Today the House voted to reject a Senate plan for temporarily extending the payroll-tax cut and subsequently moved to recess, and they deserve credit for doing so. This move does not eliminate the possibility of extending the tax cut, which expires at the end of December: The House previously passed a bill extending the cut for a full year, and that bill is good policy. It doesnt increase the deficit. It forces a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline. And its President Obamas major year-end priority. So why is the Democratic Senate blocking the bills path between Capitol Hill and the White House signing desk, and pushing the bill the House rejected instead? Because Harry Reid doesnt like how the House version is paid for. Having failed not once, but multiple times to offset the payroll-rate cut with a new surtax on job creators, Senate Democrats were forced to huddle with Republicans to find common ground. What they came up with were enough offsets to fund a 60-day extension, mostly via increased fees on Fannie and Freddie. (This makes a certain amount of sense: Republicans abhor the government-sponsored enterprises, Democrats adore fees.) The Senate plan, then, was to pass the temporary extension, send it back to the House, and enjoy a lengthy Christmas holiday. The New Year, they seem to believe, will bring with it fresh opportunities to kick the can down the road. But the 60-day extension is both irresponsible and unworkable, and House Republicans were right to hold the line against it, even if it keeps Congress in Washington through these holy nigh The House, Harry Reid, and the Payroll Tax - The Editors - National Review Online so the demoncrats were gonna soak the poor old middle class homeowners?