More dastardly doings

As the year ends, Congressional Republicans are once more demonstrating why they do not deserve to govern in a democracy.  Over the past couple of weeks:

• House Republicans passed the REINS bill.  This bill would allow either house of Congress to veto executive branch rules (e.g., EPA, OSHA) that cost $100 million or greater to implement.  If the rules are not approved by a majority in both houses they would not be implemented.  So if the Party of No decides that its okay to release let's say certain toxins to the atmosphere rather than implement an EPA rule that would control the release, well then if they have a majority in either chamber, they could just go ahead and vote no and the Executive Branch could not implement the rule.  I haven't read anything about financial industry regulations but I assume this law would apply there also.  As a NYT editorial stated this is an undemocratic, terrible piece of legislation that would undermine the executive branch: "The bill is the fullest flowering of the Republicans’ antiregulatory philosophy."  When will the right-wing understand that the problems that led to the financial meltdown was too little, not too much, regulation.  The good news is that the Senate will likely not bother to take up the measure and Obama will veto it if it makes it that far.
• Senate Republicans blocked the nomination of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...just as they had previously done to Elizabeth Warren.  As the Star-Ledger (Newark) put it: "Senate Republicans are suffering collective amnesia about the banking and mortgage loan mess that trashed the American economy."  Republicans have as their stated aim to substantially weaken the agency before they allow someone to head it, rendering it less effective.  I guess Obama will have to appoint a CFPB head when the Congressional clowns go home on recess.  I mean if "W" could appoint someone as unqualified as John Bolton to be the US representative to the UN, why can't a person clearly qualified to protect consumers be appointed head of an agency meant to head off the next financial meltdown? 
• House Republicans passed a payroll tax extension that has several "poison pills" in the legislation that will surely result in a White House veto.  These toxic provisions include:  requiring a fast track review of a controversial tar sands pipeline project, reducing by 40% the maximum time emergency unemployment benefits could be extended (99 weeks to 59 weeks), and delaying EPA regulations on industrial boiler emissions.  For this last one, the EPA has estimated that the new regulations would prevent 8100 premature deaths and 52,000 asthma attacks annually.  I'm of two minds when it comes to the payroll tax extension.  It is necessary now as a means of providing additional stimulus to the economy - it's about the only stimulus Republicans will allow. BUT continually extending the payroll tax cut would eventually undermine the Social Security system.  So  a one-time extension of the tax cut would be useful but additional extensions would be dangerous.   In any case, the vote should be on the merits of the extension and not contaminated with other issues.
• Still to come: will unemployment benefits be extended in time to prevent 5 million people from losing their benefits in 2012.  And who will pay the price?  If Republicans hold true to form - it will be domestic programs and other parts of the social safety net that will suffer.