“Vote No, Hope Yes” (Count on the MSM for Cover)

Spot the elision, kiddies! Carl Hulse, in the NYTimes:

WASHINGTON — After the shutdown, the filibusters and years of stalled bills, it was the actual passage of legislation this week that revealed the true depth of congressional dysfunction.

The House vote to raise the debt limit and stifle the budget wars was remarkable not only for its lack of brinkmanship, but for the vote count itself. The 28 members of the Republican majority who voted for the bill — a meager 12 percent — was the lowest percentage for a majority on passage since the House began publishing electronic data on votes in 1991. It has to rank among the lowest ever for a body defined by strict majority rule.

Not to be outdone, the Senate on Wednesday flirted with a market crisis as Republicans were initially reluctant to provide a handful of votes to overcome a procedural hurdle before clearing the way for the Senate to send President Obama legislation that takes the debt limit off the table until March 2015…

For a bill to pass the House with such scant support from the party in control, most members of the Republican majority had to quietly want it to pass to avoid the real-world consequences — an economy-rattling default — while being able to vote against it to dodge a backlash from conservative activists threatening repercussions. It was the purest incarnation yet of what has become known as the Vote No, Hope Yes Caucus.

The Senate vote was similar. Most Republicans badly wanted the debt limit to be raised — particularly since the House had already left town and Wall Street was unlikely to look kindly on a potential default. They just did not want their fingerprints on it.

The implications for governing are obvious. If many lawmakers are unwilling or refuse to vote for legislation that they understand to be necessary, and even beneficial, out of fear of retribution from an empowered and outspoken wing of their party, reaching agreement on major policy like immigration becomes difficult if not impossible….

Yes, that’s right: Somehow the intransigent ignorance of the Republicans in the House & Senate becomes a problem where “many lawmakers” fear “congressional dysfunction.”…

A specimen of Media Village Idiocy that should be mounted under glass, for those distant-future anthropologists exploring how our mighty civilization fell so hard and swiftly.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

18 replies
  1. 1
    Roger Moore says:

    Come on. We all know both sides do it. I just need some time to come up with an example of the Democrats doing it.

  2. 2
    John Cole says:

    Come on, Anne. Everyone is going to yell at me for stepping on you, and there is no way for me to know I am stepping on you when you have four active drafts. Please explain to them I am not doing this out of malice or contempt. You do know that, right?

  3. 3
    jl says:

    The fate of Cole’s reputation is in AL’s hands. Blog frisson, indeed. I will check in tomorrow.

    Edit: Only, not sure ‘reputation’ for exactly what is at stake. I guess other commentters can help me there.

  4. 4
    Bill E Pilgrim says:

    @jl: I’m sorry but you didn’t put your comment in the form of a come on.

    I think it’s a rule for this thread. Though neither did I.

  5. 5
    Anne Laurie says:

    @John Cole: Okay, I’ll make it official: This is not Cole’s fault. (This time.)

    I stockpile drafts on the FYWP ‘dashboard’, because that’s the only way I can be sure I’ll find them when I want them later. Side effect of my ADD (you should see my physical desktop… ) If there were a way to mark them ‘immanent’ or ‘not yet’ I would totally do that!

  6. 6
    Ian says:

    If many lawmakers are unwilling or refuse to vote for legislation that they understand to be necessary,

    This is what is wrong with our country. It almost reminds me of the terrible 1-3 star wars movies, where Natalie Portman says “so this is how democracy dies, to the sound of overwhelming applause”

  7. 7
    J.Ty says:

    What if the House Dems had switched from ‘yes’ to ‘present’ at the last second? That would’ve been funny (international economic apocalypse notwithstanding).

  8. 8
    Gypsy Howell says:

    My favorite example of Our Liberal Media from a couple days ago in the NYT:
    “G.O.P. Senate Leaders Avert Debt Ceiling Crisis”

    Oh yes, thank GOD we have the REPUBLICANS in there to avert a debt crisis. Obviously no credit should be given to the Democrats. No no no, it was the GOP who saved the day and did the responsible thing.

  9. 9
    Ruckus says:

    @Gypsy Howell:
    It is true. They could have all held their breath and hoped someone else would do the right thing. They could have all acted like immature 12 yr olds instead of most of them. And of course your point that it was their fault that this was an issue in the first place was well made and that our wonderful media is as broken as the rethuglicians. We are so fucked.

  10. 10
    Fred says:

    The solution to their long term problem is simple. Change the f***in’ title of the bill. Call it “The Budgetary Responsibility Act” or some such positive sounding tripe. The Republicans know how to do this dance. God knows it is all they do know how to do.

  11. 11
    JGabriel says:

    NYT:

    Not to be outdone, the Senate on Wednesday flirted with a market crisis as Republicans were initially reluctant to provide a handful of votes to overcome a procedural hurdle … to send President Obama legislation that takes the debt limit off the table until March 2015…

    For a bill to pass the House with such scant support from the party in control, most members of the Republican majority had to quietly want it to pass to avoid the real-world consequences — an economy-rattling default …

    Hmm. Now I’m thinking we should have asked for a 6 month debt limit hike, instead of a year.

    If the Republicans are that eager to keep this off the table until the next Congressional session, then we should have made them vote on it again right before the election.

    Ah, well. Missed opportunity. C’est la vie.

  12. 12
    Punchy says:

    Why dont they just name every bill, regardless of what the bills actually say/do/legislate, as”Demoncrats Suxxorz” or “Libtards Blow Goats”. When the base hears what their rep voted “yes” for–in name only– they’ll be happy and wont actually give a shit what the bill actually does.

    They’ll think their Rep is properly slamming Proggys, while in reality, actual work is getting passed.

  13. 13
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Punchy: Because a sufficient number of their Reps are True Believers (TM) just like the base.

  14. 14
    low-tech cyclist says:

    Anne: I think this is remarkably good by MSM standards. Sure, a couple of times he does the ‘congressional dysfunction’ and ‘many lawmakers’ bit, but four times in those six paragraphs, he calls out the responsible party by name.

    When I stopped reading the WaPo 4-5 years back, we’d have been lucky to see parties named at all in a story like this.

    Seriously, this is progress. And while I understand the virtue of continuing to lean on the MSM types until their reporting clearly identifies the responsible parties, even now I expect this is one of the better examples, and we should lean on those reporters and columnists who are doing a much weaker job of identifying which party is responsible for passing bad stuff and blocking good stuff, rather than the ones who are in the vanguard of cleaning up their act.

  15. 15
    eyelessgame says:

    “It has to rank among the lowest ever for a body defined by strict majority rule.”

    For a while when California had a 1-vote Republican majority in its House, Willie Brown was engineering multiple votes with all the Democrats plus one Republican, such as choosing the Speaker.

  16. 16
    burnspbesq says:

    @Anne Laurie:

    Blaming the software is the last refuge of the incompetent.

    P.S. Your take on the highlighted article is silly.

  17. 17
    muricafukyea says:

    Yet another Ball Juicer still doesn’t understand political theater or lack of it when they see it.

    If they were one vote shy then one Republican in a safe district would have changed their vote. Whatever they voted knowing the outcome was nothing but a show.

    This was all decided the last time they voted 3months ago or whatever anyways. Obama knew that which is why he went along. Too close to the next election.

  18. 18
    chopper says:

    @low-tech cyclist:

    that was my thought.

Comments are closed.