Bipartisan Infrastructure/3.5T Reconciliation/Gov Funding/Debt Ceiling (1 Viewer)

MT15 said:

I just heard an interview on tv with a NE R representative whose name I didn’t catch. He said that the Democrats have proposed eliminating the debt ceiling, not raising it. He said he would vote to raise the debt ceiling, like both parties have always done, but he wouldn’t go along with eliminating it.

This POV is one I had not heard. If that is true, then IMO dems should compromise and put out a number to raise the ceiling by, like has been done in the past. And it makes me a bit more hopeful that they will be able to get together and accomplish that.

He also said he would vote for the hard infrastructure bill today, even though that idiot (my description, lol) McCarthy and R leadership is whipping against the bipartisan bill. He said he agreed with the bill and would vote for it.

R leadership sees the way the D party is struggling with this issue and would rather give the D party a black eye by voting against a good bill that they should support. They are being the same as progressives if they end up voting against a bill that Biden wants and needs.

Click to expand...

The Democrats already passed a clean bill doing that and the Senate Republicans already filibustered it.

No, Progressives and R leadership are not being/acting the same. Progressives have been more than willing to negotiate and work with Dem leadership, Biden and MODERATES. Progressives originally wanted just a clean reconciliation bill to deal with Infrastructure and Social Infrastructure because they new that would be easier to pass. It was Moderates who insisted on splitting the bill in two so that they could pursue a bipartisan bill with Republicans in the Senate. Progressives went along with the demands of moderates with the caveat/clear understanding that there would also be an additional 3.5T reconciliation bill so that Biden's agenda (which they all ran on) could be fulfilled. They even held off working on the reconciliation bill so that moderates could take their time putting together an infrastructure bill. Now all of the sudden, people want to start acting like none of that happened and that its "PROGRESSIVE" causing all of this grief. It it not and reframing it that way isn't convincing at all. Just like trying to refrain the Jan 6th insurrection as something other than the attack that it was isn't convincing. Moderates are learning to many tricks from Republicans.

So let's just say, Manchin's number is currently $1.5 trillion right?.. I understand that it's not going to happen tomorrow, but if they manage to compromise at $2 trillion let's say and produce a bill that gets passed, I think all sides could pretty well save face and reasonably call it a win.

I don’t think the ‘clean bill’ was what he was talking about. I will try to look it up in a bit and see if I can find it. I don’t know who this guy was, but he sounded very reasonable to me.

Look, this is all a lot of hyperbole, IMO, from progressives and moderates. And we don’t really know what was promised to who behind closed doors, so I would recommend taking a deep breath and letting this play out without getting too emotionally invested. This is generally how these things go, IMO. Both progressives and moderates are on the same team, so it doesn’t do anyone any good to try to assign blame at this point. Especially when the process is still playing out.

And I think it’s likely at this point that something similar to that will happen, Brandon.

So the last bill is US S2868, and the text isn’t available yet. So we don’t know if it raises the debt ceiling by a set amount, or if it gets rid of the debt ceiling until December 2022, like the representative from Nebraska said.

coldseat said:

That's all fine, but it doesn't answer my question.

So Manchin and Sinema choose mutually assured destruction of the whole Dem caucus over of negotiating with Biden and Progressive? I mean, it's pretty clear they aren't going to bully progressives in to just passing Infrastructure. If one goes down, both go down. So what's the play?

Click to expand...

I say follow the money. I am trying to find an article on Sinema that I read about 10 days ago or so, about her opposition to some things. Coincidentally some of what she opposes happens to align with some lobbyist group that opposed the same things, which just so happened to be a huge donor of hers.

For Manchin? Willing to bet same thing: it is big political donors influencing him

Its all these huge corporations controlling what happens. I see this happened too

eventually this thing will probably be so gutted it won't even resemble the original plan

You take what you can get and live to fight another day, IMO. Here’s a pretty good exchange I came across:

Good article in The Bulwark, he talks first about the consequences of fracturing of the opposition to a burgeoning authoritarian movement (its not good if we want to keep our democracy). Emphasis mine.

‘A united opposition is the best way to defeat an autocrat. And a fractured opposition opens the pathway for one to attain power.

This is a precept that America’s Democratic coalition ought to have top of mind this week. Especially those parts of the coalition threatening to derail the legislation House and Senate leaders plan to bring to the floor.

Because while each wing of the governing coalition may feel that aspects of the policies they prefer are good for—and even necessary for—democracy, if they can’t reach a deal, not only will they not deliver on any of those policies, but this failure will be a boon to the authoritarian forces waiting to regain power.

There are practical political reasons why the failure to pass either of the bills would help the anti-democratic forces. (The lack of legislative accomplishment is likely to hurt Democrats in 2022 and weaken President Biden in 2024.) But more important may be the psychological component. If Democrats cannot govern even with the presidency and majorities in both houses, then it would demonstrate to the American people that democracy may not be workable in our current moment. And it’s in situations like that when a strongman who promises that “I alone can fix it” becomes more attractive.’

Then he turns his attention to the sane Republicans who are left. They need to vote with the Democrats for now.

‘Mitt Romney and other Republican senators ought to understand the importance of unified opposition, too. Because while Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and the seven Republican senators who voted to convict in Donald Trump’s second impeachment have been admirable, they have not yet collectively done the thing that saves democracies from authoritarian takeovers: forming a governing coalition with their traditional opponents, even if only on issues about democracy itself, to block the autocrat’s path to power.

In their book How Democracies Die, the Harvard scholars Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt compared four countries’ experiences in interwar Europe. In Belgium and Finland, far-right extremist parties gained some traction after World War I. In both countries, the center-right united with the left to block those anti-democratic parties from ascending further to power.

In Italy and Germany on the other hand, the center-right in both cases chose not to do that, and instead sought to co-opt the political appeal of rising far-right movements by incorporating them into their ranks. We all know what happened next.’

So another day with the vote being delayed.

The wheel of the bus go round and round. Wheeeeee!!!

samiam5211 said:

Yea, if only we could add the Joe Manchin regional airport in Charleston WV into the bill.

The republicans are the bad guys this time, and i realize that right now the Republican party is in a bad place the likes of which we have never seen the US, but the Democrats aren't above it. The parties need to be broken up.

If we don't have some type of structural reform to our political system, it is all going to fall apart. I don't see anything taking us off the path we're on. We need campaign finance reform, election reform, and probably even a reformation of our government structures. Our legislative branch argues about whether or not to keep the lights on twice a year, there is no way they are going to be able to address the issues that are taking us down the path of a failed state.

Click to expand...

This is such an unbelievably insane take repeated by the left, I don’t even know what to say. We have the greatest political system in world history, and people want to fundamentally change it because it isn’t doing their Party’s political bidding fast enough. As usual, change will come.

MT15 said:

This is well put:

Click to expand...

Hmmmm weird that the debt ceiling was raised. The issue facing government is the left wing of the Democratic Party versus the moderate wing. Sorry that you can’t acknowledge that

tigerfan said:

This is such an unbelievably insane take repeated by the left, I don’t even know what to say. We have the greatest political system in world history, and people want to fundamentally change it because it isn’t doing their Party’s political bidding fast enough. As usual, change will come.

Click to expand...

If you can't see that things are falling apart i don't know what to tell you.

These semi annual government shutdown threats aren't a sign of a healthy system. It almost never happened before the 1990s.

tigerfan said:

We have the greatest political system in world history...

Click to expand...

It's actually pretty terrible compared to the alternatives.

tigerfan said:

Hmmmm weird that the debt ceiling was raised. The issue facing government is the left wing of the Democratic Party versus the moderate wing. Sorry that you can’t acknowledge that

Click to expand...

Yes, the reason that the major debate is between the moderate and liberal democrats is because the Republicans aren't participating at all.

SaulGoodmanEsq said:

It's actually pretty terrible compared to the alternatives.

Click to expand...

What alternatives?

tigerfan said:

This is such an unbelievably insane take repeated by the left, I don’t even know what to say. We have the greatest political system in world history, and people want to fundamentally change it because it isn’t doing their Party’s political bidding fast enough. As usual, change will come.

Click to expand...

What's "unbelievable" is that you have an entire political party dedicated to removing basic protective measures FOR a pandemic IN a pandemic.

That's the modern Republican party.

You do understand how that's an irresponsible way for adults to act, right?

Put aside the playing politics goggles for a second and answer that question straight up.

tigerfan said:

What alternatives?

Click to expand...

One thing is that we could go back to pre 2010 when there was no such thing as a SuperPac. Unfortunately, we would need a constitutional amendment.

tigerfan said:

What alternatives?

Click to expand...

Put it this way, countries with electoral systems using proportional representation don't have campaigns to switch to using first-past-the-post like the USA (or the UK, for that matter).

But there are active campaigns for electoral reform to move away from first-past-the-post in both the UK and the USA.

This is because electoral systems that use first-past-the-post are crude, frequently unrepresentative, and can break when there's more than two viable candidates. This typically forces constituencies, regions, and the nation as a whole into a two-party system. Which in turn can lead to voters being denied meaningful choices, parties containing a very broad, and sometimes highly conflicted, range of positions, and internal deadlock, to mention just a few of the problems.

Honestly, it's embarrassing that the UK and the USA are still using an outdated and primitive voting principle as the basis for their electoral system in the 21st century.