Bipartisan Infrastructure/3.5T Reconciliation/Gov Funding/Debt Ceiling (2 Viewers)

[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/

 

[JRad]

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.

Unfortunately the people who can fix this are the ones who will lose jobs over it. I’ll broken record myself:

Eliminate the electoral college
Nonpartisan districting
Ranked choice
*

Make democracy speak for the people.


*I’d also add get the money out of politics, but that one isn’t as cut and dry.

 

[samiam5211]

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.

Libertarian socialism - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I think that if use of crypto currency becomes widespread we could see anarcho-socialism become more popular.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

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.

JBE is pro-life and pro-guns -- an anomaly in the Democratic Party. Manchin, to his credit, won in 2018 when Trump was near his zenith and attacked him quite regularly. Whether he gets elected again in 2024 is another story. He might just retire.

 

[Lapaz]

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

If they had to be linked, they could be 1 bill. I don’t know what agreements were made, but they aren’t linked. 1 has passed in a bipartisan vote and will benefit the country. The other is pretty far left, so I’m not mad at those that resist it. The only part that I really want is the climate piece. The health care piece would be great, but I really want climate legislation. I think the Democrats could get several Republicans if they just were trying to pass climate legislation.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Biden and the Democrats desperately need some wins. Doesn't matter what kind. His approval ratings are tanking because he's viewed as ineffective -- and rightly so.

 

[Saintman2884]

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.

It would be be nice if our political, electoral.voting system actually made for viable third-parties or allow for EU-styled coalition regimes like we see in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium and Holland are a little more complex due to linguistic/ethnic nationalism issues, particularly in southern, more rural, predominantly French-speaking Flanders Belgian region. Holland, to a lesser extent, has some minority ethnic linguistic issues,.especially with large minority German-speaking regions in southeastern parts of the country annexed after WWII.

Britain, occasionally, has had coalition governments who held on to a slim powers sharing agreement, that was.certainly the case in the mid-late 1970's with the Lib/Lab Pact of James McCarthy's Old Labour regime from 1976-79.

 

[SaintForLife]

You still don't get it. No moderate Democratic voters are against the two spending bills. In fact, moderate Democratic voters will be pissed at Manchin and Sinema if they don't compromise and help get it passed.

What Democratic voters would be against spending a lot of $ for the pet liberal projects? When does a lot of "free" programs ever poll badly? How does the polling change when you include the long term costs?

 

[Taurus]

What Democratic voters would be against spending a lot of $ for the pet liberal projects? When does a lot of "free" programs ever poll badly? How does the polling change when you include the long term costs?

Since when has the GOP ever given a flying f*** about long term costs?
At least with Dems you get something for your grandkids' money.

 

[SaintForLife]

Since when has the GOP ever given a flying f*** about long term costs?
At least with Dems you get something for your grandkids' money.

Neither party cares about the long term costs and apparently you don't either. The Republicans only pretend to care about it when they are put of power. At what point should we worry about the US debt and long term costs?

Also stop with the idiotic crying about "both sides."(general statement not directed at Taurus)

 

[Taurus]

Neither party cares about the long term costs and apparently you don't either. The Republicans only pretend to care about it when they are put of power. At what point should we worry about the US debt and long term costs?

Also stop with the idiotic crying about "both sides."(general statement not directed at Taurus)

Oh, I'm not about 'both sides'. It's one side, one treasonous deathcult side...the GOP.

 

[SaintForLife]

Oh, I'm not about 'both sides'. It's one side, one treasonous deathcult side...the GOP.

You didn't answer the question. At what point should we start worrying about the US debt or should we let the US Oligarchs continue to run the country into oblivion?

 

[Taurus]

You didn't answer the question. At what point should we start worrying about the US debt or should we let the US Oligarchs continue to run the country into oblivion?

The time to worry about the debt was 2001, again in 2004-2007, once more in 2012-2019.
When you're digging a hole (2004-2007) stop.
When times are good, try to keep that momentum (2001, 2012-2019).
Right now we're in a hole and need to lift out of it. An investment based spending plan, like the Infrastructure package, is such an investment.
Tax cuts for the rich isn't an investment, it's payola.

 

[MT15]

Biden and the Democrats desperately need some wins. Doesn't matter what kind. His approval ratings are tanking because he's viewed as ineffective -- and rightly so.

The poll that has caused the “approval ratings tanking” narrative appears to have been an outlier. Several recent polls have found the same approval rating (around 50%) as was found before the outlier.

 

[Lapaz]

The time to worry about the debt was 2001, again in 2004-2007, once more in 2012-2019.
When you're digging a hole (2004-2007) stop.
When times are good, try to keep that momentum (2001, 2012-2019).
Right now we're in a hole and need to lift out of it. An investment based spending plan, like the Infrastructure package, is such an investment.
Tax cuts for the rich isn't an investment, it's payola.

We were in a hole last year, but I don't think we're in a hole now. We needed a boost to the economy last year, but today the economy is doing well, despite Covid, and when Covid is finally under control, it will take off like a rocket. If we add fuel to that rocket, it might blow up. I love many of the things in the soft infrastructure bill, but the Democrats don't have the votes, and it will not help the debt and deficit unless it is more than paid for. I would prefer to see the hard infrastructure which will pay long term dividends, a smaller soft infrastructure that reflects a small Democratic majority, and tax changes to increase revenue to assure that we don't have a deficit and start paying down the debt. Biden's agenda is only realistic with a much larger majority, but even with a larger majority, it is not responsible to keep spending without taking in more revenue than we spend. We should take advantage of a relatively good economy to deal with our debt. Once we've gotten it under control, then it would be appropriate to expand the social safety net.

 

[efil4]

We were in a hole last year, but I don't think we're in a hole now. We needed a boost to the economy last year, but today the economy is doing well, despite Covid, and when Covid is finally under control, it will take off like a rocket. If we add fuel to that rocket, it might blow up. I love many of the things in the soft infrastructure bill, but the Democrats don't have the votes, and it will not help the debt and deficit unless it is more than paid for. I would prefer to see the hard infrastructure which will pay long term dividends, a smaller soft infrastructure that reflects a small Democratic majority, and tax changes to increase revenue to assure that we don't have a deficit and start paying down the debt. Biden's agenda is only realistic with a much larger majority, but even with a larger majority, it is not responsible to keep spending without taking in more revenue than we spend. We should take advantage of a relatively good economy to deal with our debt. Once we've gotten it under control, then it would be appropriate to expand the social safety net.

unfortunately the only real way to deal with debt is to raise taxes.

Wanna guess who will oppose that?

 

[Lapaz]

unfortunately the only real way to deal with debt is to raise taxes.

Wanna guess who will oppose that?

I know most Republicans will oppose the tax increases, but they're needed, and I hope a few moderate Republicans support that, like the HW Bush minority wing of Republicans. Regardless, Democrats should continue to try to be the responsible party, which as a whole they have been for decades, and I think they'll be rewarded for that. If the Republicans don't do the responsible thing, then they should change their name to the Irresponsiblicans.

 

[Taurus]

We were in a hole last year, but I don't think we're in a hole now. We needed a boost to the economy last year, but today the economy is doing well, despite Covid, and when Covid is finally under control, it will take off like a rocket. If we add fuel to that rocket, it might blow up. I love many of the things in the soft infrastructure bill, but the Democrats don't have the votes, and it will not help the debt and deficit unless it is more than paid for. I would prefer to see the hard infrastructure which will pay long term dividends, a smaller soft infrastructure that reflects a small Democratic majority, and tax changes to increase revenue to assure that we don't have a deficit and start paying down the debt. Biden's agenda is only realistic with a much larger majority, but even with a larger majority, it is not responsible to keep spending without taking in more revenue than we spend. We should take advantage of a relatively good economy to deal with our debt. Once we've gotten it under control, then it would be appropriate to expand the social safety net.

I think we're on a spiderweb suspended over a much deeper hole.

 

[gjones]

unfortunately the only real way to deal with debt is to raise taxes.

Wanna guess who will oppose that?

Here is a novel idea. Cut spending.