Breaking: Senate Rejects Rival Bills to Prevent $85 Billion Sequester Spending Cuts

[Hissyspit]

Source: The Hill

Senate rejects rival bills to prevent $85B sequester spending cuts

By Alexander Bolton - 02/28/13 03:15 PM ET

The Senate on Thursday rejected rival proposals to stop the sequester, ensuring the $85 billion in automatic spending cuts will begin on Friday.

A bill crafted by Senate Democrats won 51 votes, while a Republican alternative won only 38 votes. Three Democrats — Sens. Mary Landrieu (La.), Mark Pryor (Ark.) and Kay Hagan (N.C.), who are all up for reelection in 2014 — voted against their party's bill, which fell 51-49.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) also switched his vote to no, a procedural move that would allow him to bring the bill to the floor in the future.

Both plans needed 60 votes to advance, and as expected neither came close to meeting that threshold.


Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/285573-senate-rejects-last-minute-effort-to-stop-the-sequester#ixzz2ME8hWYnc

[Mass]

1. Otherwise said, the GOP filibustered a bill to stop the sequester which would have had 52 votes for

it.

Let's count on the media to ignore this fact.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Well, is that it, then? This should be fun.

[GodlessBiker]

3. Only in America do you lose with a 51-49 vote.

[tridim]

4. Democratic Senators only get 3/5ths of a vote.

Sound familiar?

[GodlessBiker]

5. LOL!

[modrepub]

13. House wouldn't pass this bill

(they're adjourned until Monday) without the house passing an identical bill it would not become law. Congress has one saving grace that no one seems to have mentioned. Since the federal workforce is largely union furloughs can't start until the rank and file have been given 30 days notice. This means most of the automatic cuts won't actually be felt until April.

[dorksied]

6. If Reid had followed through with his idea of changing the filibuster this wouldn't be happening.

Harry Reid missed his chance...

[Myrina]

7. Harry's let more than 1 chance to level the playing field pass him by ...

Time for a new leader, methinks.

[dorksied]

8. Agreed. We need someone who has a backbone.

[Euphoria]

18. Reid's tenure as Senate Majority Leader must end now.

Let's face it, these times call for people of backbone and doing something because it moves the agenda forward. And Reid - too many times - has effed up.

So, come one Demo senators and do some shaking up and get another leader of the Senate.

[Webster Green]

9. Well...minority rules.

Wait. That ain't how it supposed to be.

WTF?!

[valerief]

11. Nope, majority ruled! Majority money, that is. nt

[Botany]

10. Once again thanks a lot Harry for going w/a handshake agreement w/McConnell ....

.... on the filibuster.

But I am now sure the republicans hope to torpedo the economy in order
to try to hurt the President by blaming him for the public's suffering. They
are really un-American at their core.

[blkmusclmachine]

12. Too bad the Democrats lost in 2012, and lost again in 2008,

Oh, wait a minute ...

[Cha]

15. So? What's that have to do with the vote in the Senate.

It's not a dictatorship.

[mpcamb]

19. We need to get the word to Harry Reid!

We actually won and should have the "wherewithal" to call the shots.

[Lasher]

14. But what are these alternatives compared to the sequester?

Where's the side-by-side? What is Obama's alternative, compared to the sequester?

[and-justice-for-all]

16. All it takes is a one line bill to end the madness...nt

[octoberlib]

17. These 3 Senators vote with the Republicans more often than not

Landrieu, Pryor and Hagan. Only name missing from this list is Baucus . He usually joins them.