All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (4 Viewers)

[Maxp]

I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?

 

[Saint by the Bay]

That makes sense. I haven't done my taxes yet. I'm actually waiting til it's a done deal, lol.

I always file an extension and do mine in October. No sense in breaking with tradition now.

 

[zztop]

I just read: The Senate voted 50-to-49 to pass the "American Rescue Plan" through reconciliation. Because some provisions were amended in the Senate, the legislation must go back to the House that passed an earlier version of it last week.

 

[Neworleansfan]

75% of American including 60% of Republicans support the bill but not one R-Senator voted for it. And some Democrats are still worried about the filibuster.

 

[DaveXA]

75% of American including 60% of Republicans support the bill but not one R-Senator voted for it. And some Democrats are still worried about the filibuster.

There's no filibuster option for this bill. It's a non-issue. Not sure what they're worried about.

 

[Neworleansfan]

There's no filibuster option for this bill. It's a non-issue. Not sure what they're worried about.

What I meant with a bill as popular like this one to their constituents, Republican Senators still obstructed. Democrats needs to get rid of the filibuster if they want to do anything meaningful but they can’t because some Democrats will not vote for it.

 

[DaveXA]

What I meant with a bill as popular like this one to their constituents, Republican Senators still obstructed. Democrats needs to get rid of the filibuster if they want to do anything meany but they can’t because some Democrats will not vote for it.

Removing the filibuster isn't happening unless at least 2 Democrats change their minds about whether they would go along with that. And if/when Republicans regain control of the Senate, what then? No putting the genie back in the bottle at that point.

 

[Lapaz]

Removing the filibuster isn't happening unless at least 2 Democrats change their minds about whether they would go along with that. And if/when Republicans regain control of the Senate, what then? No putting the genie back in the bottle at that point.

The filibuster keeps congress from legislating to the extremes of each party. The bill passed with some modest adjustments. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

 

[DaveXA]

The filibuster keeps congress from legislating to the extremes of each party. The bill passed with some modest adjustments. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

For sure. But the filibuster had little to do with this bill.

 

[Lapaz]

For sure. But the filibuster had little to do with this bill.

I think it would’ve been filibustered if no changes had been made.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I think it would’ve been filibustered if no changes had been made.

They couldn’t. Not with reconciliation. That’s why they did it this way so it could pass with a simple majority.

 

[DaveXA]

I think it would’ve been filibustered if no changes had been made.

No, the threat was that Manchin or one of the conservative Democrats would have voted no, which would have prevented the bill from passing. They had to tweak the bill in order to keep all 50 in the yes column. The filibuster couldn't be used for this bill.

 

[insidejob]

Just want to point out that all this praise that Manchin is getting (for simply helping his constituents who are some of the most impoverished people in the country...) belongs to Radical Liberal Raphael Warnock and Jon Osoff. No flip in the GA Senate seats, no (worthwhile-ish) bill.

 

[MT15]

I haven’t really looked into it, but I have the impression that the filibuster could be amended without abolishing it. That it has been changed to make it easier to accomplish a filibuster with very little effort. And it could be made less easy again, so that the minority party will only use it sparingly rather than to block every single thing the majority party wants to do.

I wonder if that could be accomplished.

ETA, and tonight I see this:

Manchin Expresses Openness to Making Filibuster Harder to Use (Published 2021)

The moderate Democrat said he would not support killing off the procedural tool that requires bipartisan support for most bills, but signaled a willingness to advance some party-line votes.

www.nytimes.com

 

[MT15]

Back to the virus:

 

[porculator]

There was simply no reason for any Republican to vote yes on the bill when they know that 50 votes was all it needed, and that Manchin would be the keystone.

The fate of the filibuster will hinge on an infrastructure bill, which needs to be the next priority for both practical and political reasons (to test the waters for any bipartisan support). The only thing controversial about an infrastructure bill will (sadly) be sustainable energy, and if it passes muster with Coal King Joe Manchin, then there is no justifiable resistance to it from the Republicans. So if they dig their feet in on that, then the filibuster is gone.

 

[Lapaz]

Back to the virus:

So once all willing high risk people have been vaccinated, I presume it should be okay to lift mask mandates, yet I’ve heard some experts saying that we should keep wearing masks until Fall. Fall doesn’t make sense, but I think this is another case where experts are giving out bad advice, just like when they were telling us through March that masks weren’t recommended. I knew masks made sense in January last year, and I think no masks make sense certainly by June of this year. We currently have a mandate to wear a mask on DoD property, and it’ll be interesting to see when that changes. Maintaining a mask mandate, especially when most have been vaccinated, is a bad idea. It isn’t time to lift mandates today, but if vaccinations continue at pace, unless we have new evidence about variants causing too much hospitalization risk, which we don’t have today, then it will be time to lift mandates by May. These experts need to give good advice, lest we treat them like the kid that cried wolf. Stop talking about Fall or even worse.

 

[DaveXA]

So once all willing high risk people have been vaccinated, I presume it should be okay to lift mask mandates, yet I’ve heard some experts saying that we should keep wearing masks until Fall. Fall doesn’t make sense, but I think this is another case where experts are giving out bad advice, just like when they were telling us through March that masks weren’t recommended. I knew masks made sense in January last year, and I think no masks make sense certainly by June of this year. We currently have a mandate to wear a mask on DoD property, and it’ll be interesting to see when that changes. Maintaining a mask mandate, especially when most have been vaccinated, is a bad idea. It isn’t time to lift mandates today, but if vaccinations continue at pace, unless we have new evidence about variants causing too much hospitalization risk, which we don’t have today, then it will be time to lift mandates by May. These experts need to give good advice, lest we treat them like the kid that cried wolf. Stop talking about Fall or even worse.

Well, I would just say that we can remove mask mandates at any given point in time if we want to. I would keep it in place until supply is ahead of demand and when restrictions on who can get vaccinated are completely removed and everyone has had the opportunity to get vaccinated.

Once we reach that point, then we can look at removing the mandate, imo. Even of official policy states the fall as a target, if we've reached near full vaccination by say mid-summer, then the mandates would be lifted at that point.

Keep in mind that a vaccine for children hasn't been approved yet, and I think that may be part of the equation as well. Just something to keep in mind.

 

[wardorican]

The problem is that it's based off of the 2019 tax returns and people who were above the income limit in 2019 could have made less in 2020 due to the pandemic.

If you file your 2020 taxes before the IRS starts processing payments it will use your 2020 taxes. If they vote this weekend it will probably be too late because the IRS will start processing them early next week and I’m not sure the timing for getting it into the IRS system.

This. I already filed my 2020 taxes, so it will be based on 2020.

Also, if anyone files slow, and it ends up being processed using 2019 taxes, you can get the money later, when you file your 2021 taxes, or maybe they'll issue the payment after you finally file the 2020 payments.

I know the earlier payments, you could always collect on the back end when you filed for 2020.

Basically, if you qualify for the given tax year, you'll eventually get the payment, even if it's as a tax refund/credit.

The bigger change, for me, that will make me file and amended return is the 10k non-taxed from Unemployment benefits. I don't think I even had 10k in total unemployment.