I want to express confidence that this is going to turn out better than the ObamaCare repeal vote. I want to do that, but I'm not sure the dynamics are all that different. You're not going to get any Democrat votes so you need to hang onto at least 50 of 52 Republicans, and we're looking at least six who are either hostile or noncommittal. And that includes a few that you would normally expect to be solid on conservative legislation, not just the usual McCain/Collins/Murkowski group of RINO squishes.
Some of those wavering have been at war with President Trump, so if that's the reason they're considering voting no, I'm not sure how much it helps that Trump is headed to Capitol Hill in the next couple of days to try to persuade them. Yet that's exactly what he's doing:
Trump and Senate Republicans are also expected to discuss other fall legislative items. Congress is currently facing a Dec. 8 deadline to fund the government.
Tuesday will mark the president's second visit to the Hill in two weeks. Last Thursday, Trump traveled to the Capitol to rally House Republicans ahead of their tax vote on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act..
On Tuesday, Trump is scheduled to meet with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
The GOP tax measure will be the big ticket item in the Senate next week. Trump is eager to sign a tax bill by Christmas, and McConnell plans on bringing the bill to the Senate floor when members return from the Thanksgiving holiday. Any measure that passes the Senate would need to be reconciled with the House version.
It's still unclear whether Republicans have the votes to pass the GOP tax package in the Senate. Assuming all Democrats oppose the tax measure, Senate Republicans can only afford to lose two votes.
Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson came out against the House and Senate versions of the tax reform bill last Wednesday. Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jeff Flake of Arizona, John McCain of Arizona, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Bob Corker of Tennessee have yet to say whether they'll support the measure.
Pass-through tax rate
Johnson's objections have to do with the pass-through tax rate, which could tax some corporations at the much higher individual rate of 39.6 percent. What will probably happen in practice is that business owners who use the pass-through rate will simply stop doing so. I'm one of them and I know I would. But Johnson is right that this is a flaw in the bill, although that doesn't make it worse than the status quo. If he can get it straightened out, great.
Flake and Corker have an odd objection: They're afraid that the "temporary" individual tax cuts will end up being extended before they sunset - which is probably true - and because of this they're afraid the "cost" of the bill is being underestimated. I call this objection odd because the only reason these cuts were made temporary is to comply with the Senate's bizarre, static budgeting rules, which mandate that the tax cut not "increase the deficit" beyond a 10-year window. If a pro-growth tax cut is enacted, it shouldn't increase the deficit at all because GDP growth is a more important determinant of revenues to the Treasury than marginal tax rates. If Flake and Corker think the tax cut will "cost more" as a result of its likely eventual extension, they've missed the whole point of why you cut tax rates in the first place.
My guess is that Johnson, Flake and Corker will come around eventually, although given thee viciousness of public spats Flake and Corker have had with Trump, I'd be a little concerned the personal will overtake the political.
As for McCain, Murkowski and Collins, well now we're dealing with the same crew that sank ObamaCare. (And I'll give credit here to Rand Paul, who not only doesn't appear ready to repeat his performance on ObamaCare but is apparently heading to Washington to do his work in spite of being in serious pain as a result of the recent assault against him. I've been pretty rough on Paul at times and I expect to be again in the future, so honesty compels me to give him credit here.)
Support Canada Free Press
Why do we have so many Republicans who aren't committed to Republican economic ideas?
Murkowski has indicated she's OK with including the ObamaCare individual mandate repeal in tax reform, although she hasn't committed to a yes vote overall. Collins wants the individual mandate dealt with separately, which knowing Collins is just an excuse for a no vote. As for McCain, who knows? He strikes me as the least likely Republican to vote yes because he personally hates Trump and loves the media adulation he gets when he kills aspects of the Trump legislative agenda.
My guess if we get this across the wire, it will be with 50 votes, and McCain and Collins will be the two Republican no votes. Combined with Vice President Pence's tiebreaker, that gets the job done, but it does make the prospect of passing a conference committee bill a bit dicey.
Why do we have so many Republicans who aren't committed to Republican economic ideas? Because an awful lot of Republican voters will keep re-electing them regardless, probably because said voters aren't committed to Republican economic ideas either.
I want to express confidence that this is going to turn out better than the ObamaCare repeal vote. I want to do that, but I'm not sure the dynamics are all that different. You're not going to get any Democrat votes so you need to hang onto at least 50 of 52 Republicans, and we're looking at least six who are either hostile or noncommittal. And that includes a few that you would normally expect to be solid on conservative legislation, not just the usual McCain/Collins/Murkowski group of RINO squishes.
Some of those wavering have been at war with President Trump, so if that's the reason they're considering voting no, I'm not sure how much it helps that Trump is headed to Capitol Hill in the next couple of days to try to persuade them. Yet that's exactly what he's doing:
