Gang of Six” — a bipartisan Senate debt-reduction framework unveiled this week — and far removed from what Democrats have said would be acceptable.

(Emphasis mine.)

Here's the thing: no deal can pass without Democratic votes. And if congressional Democrats want to stop the deal on the table, they can. They just need to vote 'no.'

more

What will Democrats do?

[dgibby]

1. Obama and Boehner have the Dems boxed in.

They'll have to vote with the President because they can't afford to take the blame for letting the US default on the debt. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Either way, it will probably be the end of the Democratic Party.

[rurallib]

2. just like the tax cut deal last december.

Plus there may be enough blue dogs that will vote with the pugs anyway.

I am about ready to join Bernie Sanders and register as a democratic socialist.

[Pholus]

3. We've already seen this show twice before. They'll pass it.

HCR, the tax cuts and now this.

1) A deadline forces a crisis.
2) The WH goes into a PRIVATE huddle with the GOP.
3) The WH comes out with a sh*t sandwich of a "deal."
4) It's last minute so the Dems go along with it and cave.
5) We get screwed.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. They will vote no or they will not win another election as long as

they live. The process of destroying their reputations by any means possible will begin at once, and they will start losing their seats in 2012, then every two years until the Senate is flushed of the traitorous slime. They sit there because we elected them. And we can make sure they are never elected again. To anything. Ever.
It is up to them.

[dgibby]

5. That's the problem.

Unfortunately, if they vote NO and the country goes into default, they'll be blamed. If they vote yes, they'll lose their seats in Congress. Either way, they lose and we lose. The only winners will be the Corporate Paymasters.

[AnnaLee]

7. There is an empty bully pulpit right now

The Congressional Democrats could jump on it and shout to high heaven. But they won't and it will remain empty. It's too late for the people to take the pulpit on this one.

[florida08]

6. there's going to be a split within the party

[myrna minx]

8. So this is the new spin? The Dems are forcing the default if they defend SS & Medicare?

The tea baggers get off scott free? That's some genius vulcan 23 dimension chess playing. :eyes:

[woolldog]

9. I feel like you owe me an apology

for flaming me all this time, ProSense. Now you've seen the light.

[karynnj]

10. If this account is correct, Obama will have put the Democrats in an untenable position

I hope someone will convince me that there is a different alternative, but it seems to me that their awful choice will be:

1) To vote no, risk nothing being passed and default AND the Congressional Democrats giving a "vote of no confidence" on Obama. (We are better off if the bill rejected is just from teh Republicans.)

or

2) Voting "Yes" to something against the reason the vast majority of them entered politics in the first place.

I read Bernie Sanders' summary of the Gang of 6 proposal - and it is pretty bad. Yet this is saying that the deal with Boehner is worse.

If that is true, this is not the end. This raises the debt ceiling. There still is the task of passing a budget for 2012 (and theoretically one for 2013 next year - though I bet continuing resolutions (all with their own hostages) will be used.

I hope this is the WP trying to influence by pretending to know - but the accounts of angry democrats does not give much help.

[woolldog]

11. I say default.

The repubs will get the heat especially from wall street repubs. The debt curling can be raise with a one sentence bill. It doesn't have to be this complicated.

[florida08]

12. have been thinking the same thing

feels like it's another Wall Street crisis that we have to suffer for

[karynnj]

13. It could be a very gutsy game of chicken

The downside is that the impact could be catastrophic.

The MAIN reason I would be tempted is that as the republicans themselves say "you can't negotiate with terrorists". The fact is this has always been a procedural vote, where there is a lot of grandstanding, but no real threat of it not passing. After all, it does NOT increase spending - it just allows the spending already agreed to. The problem with giving him all that is talked of, is not just the pain that will cause, but they will be back doing the same thing on every must pass bill.

The Democrats should ALL demand a clean rising of the debt ceiling - but many of the House Democrats voted against that as they were pushed by the republicans to think it voting yes would have hurt them. Now, the face saving out for them and the minority of sane Republicans, might be a variation of Reid/McConnell - hopefully improved.

[Armstead]

14. It depends on the Democrat n/t

[Enrique]

15. will Obama and Boehner shoot the hostage?

we'll see.

[polichick]

16. They should vote no and let the WH deal with this Constitutionally.