Can kill Rush Limbaugh tax cut much? (Salon)

The u.s. Senate after shrug off the coast of the amendments proposed by Jim DeMint and Bernie Sanders, massively voted to approve the tax cut much on Wednesday afternoon, 81-19. Attention now turns to the House, where some are asking if the Tea Party angst and Rush Limbaugh will harass be sway enough Republicans to the crossing agreement endanger.

December 10, Limbaugh said that "I hope now that the tax agreement fails." I say it directly and officially. "Political scientist Jonathan Bernstein followed in writing that he remembers"lots of examples of House Republicans challenging Rush Limbaugh on a large scale in the last twenty years vote." "But still waiting for political analysts ' consensus holds that the tax agreement pass, regardless of the grousing. Democratic opposition in the House appears to be wither on the vine and a handful of Republican members have come directly and said they would vote for the transaction in all circumstances.

This list of the bastions includes the hardest of the hardcore, usual suspects: Michele Bachmann Mike Pence, Minnesota, Indiana, Jason Chaffetz Jeff Flake, Utah in Arizona, John Campbell California and Scott Garrett of New Jersey.

Spence fired the latest cross against the agreement Tuesday evening, in an interview Sean Hannity of Fox.

"I have been fighting since last summer to extend to all tax rates." I've said on national radio in summer that we need to ensure that no American would see a tax increase on January first, not one, "said pence."

"And frankly I've struggled with is the right thing to do here. But at the end of the day, I just came to the conclusion that the American people did not vote for the stimulus, they did not vote for the deficits, they did not vote for debt more, they've step vote for more uncertainty into the second November tax code. And so I vote for the tax agreement when it comes to the floor of the House of representatives. I think it is a bad deal for taxpayers who does little to create jobs, and I cannot support. »

So far, evidence of a groundswell in support of the pence position are scarce. But there is nevertheless a clear and recent precedent for base Republican House rebel against the will of their own leaders - the first vote on the Bill authorization TARP in September 2008. And no one, of each side democratic or Republican wants be intercepted vote Yes if measurement seems intended to defeat - which raises the possibility of exactly the same kind of stampede end for the outputs which resulted in the rejection of TARP.

Of course, it is worth remembering that began in the markets as soon as it became clear what was the wind blowing TARP - index Dow Jones crash, hard, and politicians have been forced to scramble. Of course, there are far fewer panic in the air at the present time, that he did so, but it is fairly safe to say that if the agreement collapses, much more "uncertainty" is injected into the economic landscape if it passes

Ultimately, it's a numbers game. How many Republicans defect? If party discipline is solid, only about 40-50 Democrats should vote for the Bill to ensure passage. But the Republicans who break with leaders, Democrats more must fall in line - posing headache rained for President Nancy Pelosi. At some point, it will be more reasonable to ask why she should mobilize support an agreement that his constituency believes is a capitulation to Republican - when priorities Republicans not even vote for it.

The number of Republicans who are reluctant will also send a signal to be the tenor of the next Congress. The next House will be much more conservative and less willing to compromise. If base break in revolt today opened next year will be bloody.

This is how the GOP Congress regulate Wall Street? (Salon)

Reuters/Gary Cameron Stelios VariasRep. Spencer Bachus, R - Ala. and Senator Richard Shelby, R - Ala.

Rarely do you see a politician very honest this: last Wednesday, hours after securing the position of the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Spencer Bachus, R - Ala., said the Birmingham News that "in Washington, the view is that banks should be regulated, my opinion is that Washington and regulators are here to serve banks."

In the following paragraph, the newspaper reported that Bachus "more later to clarify his comment that regulators should define the parameters in which banks operate but not to micromanage the. But the damage was already done. Quote from the Bachus climbed around of the lefty blogosphere and Monday night, Member of the old Congress 62 years won a coveted award of "More person in the world" in Keith Olbermann on "Countdown to MSNBC."

The sincerity of the initial declaration of the Bachus is farmed to greenling, without doubt, but the fuss and hassle on her revealing is a little misleading. Do not listen to words of Alabama Republican to understand just who master it intends to use - all that you need to do is to look at his actions. Together with his colleague Republican Alabaman, Senator Richard Shelby, the powerful of the Senate Banking Committee ranking member it is part of a dynamic duo market fundamentalist Crusaders who will probably set the tone for the banking reform and regulatory oversight to Wall Street are implemented for the next two years.

Immediately after the midterm elections were well prior to his confirmation as Chairman Bachus obtained quickly work its agenda anti-regulation. The day after the election, in fact, Bachus sent a letter to the Supervisory Board of financial stability, which, as I wrote last month, was written as if dictation by Bank lobbyists. Its main objective: the so-called rule Volcker, would, as economist Simon Johnson has so eloquently, "in principle force major banks to get out of the company of their capital in ways that can bring down the entire financial system bet."

Three weeks later, the Office of the Inspector General Department of the Treasury and Federal Reserve corédigés letters Bachus requiring detailed information on the manner in which the Office of consumer financial protection is implemented.

"History shows that the process of creation of a new Government agency is extraordinarily difficult and hard," both legislators writes, according to Bloomberg. "Until now, we know very little on the activities undertaken by the Treasury Board to establish the Office."

But do not be fooled by "a clear lack of accountability and transparency" Bachus lament surrounding the creation of the CFPB. Clear intention is to harass and block the provisional CFPB Director, Elizabeth Warren, at each step of the way. More in the Senate, Richard Shelby made no attempt to hide his contempt for the idea of consumer protection or its reluctance to Warren, but it has been relatively powerless to do anything. BACHUS, however, will have many opportunities to create friction. Reports are due January 10. Hearings will no doubt follow. Want some compelling the CSPAN TV? View Warren, with his Oklahoma twang repel hostile questions soon to come deep drawling Bachus.

Let's recap: who hates the Volcker rule the most? Banks. Which is more irked by consumer financial protection agency? Banks. The agenda is Spencer Bachus already used to the best of its ability? Banks.

With a democratic majority still control of the Senate and White House, Bachus Obama and Shelby will be not completely subverting the reform of the Bank and hose regulatory oversight. But there is little doubt there is a new Sheriff in town. Alabama, a State which, in terms of GDP, is about one-sixth the size of New York, is defined to have an influence on how disproportionate Washington rides herd on Wall Street.

Birmingham News tell us that Bachus is the first Republican Alabama at the Chair of a Committee of the House from the 19th century. It is above all an accident of history. Deeply conservative Alabamans already run the primary committees banking supervision in both the Senate and the House of Commons - but they were at the time the Democrats since there was no place for Republicans in the South of the post-Reconstruction. The chain of events set in motion by the voting rights act which eventually transformed democratic South in a sea of Red States changed all this. (Richard Shelby, it of easy to forget, was a Democrat until 1994, when he switched sides after the Republican victory big divide in the same year.)

The most famous Alabaman influence on Washington regulators Wall Street was probably Henry Steagall, whose name resonates throughout the history of its inclusion in the name of the glass-Steagall Act that separates the investment and commercial banks for most of the 1960s. Bachus and Shelby voted to repeal of glass-Steagall and two of them have worked hard to ensure that the spirit of regulation given birth in the great depression and reanimated by the great depression, died stillborn. Henry Steagall was no ignited Liberal, but it is difficult to imagine that it would be too pleased by the agenda of Alabama.