GOP Senators Vote to Defeat Obama's Jobs Bill

By: Andrew Taylor and Ben feller, Associated Press
By: Andrew Taylor and Ben feller, Associated Press

Washington, D.C. (AP) - United against Barack Obama, Senate Republicans voted Tuesday night to kill the jobs package the president had spent weeks campaigning for across the country, a stinging loss at the hands of lawmakers opposed to stimulus-style spending and a tax increase on the very wealthy.

The $447 billion plan died on a 50-49 tally that garnered a majority of the 100-member Senate but fell well short of the 60 votes needed to keep the bill alive. The tally had been 51-48, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., switched his vote to "nay" so that he could force a future revote.

The demise of Obama's jobs package was expected, despite his campaign-style efforts to swing the public behind it. The White House and leaders in Congress were already moving on to alternative ways to address the nation's painful 9.1 percent unemployment, including breaking the legislation into smaller, more digestible pieces and approving long-stalled trade bills.

"Tonight's vote is by no means the end of this fight," Obama said in a statement after the vote. "Because with so many Americans out of work and so many families struggling, we can't take `no' for an answer."

The White House appears most confident that it will be able to continue a 2-percentage-point Social Security payroll tax cut through 2012 and to extend emergency unemployment benefits to millions of people - if only because, in the White House view, Republicans won't want to accept the political harm of letting those provisions expire.

White House officials are also hopeful of ultimately garnering votes for the approval of infrastructure spending and tax credits for businesses that hire unemployed veterans.

"Now it's time for both parties to work together and find common ground on removing government barriers to private-sector job growth," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said after the vote.

Democrats Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Jon Tester of Montana - both up for re-election next year in states where Obama figures to lose - broke with their party on Tuesday night's vote. Every Republican present opposed the plan.

Earlier in the day, Obama capped his weekslong campaign for the measure in an appearance typical of the effort - a tough-talking speech in a swing state crucial to his re-election. Like earlier appearances, it seemed aimed more at rallying his core political supporters heading into the election than changing minds on Capitol Hill.

"Any senator who votes no should have to look you in the eye and tell you what exactly they're opposed to," Obama said to a union audience in Pittsburgh. "I think they'll have a hard time explaining why they voted no on this bill - other than the fact that I proposed it."

Democrats were not wholly united behind the measure. In addition to Nelson and Tester, Sens. Jim Webb, D-Va., Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent who aligns with Democrats, said they oppose the underlying measure despite voting to choke off the filibuster.

Obama's plan would combine Social Security payroll tax cuts for workers and businesses and other tax relief totaling about $270 billion with $175 billion in new spending on roads, school repairs and other infrastructure, as well as unemployment assistance and help to local governments to avoid layoffs of teachers, firefighters and police officers.

Obama said that the plan - more than half the size of his 2009 economic stimulus measure - would be an insurance policy against a double-dip recession and that continued economic intervention was essential given slower-than-hoped job growth.

"Right now, our economy needs a jolt," Obama said. "Right now."

Unlike the 2009 legislation, the current plan would be paid for with a 5.6 percent surcharge on income exceeding $1 million. That would be expected to raise about $450 billion over the coming decade.

"Democrats' sole proposal is to keep doing what hasn't worked - along with a massive tax hike that we know won't create jobs," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday, saying there are 1.5 million fewer jobs than when Obama's 2009 economic package became law. "Why on earth would you support an approach that we already know won't work?" McConnell said.

The White House and Democratic leaders, however, were pleased that the great majority of Democrats voted for the plan. Support among Democrats was shored up by replacing Obama's tax increases - particularly a proposal to limit the value of itemized deductions for families making more than $250,000 - with the surcharge on annual income over $1 million.

That millionaires proposal would hit about 392,000 households, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank. In 2013, the first year the tax would take effect, those wealthy households would see their taxes increase by an average of $110,500, according to the analysis.

Just before the vote on Obama's jobs plan, the Senate passed legislation aimed at punishing China for keeping its currency undervalued against the dollar. Lower-valued currency helps Chinese exports at the expense, bill supporters say, of American jobs.

Next, both the House and Senate will turn Wednesday to approving trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea that could create tens of thousands of jobs, one of the few areas of agreement between Republicans and the administration on boosting the economy.

In coming weeks and months, Democrats promise further votes on jobs. But it remains to be seen how much of that effort will involve more campaign-stoked battles with Republicans and how much will include seeking common ground in hopes of passing legislation.

Leaders of the GOP-controlled House have signaled they support tax cuts for small businesses and changes to jobless insurance to allow states to use unemployment funds for on-the-job training. And they've indicated they'll be willing to accept an extension of cuts to the Social Security payroll tax. But stimulus-style spending is a nonstarter with the tea party-infused chamber.

Tuesday's vote played out as disaffected crowds continued to occupy Wall Street, a square in Washington and parts of other cities around the country in protest of income inequality and related issues.

Obama advisers said they were working with Senate Democratic leaders on how and when to break out separate aspects of the overall jobs bill for votes.

Even before Tuesday's defeat, the White House was casting the Senate vote as but the first act in what one Obama adviser called a long-term play - essentially, an autumn full of action to force Congress to take action on jobs. Senior Obama officials said it was important for the Senate to act to keep pressure on the Republican-led House.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., was recuperating from surgery and did not vote.


Associated Press writers Darlene Superville in Pittsburgh and Erica Werner in Washington contributed to this report.

You must be logged in to post comments.

Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by Anonymous on Oct 13, 2011 at 11:24 AM
    We are fortunate it was squashed. The plan was so ladden with excesses that even Madoff would have squeamed.
  • by Gerry Location: Tallahassee on Oct 13, 2011 at 05:18 AM
    The New York Times called the Republican votes "economic vandalism." Republicans have no plan, just vote "no."
  • by dog Location: gone on Oct 12, 2011 at 07:19 AM
    Head line should have been DEMOCRAT SENATORS VOTE TO DEFEAT OBOMA'S JOBS BILL. This is why the press gets called the LIBERAL MEDIA. Just report the FACTS with out the PROGRESSIVE SPIN.
    • reply
      by Gerry on Oct 12, 2011 at 08:06 AM in reply to dog
      Good post, dog. You know what's going on. 2 Dems voted against. 46 Republicans voted against. 51 Dems vote for. Clearly, it was Dems who defeated this bill.
  • by Mary Location: Tallahassee on Oct 12, 2011 at 05:53 AM
    As has been mentioned, the Democrats control the Senate and for two years the Democrats controlled the house, senate and presidency but they always want to blame the Republicans. This is a bad bill that won't produce many jobs and the ones that are produced will cost millions per job.
    • reply
      by Gerry on Oct 12, 2011 at 06:23 AM in reply to Mary
      Were you born yesterday? Have you heard of the filibuster? It takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, i.e., to shut off debate in the Senate on a particular bill. Dems have a majority in the Senate, but not 60. In the House, a majority can work its will. Not in the Senate. Dems have had a majority in the Senate since Jan 2007, but had 60 Senate votes only during the time Paul Kirk was Senator from Massachusetts, about 4.5 months. Once Scott Brown was elected in early 2010 the willfully obstructionist Republicans had 41 and could bring the Senate to a halt.
      • reply
        by mc on Oct 12, 2011 at 07:05 AM in reply to Gerry
        The fact remains that this isn't a jobs bill this is a tax bill a stimulus the first stimulus didn't work neither would this one . It is nothing but a money laundering plan to get more money to the govt. unions to pay back for donations to the Democrat party.If you keep doing the same thing and expect different results each time isn't that the description for insanity? Also why are the Democrats who up for relection against voting for what they really want? Because they know they can't fool the American people any more. And the Democrats still haven't passed a budget for two and a half years, in our own lives that would be called irresponsible but in liberalism its called genius.
        • reply
          by Gerry on Oct 12, 2011 at 08:19 AM in reply to mc
          There are at least a dozen Dem Senators up for reelection in 2012 and 2 voted against the bill. 3 even you might have heard of that voted for and are running for reelection are Bill Nelson, Al Franken, and Dianne Feinstein.The first stimulus was (is) responsible for jobs, higher GNP, and a lower unemployment rate. See the CBO report at, dated August of 2011. I know you won't read the report because you prefer to shoot off your mouth and hope some of it might be right. I'd like to be paid to correct your mistakes. It's time-consuming work.
        • reply
          by Gerry on Oct 12, 2011 at 04:02 PM in reply to mc
          I made a mistake in my last post. Al Franken is not up for reelection in 2012. Kirsten Gillebrand of NY and Robert Menendez of NJ are 2 Dems who are up in 2012 and voted for the Obama jobs bill.
  • by P??? on Oct 12, 2011 at 05:05 AM
    The Jobs bill was pork laden and was giving all the jobs to the unions, and that is not a very good thing.
  • by Gerry Location: Tallahassee on Oct 12, 2011 at 04:55 AM
    The bill was defeated because of 46 Republican votes against it. 40 Republican votes against would have been sufficient to defeat it. 2 Dems voted against. A majority of Senators present voted for the bill. The bill needed 60 votes to pass. A willful, obstructionist minority can bring the Senate to a full stop.
  • by 1lttightwad Location: Quitman on Oct 12, 2011 at 04:38 AM
    Wow! What a great headline for the story. GOP votes to defeat Obama jobs bill..Duh..the reason it did not pass is that his own democrats did not vote for it..Remember people....democrats control the senate. now don't they.
    • reply
      by Jack on Oct 12, 2011 at 05:11 AM in reply to 1lttightwad
      The dims are separating themselves from Barry. They arent on board with this guy anymore.
      • reply
        by Gerry on Oct 12, 2011 at 05:22 AM in reply to Jack
        51 of 53 Dems voted with Barry. Then Harry Reid switched for procedural reasons. Good post, Jack.
  • by it is what it is on Oct 12, 2011 at 03:14 AM
    And this in a Democratically controlled Senate. The bill isn't worth the paper it's written on.
WCTV 1801 Halstead Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32309
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 131567073 -
Gray Television, Inc.