Bfgrn
New member
Really Chuckles, you leave out a lot of detail in an effort to sneak by with this lemon...
Here’s the roll call. This was a truly bipartisan vote – 22 Democrats and 24 Republicans voted no.
The Senate was about 55(D)..41(R) back then
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/01/26/conrad-gregg-commission-defeated/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Only 53 senators voted for the commission—seven short of the 60 needed to create it. Many Democrats feared the commission’s plan would lead to cuts in entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, while many Republicans didn’t want to open the door to tax increases.
Read more: http://www.portfolio.com/views/blog...t-bipartisan-budget-commission/#ixzz14i2e42hJ
................................................
Despite the appearance of protection for taxpayers, this commission would guarantee a net tax increase be in its proposal. Every Democrat on the commission would insist on tax increases to “balance” spending cuts in the recommendation.
Read more: http://www.atr.org/vote-nears-broad-opposition-conrad-gregg-a4410##ixzz14i3qEWhW
.................................................
The special deficit panel would have attempted to produce a plan combining tax cuts and spending curbs that would have been voted on after the midterm elections. ..... Anti-tax Republicans joined with Democrats wary of being railroaded into cutting Social Security and Medicare to reject the idea.
Obama endorsed the idea after being pressed by moderate Democrats. The proposal was an amendment to a $1.9 trillion hike in the government’s ability to borrow to finance its operations.
I am not trying to sneak by anything. Maybe you need to investigate what co-sponsoring a bill means.