Sen. Tom Coburn is a busy man. Not only is he preparing to attack Social Security, but he's been pivotal in helping to destroy jobs, airline security and force Americans to foot the bill in the process with his blocking of the new FAA reauthorization. Now you know why I threw up when he stepped into the Gang of Six negotiations. C&L has been covering the tea party's crazed crazed attacks of the FAA because of their anti-union agenda and now the Senate has joined in their madness.

Political Correction:

The House of Representatives adjourned for summer recess last night without resolving a dispute over Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) funding, meaning that almost 4,000 FAA employees will remain furloughed for another month and that dozens of construction projects will remain on hold. Furloughing thousands of employees and delaying construction projects can only hurt a sagging economy, and CNN reports that tens of thousands of workers could be affected:

The work stoppage will have a direct impact on about 24,000 construction workers engaged in those projects, indirectly impact 11,000 others and hurt 35,000 support workers, such as food service vendors, said Steve Sandherr of Associated General Contractors of America.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) blasted her party for causing the impasse by insisting on including "extraneous" provisions in the funding bill:

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, breaking with her party, called on Congress to pass a temporary extension that was devoid of any complicating policy issues.

"We're getting ready to leave for a month. We should not shut down the FAA because of a rider put on the extension of the FAA legislation that has not been negotiated," Hutchison said.

"It is not honorable for the House to send an extraneous amendment" on a funding extension, she said.

In addition to the negative economic impact on FAA employees and tens of thousands of others, the dispute could cost the federal government $1.2 billion in lost revenue due to uncollected taxes on airfare. (That lost revenue isn't staying in taxpayers' pockets, by the way: Airlines are raising fares to offset the decrease in taxes, so customers aren't saving any money — they're just paying more to the airlines rather than funding the FAA.)

As is often the case, the Senate failed to pass the necessary legislation in large part due to the obstinacy of Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK):

On Monday, Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., chairman of the committee that oversees the FAA, and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, the senior Republican on the committee, floated a proposal to restore full operating authority to the FAA while cutting air service subsidies $71 million. The plan fell apart when Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said he would use parliamentary procedures to tie up the Senate in an effort to prevent a vote on the measure.

Coburn's refusal to allow a vote, thus costing the government $1.2 billion in revenue, is remarkable for a senator who has made a career of showboating about the budget deficit.

Coburn was not the only Republican who threw a wrench into these un-American activities which are motivated by their hate of unions more than anything else:

House Transportation Committee Chairman John Mica (R-FL), in a fit of spite, attached extra cuts to rural airports (in mostly Democratic states) to his version of the bill, which he admitted was merely meant to tweak Democratic senators for not going along with the GOP’s union busting. If the FAA shutdown continues for another month, it will cost the government about $1.2 billion. But for the GOP, that seems to be an acceptable price for advancing an anti-union agenda.

Last night, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) attempted to pass a clean FAA reauthorization through the Senate by unanimous consent. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) objected.

So much for worrying about the federal debt. What a sham. This Congress is what the administration thinks they can shame into raising revenues in any way possible? Or to even promote job growth in America?

Heretofore, the GOP plan for the 2010 midterm election has appeared to be the gnat in the oil, the constant irritant to any attempt by the Democratic majority to fix the giant clusterf&^k brought to them by the Bush/Cheney administration. They didn't have to be specific; they didn't have to have solutions. All they had to do is say no to anything and everything. Then, effectively paralyzing the majority party from actually getting to the solutions promised to the American people, they can point to the other side of the aisle and say they were ineffectual and didn't help the average Joe and glide right back into the majority again.

And it might have worked, if it wasn't for those pesky Villagers. Because, if you've lost David Gregory and he's actually asking follow up questions to pin you down to an actual answer, well, you've lost a big advocate for your propaganda and spin.

Watch as Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Pete Sessions hem and haw and try to launch a load of platitudes rather answer Gregory's questions. And then--be still my heart--Gregory actually calls them on their obfuscation and tells them they didn't answer the question. ThinkProgress:

GREGORY: I think what a lot of people want to know is, if Republicans do get back in power, what are they going to do?

SESSIONS: It’s quite simple that Americans do know the agenda that is before us. They understand what the President and the speaker stand for, and they understand what Republicans stand for. Republicans…very strong, standing with the American people back home. [...]

GREGORY: Congressman, congressman, that’s a pretty gauzy agenda so far. I mean, what specifics — what painful painful choices are Republicans prepared to make? … How do you [balance the budget]? Tell me how you do it. Name a painful choice that Republicans are prepared to say we have to make.

SESSIONS: Well first of all, we have to make sure as we look at all we spend in Washington, D.C., with not only the entitlement spending, but also the bigger government we cannot afford anymore. We have to empower the free enterprise system.

GREGORY: Congressman, these are not specifics, voters get tired of that.

Continue reading »

Mooooo!

"Republicans said we can't vote for this or they'll say mean things about us!" Of course, it's just an excuse to do what they want to do to make big contributors happy:

The Senate effectively rejected a slimmed-down package of jobless benefits and state aid late Thursday, rebuffing President Obama's call for urgent action to bolster the economic recovery.

Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) voted with a united Republican caucus to block the approximately $120 billion package. The measure needed 60 votes to advance, but garnered only 56.

Democratic leaders, who had predicted victory less than 24 hours earlier, vowed not to give up on the measure, but acknowledged that they have no clear path to securing the one or two Republican votes needed to push it to final passage. Though the sprawling package contains a number of must-pass provisions, Republicans have been steadfast in their opposition, insisting that the full cost of the measure be covered by cutting existing government programs.

"Americans are frustrated with the amount of spending and borrowing around here," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said after the vote. "Let's not wave on through legislation that is going to worsen the deficit and dig an even deeper hole than we are in."

With midterm elections looming this fall, conservative Democrats also had voiced opposition to the size of the package and its impact on deficits, already driven to record levels by government spending to combat the recession. But congressional leaders have struggled to pare the legislation back.

UPDATE: Ah, this is still the same Obama we're used to. Apparently the appointments that went through aren't the most important ones - he's still letting them block NLRB appointees Craig Becker and Mark Pearce.

Who knew? Apparently the president does indeed have a spine:

The Senate confirmed a huge group of administration nominees on Thursday, following a tense exchange between President Barack Obama and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

At a White House meeting with bipartisan congressional leaders on Tuesday, Obama warned that he would make recess appointments if the logjam over nominees wasn’t broken before the Senate left for the Presidents’ Day break.

“Mitch, this is unprecedented,” the president said, gesturing forcefully on the Cabinet Room table, according to aides. “If you don’t move any, I’m going to do some appointments.”

The 27 confirmations mean no recess appointments will be needed during this break, top administration officials said. Recess appointments, which a president can make when Congress is not in session, are temporary and generally last to the end of the year.

In a statement Thursday night, Obama said: "At the beginning of the week, a staggering 63 nominees had been stalled in the Senate because one or more senators placed a hold on their nomination. ... And so on Tuesday, I told Senator McConnell that if Republican senators did not release these holds, I would exercise my authority to fill critically-needed positions in the federal government temporarily through the use of recess appointments. ... Since that meeting, I am gratified that Republican senators have responded by releasing many of these holds and allowing 29 nominees to receive a vote in the Senate. While this is a good first step, there are still dozens of nominees on hold who deserve a similar vote, and I will be looking for action from the Senate when it returns from recess. If they do not act, I reserve the right to use my recess appointment authority in the future."