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

[coldseat]

Thought it would be good to have a place to discuss all the drama on Capitol Hill and whether Democrats will get any of this signed. Given that Republican have abandoned any responsibility of doing anything for the good of country it's on Dems to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling. But as with the reconciliation bill, moderates are opposing this.

I'm really trying hard to understand why Manchin and Sinema are making the reconciliation bill process so difficult and how they think that benefits them? As far as I can see, all it's doing is raising the ire of the majority of democrats towards them. It's been well known for a long time now that both the Infrastructure bill and reconciliation bill were tied together. They worked so hard to get and "Bipartisan" Infrastructure bill together (because it was oh so important to them to work together) and passed in the Senate, but now want to slow drag and bulk on the reconciliation bill (by not being able to negotiate with members of their own party)? There by, Putting both bills passage at risk and tanking both the Biden agenda and any hope of winning Congress in 2022? Make it make sense!

I suspect they'll get it done in the end because the implication of failure are really bad. But why make it so dysfunctional?

The drama and diplomacy are set to intensify over the next 24 hours, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) scrambles to keep her fractious, narrow majority intact and send the first of two major economic initiatives to Biden’s desk. In a sign of the stakes, the president even canceled a planned Wednesday trip to Chicago so that he could stay in Washington and attempt to spare his agenda from collapse.
Democrats generally support the infrastructure package, which proposes major new investments in the country’s aging roads, bridges, pipes, ports and Internet connections. But the bill has become a critical political bargaining chip for liberal-leaning lawmakers, who have threatened to scuttle it to preserve the breadth of a second, roughly $3.5 trillion economic package.
What is in and out of the bipartisan infrastructure bill?
That latter proposal aims to expand Medicare, invest new sums to combat climate change, offer free prekindergarten and community college to all students and extend new aid to low-income families — all financed through taxes increases on wealthy Americans and corporations. Liberals fear it is likely to be slashed in scope dramatically by moderates, including Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), unless they hold up the infrastructure package the duo helped negotiate — leading to the stalemate that plagues the party on the eve of the House vote.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/09/29/biden-pelosi-democrats-infrastructure/

 

[Saintman2884]

You don't understand Republican voters. They don't need legislation. They just need to detest everything democratic. Their aim is to eliminate government as much as possible, unless it is biblical governance. Almost half of America voted for one of the most immoral politicians in history and one that wants to become a dictator, so what do you think would happen if that Republican was a little more appealing? Replace Trump with DeSantis or his ilk, without giving Democratic voters a reason to vote for you, and about 5% will switch their vote to the Republican, and Democrats will lose.

The more immediate problem is the midterms. Some more appealing Trumpists will run in many voting district, and even in the more liberal districts, the result will be that 5% of Democratic voters will vote for that Trumpian candidate, unless they think the Democrat has something to offer. Trump was so dangerous that fear was enough of a motivator to convert many people, but make the candidate slightly more appealing, and that fear won't be enough. Without a reason, other than fear, the end result will be that Democrats will lose by an even larger margin than is currently predicted, and governance will get ugly. Whereas, keep some of the human infrastructure out of the current bill, and Democrats can run on trying to pass that in the next election. Some of that human infrastructure will play well in the liberal districts, but if it is passed, they can't run on passing it.

My hope is that Trumpism is like an addiction. We need to stay clean long enough to break the addiction. Apparently, many are still craving that toxic nonsense, which partially explains why Biden's approval numbers are low, so we need to buy some time to allow people to realize that that toxicity doesn't belong in government. The cult analogy works as well. We're in the process of breaking the cult of personality spell, but we need more time. Biden needs a Democratic congress to continue to make progress, and that's best achieved by giving Democrats an achievement AND something to run on to achieve in the future. If they shoot themselves in the foot with this all or nothing approach, then they will get slaughtered in the midterms.

Not that Trump wouldve done any better and likely the Afghan evacuation/withdrawal is much more disastrous, deadlier, and infinitely a logistical quagmire, and Trump did lay the foundations, and formula for the most part, but the trend towards Biden's lagging poll numbers, approval popularity numbers began with his initial handling and response of the pro-American Afghan civilians, men, women, and young girls in their hundreds of thousands in a repeat of the "Saigon Syndrome"-a rushed, highly unprecipitated series of rescue plans organized and orchestrated very quickly, and thankfully, mostly successful.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I just don't see this bill happening and in turn, it may doom the infrastructure bill as well. The progressives have zero trust in Machin and Sinema and I truly can't blame them.

Manchin and Sinema detail key disagreements over Biden agenda | CNN Politics

The two leading Democratic moderates made clear to their colleagues this week that a deal on the party’s sweeping economic package is far from secured, raising new questions about the fate of President Joe Biden’s first-term agenda, according to sources familiar with the matter.

www.cnn.com

 

[Lapaz]

Not that Trump wouldve done any better and likely the Afghan evacuation/withdrawal is much more disastrous, deadlier, and infinitely a logistical quagmire, and Trump did lay the foundations, and formula for the most part, but the trend towards Biden's lagging poll numbers, approval popularity numbers began with his initial handling and response of the pro-American Afghan civilians, men, women, and young girls in their hundreds of thousands in a repeat of the "Saigon Syndrome"-a rushed, highly unprecipitated series of rescue plans organized and orchestrated very quickly, and thankfully, mostly successful.

I think the Afghan evacuation had a short term affect on Biden's popularity, but I think people only cared about that while it was leading in the news, because it doesn't affect their day to day life. Plus, since it was mostly successful, it is not a lingering issue. Today the main issue for Biden is Covid persisting, inflation, supply chain, and the failure to pass legislation. If Democrats pass the hard infrastructure bill, and a small fraction of the soft infrastructure bill, it will help Biden and the rest of the Democrats a lot, but ultimately Covid and the economic issues have to get better. Once those things happen, Biden's popularity numbers will surge by 10%.

 

[Lapaz]

I just don't see this bill happening and in turn, it may doom the infrastructure bill as well. The progressives have zero trust in Machin and Sinema and I truly can't blame them.

Manchin and Sinema detail key disagreements over Biden agenda | CNN Politics

The two leading Democratic moderates made clear to their colleagues this week that a deal on the party’s sweeping economic package is far from secured, raising new questions about the fate of President Joe Biden’s first-term agenda, according to sources familiar with the matter.

www.cnn.com

Manchin's and Sinema's positions are just as trustworthy as the liberal's positions. They support the hard infrastructure, and Manchin supports a 1.5T soft infrastructure, but liberals only support both if the soft is guaranteed to pass at nearly the 3.5T price tag. Liberals have said they'll vote down the hard infrastructure, even though it will help a lot, unless they get almost everything they want in the soft infrastructure. How can you trust liberals anymore?

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Progressives are under the impression that they will score major electoral victories if they force the Democrat party further to the left. I don't see that as reality. I completely agree with Lapaz that the best play for Biden's presidency is getting relatively non-controversial legislation passed and score points with independents who are looking for a return to normalcy.

Is the GOP filled with obstructionist lunatics? Yes. So you're forced to concede to Manchin and Sinema. I don't think that's necessarily a horrible thing as most independents are probably closer to Manchin and Sinema than they are AOC and Bernie.

Democracy is teetering on the brink. You're not going to save it by pooping on conservative Democrats. You'll just send the country hurtling closer to GOP authoritarianism.

 

[J-DONK]

Progressives are under the impression that they will score major electoral victories if they force the Democrat party further to the left. I don't see that as reality. I completely agree with Lapaz that the best play for Biden's presidency is getting relatively non-controversial legislation passed and score points with independents who are looking for a return to normalcy.

Is the GOP filled with obstructionist lunatics? Yes. So you're forced to concede to Manchin and Sinema. I don't think that's necessarily a horrible thing as most independents are probably closer to Manchin and Sinema than they are AOC and Bernie.

Democracy is teetering on the brink. You're not going to save it by pooping on conservative Democrats. You'll just send the country hurtling closer to GOP authoritarianism.

Nope, most smart people right now think the GOP has a huge advantage in 2022. This is largely scene as the last chance to get any major legislation through. I'll remind you, and everyone else on this board. Progressives are trying to pass Joe Biden's agenda. They had a deal, and Manchin/Sinema went back on it. Also, this is a popular bill. How does caving into these clowns save democracy?

I have a better idea. Tell them to pass the president's agenda, or they get no funding, no support, and party leaders will endorse their opponents in a primary. Nancy Pelosi decided to endorse a Kennedy over Ed Markey, a sitting house rep in 2020. Markey won his race, and kept his seat. They can try to keep theirs. There needs to be a consequence for going against the rest of the party's agenda in this manner. This should be not be tolerated, and hand waved away as "conservative democrats being conservatives". If these two think they are doing the will of the people, they can prove it by going against opponents with the full backing of the DNP.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Massachusetts is not Arizona or West Virginia. You primary Manchin and Sinema and two Republicans will fill those seats.

 

[insidejob]

Massachusetts is not Arizona or West Virginia. You primary Manchin and Sinema and two Republicans will fill those seats.

Manchin for sure, but Sinema could get beat by another moderate democrat who actually plays nice with the other democrats instead of making fun of John McCain in her first days on the job.

 

[J-DONK]

Massachusetts is not Arizona or West Virginia. You primary Manchin and Sinema and two Republicans will fill those seats.

We have no idea on WV, until you roll that dice. Mark Kelly is to the left of Sinema, and was elected just last year. AZ isn't a red state that elected a blue dog democrat.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Massachusetts is not Arizona or West Virginia. You primary Manchin and Sinema and two Republicans will fill those seats.

Like inside said, I can see another dem taking that seat from Sinema, even sometime that might be slightly left of her.

 

[J-DONK]

Manchin's and Sinema's positions are just as trustworthy as the liberal's positions. They support the hard infrastructure, and Manchin supports a 1.5T soft infrastructure, but liberals only support both if the soft is guaranteed to pass at nearly the 3.5T price tag. Liberals have said they'll vote down the hard infrastructure, even though it will help a lot, unless they get almost everything they want in the soft infrastructure. How can you trust liberals anymore?

Progressives wanted the bills linked. You didn't need to trust them. That was the whole point. What are you even talking about?

 

[coldseat]

Progressives are under the impression that they will score major electoral victories if they force the Democrat party further to the left. I don't see that as reality. I completely agree with Lapaz that the best play for Biden's presidency is getting relatively non-controversial legislation passed and score points with independents who are looking for a return to normalcy.

Is the GOP filled with obstructionist lunatics? Yes. So you're forced to concede to Manchin and Sinema. I don't think that's necessarily a horrible thing as most independents are probably closer to Manchin and Sinema than they are AOC and Bernie.

Democracy is teetering on the brink. You're not going to save it by pooping on conservative Democrats. You'll just send the country hurtling closer to GOP authoritarianism.

Is that really what Independents want? Because I'll be honest, Independents, more so than Republicans, have confounded me for some time. If they really want normalcy, why would they be poised (if you go by polling and general sentiment) to give power back to Republicans in the House, and maybe Senate, in next years midterms. Do they really believe that would set us on a course to return to normal?

I don't even know that a return to normal is possible or what that even is now. Do Independents believe that Republicans can strengthen our institutions, bring us together, control debt or preserve the full faith and credit of the US? Because I've seen no indication that they're capable of doing any of that over the last 20+ years. So what exactly would they be voting for?

It seems to me that the only thing Independents are really interested in is constantly switching sides so that they can appear to be neutral. If anything, that's made our politics and country worse.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Is that really what Independents want? Because I'll be honest, Independents, more so than Republicans, have confounded me for some time. If they really want normalcy, why would they be poised (if you go by polling and general sentiment) to give power back to Republicans in the House, and maybe Senate, in next years midterms. Do they really believe that would set us on a course to return to normal?

I don't even know that a return to normal is possible or what that even is now. Do Independents believe that Republicans can strengthen our institutions, bring us together, control debt or preserve the full faith and credit of the US? Because I've seen not indication that they're capable of doing any of that over the last 20+ years. So what exactly would they be voting for?

It seems to me that the only thing Independents are really interested in is constantly switching sides so that they can appear to be neutral. If anything, that's made our politics and country worse.

Independents don't know what they really want. In some ways, they annoy me more than these traitor Republicans do. Independents seem to believe that being neutral is the same thing as being objective.

Independents seem to have the misguided belief that the Republicans are still a legitimate political party and that we still have a two party system. The Republicans are nothing more than a fascist cult now.

You can't have a two party system in a democracy when one party will no longer accept losing anymore, which is the Republican Party.

 

[insidejob]

Independents don't know what they really want. In some ways, they annoy me more than these traitor Republicans do. Independents seem to believe that being neutral is the same thing as being objective.

Independents seem to have the misguided belief that the Republicans are still a legitimate political party and that we still have a two party system. The Republicans are nothing more than a fascist cult now.

You can't have a two party system in a democracy when one party will no longer accept losing anymore, which is the Republican Party.

Is an Independent the same as registering "No Affiliation?" Can you even run for office if registered No Affiliation or would you have to pick a team? Or would they just label you as Independent? Just curious, because I think that both were on my voter registration card when I moved. I mean, logically, they both pretty much mean the same thing so I could be wrong about them both being on the registration card. On the other hand, claiming to be Independent is an affiliation...who knows? I was registered no affiliation for a while because I wasn't really happy with the platform of either team, but once the Tea Party came around, I knew I could never associate myself with that lunacy and decided that Democrat made the most sense for me. I wish the Tea Party/Trump Party would just become a third party so the sane conservatives could be Republicans. There are so many people who are single issue Republicans because of abortion while having sane views on society at large that it really is a shame that they choose to remain loyal to the GOP in its current iteration of Trumpism - a man who has probably paid for more abortions than he has brain cells.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

I'll concede that it's certainly possible for a Democrat to win Arizona. West Virginia is no chance at all, though. Manchin is basically a unicorn in politics these days -- the state overwhelmingly voted for Trump.

To the larger point of independents; I think there is a large voting block out there that doesn't necessarily pay attention to politics on a daily basis so they are relatively aloof of the insane things Trump does. And perhaps would unfortunately brush off January 6 is unrelated to this insanity.

 

[samiam5211]

I'll concede that it's certainly possible for a Democrat to win Arizona. West Virginia is no chance at all, though. Manchin is basically a unicorn in politics these days -- the state overwhelmingly voted for Trump.

To the larger point of independents; I think there is a large voting block out there that doesn't necessarily pay attention to politics on a daily basis so they are relatively aloof of the insane things Trump does. And perhaps would unfortunately brush off January 6 is unrelated to this insanity.

I think a centrist party that shy’d away from social issues argued for police reformation (not using the term defunding), pragmatic immigration reform, drug/criminal justice reform, and second amendment protection (which means supporting responsible gun ownership) would dominate US politics for the next generation.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

I think a centrist party that shy’d away from social issues argued for police reformation (not using the term defunding), pragmatic immigration reform, drug/criminal justice reform, and second amendment protection (which means supporting responsible gun ownership) would dominate US politics for the next generation.

That's basically where I'm at. If the machinery weren't so stacked in favor of the two-party system, I think the Libertarian Party (or some close approximation) would be thriving right now.

 

[JRad]

I'll concede that it's certainly possible for a Democrat to win Arizona. West Virginia is no chance at all, though. Manchin is basically a unicorn in politics these days -- the state overwhelmingly voted for Trump.

Just quoting yours out of convenience - but a thought occurs. Just because Manchin won in a Trump state before doesn’t mean he will again. As the gap widens, those voters get further away.

I will conceded I don’t know squat about the state’s voting patterns though. From the outside looking in, I‘m sure many thought it was a lock Rispone would beat JBE because of the (R) by his name. Louisiana just has enough votes in the right place to avoid that.