Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Charles Grassley (R-IA) got a nod from Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) to craft a $85 billion bipartisan jobs bill, but their efforts may end up in vain after all… Reid kicked the Baucus-Grassley bill out the door and introduced a $15 billion version, to the astonishment of his peers and the White House:
“Grassley and three to four Republicans would have voted for it, but all the other Republicans would have beaten the living s—t out of us [during the 2010 midterms], claiming the bill was too bloated,” said a Democrat who supported Reid’s decision, explaining the leader’s logic.
Few felt as good about the decision: Republicans say the about-face will only add to an already poisonous partisan atmosphere, liberal Democrats think the bill is too small to do much good and the powerful negotiators of the bipartisan package were left embarrassed, demoralized and befuddled.
Aides to Baucus and Grassley said their bosses didn’t know of Reid’s decision when they unveiled their bill early Thursday – and expected it to have the leader’s support.
“Sen. Reid’s announcement sends a message that he wants to go partisan and blame Republicans,” Grassley spokesperson Jill Kozeny said in a statement.
Antonia Ferrier, a spokeswoman for Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who supported the bipartisan effort, said her boss was “deeply disappointed that the majority leader has abandoned a genuine bipartisan compromise only hours after it was unveiled in favor of business-as-usual, partisan gamesmanship.”
The White House also appeared to be caught off guard.
But according to the Reid camp, the decision had the backing of the caucus. Is somebody not telling the truth?
But people who were in the room painted a somewhat different picture, saying Reid’s proposal was met with a mixture of confusion and outrage from senators upset about having their pet projects redacted – even after Reid promised to include their proposals in subsequent jobs bills.
Is Sen. Reid trying to trap Republicans to further accuse them of being the “party of no”? Or just re-asserting his leadership position in the wake of losing his supermajority?
