It may have been "unacceptable to business owners, but what about the workers, who now will have their tax bill raised, while those very same "business owners, the very ones who are making record profits, while holding down wages,and "cry", about how their taxes, are "killing them"as they get more and more tax incentives passed! What do they think their customers, who aren't having their interests addressed with this vote,who are not going to be able to patronize them much further,because of all this, think about it?

While the "job creators" continue to enjoy large tax breaks, the working people will be squeezed out of another 2% of their wages, if they have a job at all. It will be that much less people will have to spend to "stimulate" the economy. Congress gets an "F."

I can not wait to vote for Bill Foster and send Li'l Randy Hultgren back to his hairdresser in Wheaton.

I am absolutely embarassed to live in the District he thinks he represents...another day of watching sheep follow a ignorant leader in the House of Reps....where have the real Statesmen gone ??

The simple fact is that most/all payroll processing firms (ADP, Paychex) were unwilling/unable to implement any short term changes to their software. Why would we even consider a 2 month patch? Games played on both sides of the House and Senate indicates the lack of both congressional and presidential leadership.
Remember that monster $15.1 Trillion dollar debt? It is worsened by this bill and oh by the way - each person's portion of this debt is now $48,500.
I wanted Hultgren to stem the spending spree - this vote supports that.

For all you liberals who have commented so far, let's set the record straight.

The Republicans, including Randy have already voted for the tax break.

The Senate Democrats wanted a 2-month extension, not a year extension.

Harry Reid has REFUSED to have the Senate work on this. Nancy Pelosi has said that she will not bring her members back.

The House Republicans are still there, ready to work. The Democrats have punted.

If you have a problems with the bill being passed, look at Reid, Pelosi and Obama.

Thank God Randy is standing up for Middle America! How can you run anything with a two month plan? Is American running a going out of business sale those are the only companies that talk in terms of two month plans the ones going out of business. Pay for it with cuts NOT more tax hikes on the middle class because 41% of the poor pay no tax or actually get money back not owed to them through earned income tax credits a reward for being lack luster???? We need to stop rewarding mediocrity this is capatalism Not communism. Go get them Randy stand up for the working people.

Get real, the Senate version of the Bill had bi-partisan support. Meanwhile the House version of the Bill that provided tax relief for another year was filled with extra Christmas presents for the middle class that included: decreasing the unemployment benefits back to 59 weeks from the current “emergency” level of 99 weeks and the approval of the Keystone Pipeline from Canada to Texas without the completion of studies. For the 1% there is increased tax deductions in the area of depreciating property. None of these things belong in a bill that is supposed to provide tax relief to the middle class. Randy Hultgren is standing up for his own self interest, he is not looking out for the middle class.

Wow, too many people who are commenting here must be drinking some weird kool-aid because ANYONE who would support a 2 month extension of an adjustment to withholding is delusional. It's already been determined (by the professionals who do payroll) that it was totally unworkable. Let's not be ridiculous here--this stunt Harry Reid was all about creating political buzz and doing their (now tiring) blame game stuff AGAIN. No one does 2 month budgeting who runs a successful ANYTHING. And yes, let's keep underfunding the Social Security system (DO NOT PAY ANY ATTENTION to that large gaping hole in the system....sure, it'll be okay). Is this perhaps a stunt to take attention away from the fact that the pipeline was included in the Republican 1 year extension? Obama doesn't want it (why would we want to create jobs when he thinks a depressed dependent country will blindly vote for their benefactor) and anyone with an ounce of brains does. Let's cater to the whack job environmentalists and not the people who have already STUDIED THIS TO DEATH AND APPROVED OF IT'S LOCATION.

And all of you who are just salivating at the possibility of Foster being elected--keep him in your district. We don't want him in the 14th. He was a disaster as our representative. And honestly, he doesn't even live in Illinois anymore. Be naive people--it keeps you docile.

All—For more perspective, I suggest reading the Wall Street Journal editorial on the payroll tax holiday:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577110573867064702.html

Also good reading: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001547-Why-No-Income-Tax.pdf

This just in! House Republicans agreed to a two month extension of payroll tax reduction bill. Apparently they are, in the words of some commenting on this article, DELUSIONAL!!!!!!

How can any educated person think the two-month "fix" was correct when unemployment remains way over 8% and unions even supported the pipeline construction project and the "fix" was not capable to implement and even prominent democratic party leaders including the president supported a one year holiday and foriegn oil dependancy remains the same as it was as are gas prices when Obama was sworn in? This was clearly a political stunt by democratic operatives to grab more attention and instill fear into the minds of common Americans for gaining votes while demeaning wealthy people and republicans against the poor. How much more do they think they can dupe us all again? Glad to see republicans stand up on the one year plan and win despite the demonization by the democratic party and

Enough partisan politics and move to do whats in our best long term interests! We have a HUGE debt to tackle now at $15 trillion! Get the pipe in and create jobs and bring gas prices down for our sakes! Senate should've picked up the house bill to begin with and voted yes rather than showcase on TV and make us all worry with fearmongering again and again! Sick!

Just a couple points--and not criticizing anyone here but let's just try to demystify this whole subject. Businesses contribute unemployement--individuals do not directly contribute. Check a paystub for further information. And to Nora, who was very pointed in her response to me: I am a huge proponent of education and your pursuit of an advanced degree is admirable, but will it be in a field that will enable employment? Let's be honest here--lots of people might love to pursue further education in philosophy or poetry or other fields, but there isn't much possibility you'll get hired to be a philosopher or poet--so realistically it might be a lot of time and money wasted. I hope for your sake you are in something that will be worthwhile and not frivilous and REALLY hope you are not saddling yourself with huge student debt (and that subject has been talked to death on this site and others).
On the subject of jobs and unemployment--There are people who took their 99 weeks on unemployment without concerns. A reliable source had an former employee who spent a year in a central American country drinking beer and getting a tan while a friend did her "check in" for unemployment. Not bad if you can get it. Is this the norm--ABSOLUTELY NOT. Unfortunately this type of abuse causes strain to a budget under horrible pressure. There are jobs--and attitude has way more to do with getting that job than whether you are over-qualified. Show you really want to work and that it's not a burden.

http://www.employeradvocates.com/faq/who_pays_unemployment_taxes.html

Who pays for unemployment benefits?

"Private employers pay a tax to finance the unemployment benefits paid to their former employees. For most employers, this tax rate goes up or down depending upon how much their former workers collect. Some organizations (usually non-profit or government agencies) reimburse the state, dollar for dollar, for any unemployment benefits paid by the state, in lieu of paying the tax."

This bill is about allowing workers to not contribute to the funding of Social Security, and seems to me to be financially irresponsible, but then what else is new. Good work Mr. Hultgren, stand strong in the face of politically expedient by fiscally irresponsible ploys.

See Senator Kirk's and a Democrat's financial analysis on Youtube at the link below, and learn how it will diminish further the required funding of Social Security guarentees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO3NsV3Hm6k