In American politics, a “lame duck” is any politician leaving office as a successor awaits.The term is typically applied to presidents who will be leaving the White House but are awaiting the inauguration date of January 20th to turn power over to their successor. Like a duck wounded by a hunter, this president lies powerless as those with power approach.
This week, the Congress begins a lame-duck session as the House and Senate chambers will play host to more than 100 news faces in January (56 new members were sworn in at the opening of the 111th Congress). What will get done before the new freshman class gets to Washington? Actually they got there this week, for orientations, and two new Senators (Chris Coons D-Del., and Joe Manchin D-W Va) have been sworn in to finish terms that will continue into the 112th Congress.
Lame duck sessions tend to be notoriously unproductive, especially when there's a turnover in the majority party. The party losing power is in a sour mood and just wants to go home; the party entering power usually prefers to wait until reinforcements arrive in January and wants most business put off so they can put their own stamp on it.
But there is much on the agenda, giving the possibility that this lame-duck may make some fame.
Bush-era tax cuts
Lawmakers in both parties, however, are keen to immediately address the looming expiration of Bush-era tax cuts on Dec. 31. Taxes on income, investments, and large estates are set to go up, while the $1,000 per-child tax credit would be cut in half and couples would lose relief from the so-called marriage penalty.
Some of the rest of the agenda:
—Taxes: Obama supports renewing most of the Bush-era tax cuts, but not those for family income exceeding $250,000. Emboldened Republicans will insist, however, and with Democrats splintered, many observers think a one- or two-year extension of everything is most likely. Otherwise, it'll fall to the new Congress to decide. Already expired tax cuts, like AMT relief, are likely to get done in the lame duck.
—Medicare physician payments: As they always do, lawmakers are likely to address a 1997 law that's forcing cuts in Medicare's payments to doctors. But it's not clear how long a reprieve the doctors will get.
The there are items that some lawmakers would like to do, but may not be able to:
—Nuclear weapons: Senate Democrats want to ratify the new START treaty between the United States and Russia that would cut each nation's nuclear arsenal by one-fourth.
—Unemployment benefits: Congress has always extended unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed when the jobless rate has been this high. But it took months earlier this year for Congress to extend jobless benefits through the end of November, and Republicans are likely to insist that any further extension be financed by spending cuts elsewhere in the budget. That could limit any extension to just a couple of months.
—Social Security: Before the election, Democrats promised a vote on legislation to award a $250 payment to Social Security recipients, who are not receiving a cost-of-living hike this year. But the measure failed to garner even a majority in the Senate earlier this year, much less the 60 votes required to beat a filibuster. It won't pass.
And that doesn't include a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," or the Banning of Earmarks, which Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell got on board with his Tea Party coalition and said he would support on Monday.
As for how the 112th Congress will look in January, CQ Roll Call has a look in chart form on Page 14 and 15 of this report:
http://innovation.cq.com/newmember/2010elexnguide.pdf
6 comments:
One of my articles this week talked about the potential productivity of this lame duck session, but the author of mine argued that this will prove to be another fairly typical lame duck Congress. I have to agree with the latter opinion. I think it is certainly possible that it might yield slightly more results than some similar sessions of Congress, simply because of the great amount of work that absolutely MUST be done: i.e. the tax cuts. Because there is a deadline on those, action will be taken and it could even potentially be fairly important legislation. But in terms of the don't-ask/don't-tell legislation, banning pork, and even nuclear talks with Russia, I don't think anything revolutionary will take place. The Republicans will probably filibuster legislation they don't like and will most likely be very, for want of a better word, difficult. They know that they will be able to do more of what they want come January so they won't bother making any concessions to Democrats who might want to make a "last hurrah" to pass some of their legislation.
I agree with John O when he says that he doesn't think anything revolutionary will take place with dont ask/ dont tell, banning pork, and nuclear talks with Russia. Democrats do seem sort of crabby now that they aren't wanted, so I doubt passing anything to please their voters is on their personal agenda. I'll be interested to see how fast things take off once the Republcians officially take over in January.
Remember the term divided government. When one party is the majority in the Congress and one holds the White House.
In January, there will be partially divided government, with the GOP controlling the House and having subpoena power, and the Democrats holding a narrow majority in the Senate.
Will the result be gridlock, or a Congress that works together to get things done?
While the lame duck session might pass some legislation regarding Don't Ask/Don't tell and nuclear talks with Russia, Democrats may try to push a more conservative agenda in order to win the favor of the new Republican majority that will enter congress in January. Furthermore, few people truly recognize the importance of this session as, because the election is over, they will focus on what Congress will do next year rather than what Congress still has thep ower to do during this present session, meaning that Congress will havem more liberty to focus solely on its legislative function as opposed to worrying about governing as well as campaigning.
I agree with John and Katy on this one too, especially with his statement that even though certain pressing matters will get done, nothing ground-breaking will get done on most of the other issues until the GOP gets reinforcements. Its a month later now, and while the tax cuts are finally getting done, nothing has changed with anything else, and with a divided government in the next congress, it is unlikely that more will be done unless the Republicans and Democrats can learn to work together a little bit better (and I don't see that happening anytime soon).
It's key for things to happen during a lame duck session because of the impending change. While nothing revolutionary gets passed during this time period, I think what does get passed still is pivotal because of the amount of time it took for that piece of legislation to even reach this current status. And with a change or shift of seats, there is always the risk of prolonged, extended debate on pieces of legislation that have already made it this far.
Post a Comment