President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 14, 2014 09:01 AM UTC

Senate Passes "CRomnibus," Another Tea Party Tantrum Backfires

  • 20 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

The Hill reports on somewhat unexpected passage last night in the U.S. Senate of the $1.1 trillion "CRomnibus" spending deal, which funds most of the federal government through next September but contains provisions upsetting to both the left and right:

The debate exposed divisions within the Democratic and Republican caucuses on both sides of the Capitol and sets the stage for what could be a year of internecine squabbling in 2015. 

Twenty-one Senate Democrats voted against the bill while 24 Republicans voted for it, including every member of the Senate GOP leadership.

Democratic opponents included several senators rumored to have presidential ambitions such as Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Cory Booker (N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.)…

As Politico reports, the vote on the spending bill yesterday came after "Tea Party" Sens. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee demanded the Senate remain in session this weekend to vote against President Barack Obama's recent immigration executive order–this after Senate leadership had agreed to wait until this week to finish debating the divisive "CRomnibus" spending bill. Seeing an opening, Sen. Harry Reid took advantage of the tactical mistake to pass "CRomnibus," and also move ahead on another major Democratic priority: confirming Obama's many stalled nominees.

In the end the Senate passed the $1.1 trillion spending bill, 56-40, but not before Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was able to begin moving forward on 24 of the president’s nominations, including controversial figures like Vivek Murthy to be the new surgeon general, White House adviser Tony Blinken to be the deputy secretary of State and Sarah Saldana to head Immigration and Customs enforcement and a dozen federal judges to lifetime appointments.

Republicans fought Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for months to block these nominees from moving forward and many believed as late as Friday that they’d won as the holidays approached. But when Sens. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee took to the floor on Friday night to call for a vote on the president’s executive action on immigration and demand their colleagues stay through the weekend to do so rather than adjourn until Monday, they allowed Reid to exploit a procedural quirk and get the nominations rolling…

Had Cruz and Lee agreed to Reid and McConnell’s deal, the conservatives could have received the same constitutional point of order vote on Monday, though they attracted extra attention from both their colleagues and political watchers by forcing the Saturday session. But the point of order was defeated, so the result was the same: The omnibus was sent to the president without defunding the immigration order — and Obama appears set to win quicker approval of his nominations.

With Obama, Reid, and Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell all in support of the spending package, its passage in the Senate was always assured, despite the anger over the bill's campaign finance, banking rule, and environmental protection rollbacks from the left in both the House and Senate. Those objections are much more legitimately aggrieving to progressives than anything the right has been asked to swallow in this spending deal. Still, Cruz and Lee's antics allowed Reid to get the jump on Republicans on the issue of Obama's stalled nominees, which could in the long run prove the bigger win.

Both Colorado Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet voted to approve "CRomnibus" yesterday, again expected though it won't please liberals who followed the rancorous debate in the House last week and are aware of the bill's many compromises. But especially in the larger context of Reid moving the President's stalled nominees, that vote can now be plausibly chalked up as a win for Obama and Democrats–which seems to be the prevalent media spin today. Looking ahead, we do think this debate was good for progressive Senate leaders with higher career aspirations who opposed it, foremost Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

But the big loser here is the Tea Party, whose pointless sound and fury has once again backfired.

Comments

20 thoughts on “Senate Passes “CRomnibus,” Another Tea Party Tantrum Backfires

  1. Non-sense……..Teddy Temper Tantrum had great effect.  It got us confirmation of a well qualified surgeon general (who also recognizes the public health/safety danger posed by this country's fetish for firearms) and a bunch of other Obama  judicial and sub-cabinet appointees!

    1. Which was it? did Homeland get funded only thru Feb, as is being reported this morning in network media? Or, was it a backfire (ColPols showcasing Ted) (and funded out thru Sept?) by Ted Of "Tea Party" Cruz?

        Good to see the languished appts come to fruitition (spell chek is a tard!) .

      AS for Surgeon Gen firearm pronouncements, latest #s are 52 % believe gun ownership rights supersede background checks, Today, Sandy Hook parents file class action against Gun manufacturer

  2. Why would Udall and/or Bennet want to please liberals? Both have stayed exactly true to (Blue Dog/New Dem/DLC/Third Way) form: mostly liberal on social issues, mostly Conservative on economic issues. With a dash of useless bipartisanship to win Editorial Approval. 

    Blue Dogs have gone the way of the Dodo bird. And I don't think Bennet has the imagination to do otherwise.

  3. Someone is going to have to explain to me how it is fiscally conservative to allow banks to gamble with their customers' money and put taxpayers on the hook to cover the banks' losses. 

    1. You know the answer, you're just averse to admitting it.

      It's insurance for the Wall Street 1%ers. They just foisted their risk onto the their plebeian depositors and the American Treasury and taxpayers . . .

      . . . in short, CRomnibus protects and conserves the wealth of the already wealthy oligarchs.

       

        1. But when it comes to human beings who are homeless living under viaducts and eating out of dumpsters, our friends on the right call them parasitic leeches sponging off the teat of big gummint.

  4. The bill sucks but once Obama started whipping it, Dems were going to fall in line. I'm not delighted by Bennet's vote but I understand it. Bennet will have more chances to show his mettle, I hope he takes one soon. He does need to have the Demcratic base with him for '16.

  5. I love watching the awesomenest House Speaker in US History corral his party like a mouse herds oxen.  And obviously the turtle, speaking of feckless herding animals, will have the easiest of times over in his chamber as the various orangutans vie for the wingnut primary vote by screaming at 'RINOs' as the pundits and party insiders ponder which old school name to resurrect and thus hold the Tea-ankenstein they created in check… 

    1. It's called the party of freedom. Freedom is sometimes messy. I'll take my party any day over the Obamabot-dominated Democrat Party, where dissent against The One is not tolerated.

      1. You don’t’ think Warrens speech qualifies as dissent? All the Dems from the chickenshit wing of the party shunning the president before the election doesn’t qualify as dissent???
        You really are some very special kind of stupid.

      2. And weren't you just gloating over the division in the 'democrat' party, you know people going 'against The One.'  You are rather an embarrassment to people of your persuasion, you know, I mean with the sheer idiocy and everything.  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

170 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!