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

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 12:15 PM Mar 2012

Vote to repeal subsidies for Big Oil fails 51- 47

Senate votes on repeal of Big Oil tax breaks

by Joan McCarter

One of the key votes to set up the political narrative for the next ten months takes place in the Senate shortly. That's when the Senate decides whether to move forward to vote to end subsidies to Big OIL. In a surprise vote on Monday, Republicans nearly unanimously agreed to have the debate about Big Oil this week, thinking that they would have the upper hand by insisting that ending these subsidies would just for the poor, beleaguered "energy producers" to raise prices at the pump.

<...>

...Among the "no" votes so far, Dems Mark Begich (AK), Mary Landrieu (LA), Jim Webb (VA).

Republican Susan Collins is an "aye."

...Ben Nelson, "no."

...Olympia Snowe: "Aye"

...Manchin was an "aye," but no matter. It fails 51-47, because of course majority no longer rules in the Senate.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/29/1078859/-Senate-votes-to-repeal-Big-Oil-tax-breaks


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

gateley

(62,683 posts)
1. There is no valid, legal reason that the majority no longer rules the Senate. Can't Reid
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 12:20 PM
Mar 2012

do something about that?

This is INFURIATING! Although I'm spitting invectives at Begich and the other turncoats, I DO realize that their States rely heavily on Big Oil revenue.

phantom power

(25,966 posts)
5. The GOP would cheerfully blow that bullshit "60 vote" rule off at the first opportunity.
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 04:23 PM
Mar 2012

In fact, sooner or later they'll have that opportunity and they'll dump the 60 vote requirement like yesterday's fish. You heard it here first.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
6. If they gain the majority, I've no doubt they will. So why can't WE do that now?
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 04:48 PM
Mar 2012

If I understand it correctly, the only reason we do this is because of the THREAT of a filibuster by the Republicans. i don't think we've EVER called them on it, have we? And now this seems to have become SOP.

KansDem

(28,498 posts)
3. "...majority no longer rules in the Senate."
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 12:33 PM
Mar 2012

This might explain why:



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

Molly Ivins said it best: "Republicans don't want to govern; they want to rule" and governing requires compromise...

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
4. Mary Landreiu strikes again
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 03:22 PM
Mar 2012

Why oh why should we consider her a Democrat? Even after James O Keffe gets cuaght trying to bug her phones, she still does everything the GOP wants!

TeamsterDem

(1,173 posts)
8. Why in THE HELL don't the Dems modify their approach to filibusters
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 05:19 PM
Mar 2012

by not opening new business until the filibuster closes course? That wouldn't take a change to the Senate rules, just an agreement between the leadership to not open new business until a filibuster is somehow dispatched.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Vote to repeal subsidies ...