Though AP also cites opposition to environmental standards, the Senate Republicans are blaming unions for the failure of a bailout of the automobile industry, one that fell because they didn't want to give unions two more years to deal with cuts. This per a plan supported by the House, a majority of the Senate (the cloture vote failed 52-35 with Harry voting with the minority for procedural reasons), and the President.
If the Senate Republicans were serious, and the claims of fiscal responsibility ring false too, something of this magnitude wouldn't fall on that. They apparently weren't, except to screw unions. Key senators voted in support of foreign car plants with less benefits (why do they hate America?), underlining the importance of things like health care reform and trade policy. One analysis on the benefits involved, one that supports the bailout (stop the bleeding, then deal with the chronic condition), points out two important matters:
These retirees make up arguably Detroit’s best case for a bailout. The Big Three and the U.A.W. had the bad luck of helping to create the middleclass in a country where individual companies — as opposed to all of society — must shoulder much of the burden of paying for retirement. ...
But Congress and the Obama administration shouldn't fool themselves into thinking that they can preserve the Big Three in anything like their current form. Very soon, they need to shrink to a size that reflects the American public’s collective judgment about the quality of their products.
Yes, this is in large part about unions and how they were important in protecting the middle class. Contra lower pay workers in Republican rich former Confederacy states that have less economic well being across the board. After all, costs were not such a big issue when the banks got theirs. This is also about broad structural matters, which need to be fixed as well. We should include politics here, even if some want to blame the Constitution per se.
Did that force about ten key Dems to vote against the bill? For the leadership to make it easy for a minority to do this, when rubbing their nose into it etc. was the right path? For instance, force a filibuster, keep the senators in session, thru Christmas if necessary. From the beginning, have a united front (with a few Republicans joining in) underlining the alternative is unforgivable. How a majority supports this, including something like forty Republicans in the House, the President and the President-Elect.
Play hardball, like Republicans did when THEY were in the majority. Let us see what will happen. I have this idea, perhaps misguided, that waiting six weeks or so, will not be disastrous in the long term. For instance, bankruptcy takes time, right? Still, one does worry. After awhile, you know, something bad might really happen to the economy or something.