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/

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Ye

I’m not setting the standard, the voters will do that.

They’re not done with voting rights. Let’s wait and see what they do next.

Yeah, you are setting the standard. You said the Democrats deserve to lose next year. And you are wrong.

 

[MT15]

I said that if the Democrats take this bill and treat it like JDonk is - by being “furious” about what it doesn’t include rather than celebrating what it does include - they will deserve to lose. And if they do that they will deserve to lose, because it’s about the stupidest political strategy ever.

Nice try twisting my words, though.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Inequality leads to revolution; everybody knows that. The oligarchy prevents the revolution by giving alms to the poor as we are seeing now with the progressives and even some conservatives in Washington DC. The problem with this paradigm is that the wealth difference remains.

Many wonder why throughout history there was always inequality. At the onset it was tyranny and domination. Todays is rather simple: Once a person has economic success making additional wealth is rather easy. In other words wealth begets more wealth. Even the most passive investor can make large sums of money with no effort. This is known as the Matthew principle in economics and that is a tough one to get around.

"The Matthew effect of accumulated advantage, Matthew principle, or Matthew effect for short, is sometimes summarized by the adage "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer".[1][2] The concept is applicable to matters of fame or status, but may also be applied literally to cumulative advantage of economic capital. In the beginning, Matthew effects were primarily focused on the inequality in the way scientists were recognized for their work. However, Norman Storer, of Columbia University, led a new wave of research. He believed he discovered that the inequality that existed in the social sciences also existed in other institutions.[3]

The term was coined by sociologist Robert K. Merton in 1968[4] and takes its name from the parable of the talents or minas in the biblical Gospel of Matthew. Merton credited his collaborator and wife, sociologist Harriet Zuckerman, as co-author of the concept of the Matthew effect.[5]

The Matthew effect may largely be explained by Preferential attachment whereby individuals probabilistically accrue a total reward (eg., popularity, friends, wealth) in proportion to their existing degree. This has the net effect of it being increasingly difficult for low ranked individuals to increase their totals, as they have fewer resources to risk over time; and increasingly easy for high rank individuals to preserve a large total, as they have a large amount to risk.[6]"
WIKI

Not only does the wealth difference remain, it continues to grow substantially every year. Which is actually the bigger problem and more dangerous problem for this country.

Therefore, quibbiling about how little the bottom 50% of Americans pay in taxes completely misses the point.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

I said that if the Democrats take this bill and treat it like JDonk is - by being “furious” about what it doesn’t include rather than celebrating what it does include - they will deserve to lose. And if they do that they will deserve to lose, because it’s about the stupidest political strategy ever.

Nice try twisting my words, though.

This is no different. The Democrats still don't deserve to lose because some of us are upset about how watered down the bills have become, due to two self-absorbed imbeciles in the Senate. And what's more infuriating is that most of the voters in West Virginia and Arizona support the progressives' original proposals.

The Republicans deserve to lose next year for not doing anything besides obstructing every bill in Congress and for being traitors.

So, yeah, you are normalizing the Republican Party's behavior.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

This is a self-defeating attitude. The average democratic voter should be thrilled that they have a framework for 1.75T. It will improve the lives of millions of ordinary people. Which is not only something the Republicans haven’t done, it’s something they have vigorously opposed every step of the way.

If Democrats don’t celebrate this and proclaim its benefits from the mountaintop, they will deserve their defeat at the polls in the next election and not only will further progress be doomed but the Rs will roll back everything gained.

Your views are extreme. They don’t represent the majority of the party, let alone the majority of the people who vote in this country.

Not according to the polls. There have been multiple stories of more than a majority of the people wanting the BBB plan, BEFORE it was chopped in half, ranging from mid-50s to almost 70% in some polls.

CBS poll finds support for Biden social bill, but fixation on cost

A new poll indicates that most Americans approve of the Biden administration's "Build Back Better" plan despite a limited number of

thehill.com

https://navigatorresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Navigator-Update-09.21.2021.pdf?emci=41c7e453-4c1a-ec11-981f-501ac57ba3ed&emdi=c3efce95-c01a-ec11-981f-501ac57ba3ed&ceid=1283014

https://d3jpbvtfqku4tu.cloudfront.net/img/Hart-SEIU-Home-Care-Poll-Sept-2021.pdf

Democratic Spending Bills Retain Majority Support, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; But Democrats In Congress Lose Ground | Quinnipiac University Poll

"If it takes a trillion to build roads and bridges and expand broadband, so be it, say a majority of Americans. And, though fewer in number, more than half of Americans green light the 'human side' of the two bills, aimed at families, seniors, and the overall welfare of the population," said...

poll.qu.edu

It's not self-defeating when the entire caucus are ready to move with the exception of two - TWO - who are selling out to big business and their egos rather than negotiating in good faith. Sinema is going to be primaried big time and the only reason Manchin won't switch parties is due to family legacy and the fact that he's scared of being haunted by the ghost of Robert Byrd.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I’m not setting the standard, the voters will do that.

They’re not done with voting rights. Let’s wait and see what they do next.

How are they not done with voting rights. Republicans just filibustered the bill that MANCHIN SUPPORTED and he stated once again that he was not willing to break the filibuster rules for it. Even if the lower courts provide some relief, we have seen what will happen when it reaches SCOTUS.

The voters won't be setting any standard because by the time all of these state laws go into effect, many won't be around.

 

[Paul]

Not only does the wealth difference remain, it continues to grow substantially every year. Which is actually the bigger problem and more dangerous problem for this country.

Therefore, quibbiling about how little the bottom 50% of Americans pay in taxes completely misses the point.

I was making an observation.

Here is another observation. People want to redistribute the wealth from the top to the bottom which IMO is a good idea to avoid a revolution. At the same time those that want the wealth of the top demonize those at the top. I am thankful because at least we live in a society where there are people at the top that can pass wealth to the bottom. I would not want to live in a nation with only poor and middle class people. There would be no way to redistribute wealth.

 

[Taurus]

The bottom 50% pays little or no federal tax. For them is free.

AT&T pays little to no federal tax, too. The moral denigration around those who accept "free stuff" doesn't seem to apply to them.

Also, the bottom earners still pay income tax...they just get it back after Uncle Sam has enjoyed a year's worth of interest on it.

 

[SFIDC3]

I was making an observation.

Here is another observation. People want to redistribute the wealth from the top to the bottom which IMO is a good idea to avoid a revolution. At the same time those that want the wealth of the top demonize those at the top. I am thankful because at least we live in a society where there are people at the top that can pass wealth to the bottom. I would not want to live in a nation with only poor and middle class people. There would be no way to redistribute wealth.

Here is another observation, you state that the poor pay little to no taxes yet you fail to mention that most the richest of the rich pay little to no taxes along with a lot of the richest corporations....

And anyone who demonizes the wealthy or "those at the top" have a perfect right too....because they are the true "welfare staters".....But I prefer to demonize the law makers that created the current unbalanced, unfair, unsustainable, welfare for the rich tax code....

By all means though, keep on moderating!!!!

 

[Paul]

Here is another observation, you state that the poor pay little to no taxes yet you fail to mention that most the richest of the rich pay little to no taxes along with a lot of the richest corporations....

And anyone who demonizes the wealthy or "those at the top" have a perfect right too....because they are the true "welfare staters".....But I prefer to demonize the law makers that created the current unbalanced, unfair, unsustainable, welfare for the rich tax code....

By all means though, keep on moderating!!!!

I do not disagree with your post. The politicians tell the poor what they want to hear and then take the cash from the rich to write laws that benefit the rich. That is the history of the world. This scheme is also practiced by socialists because greed is universal.

However, there will always be people at the top, people at the bottom and the rest in the middle. I do not think that can be changed. Humans exist in a spectrum of talent and competency therefore success comes easy to some and never to others.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

I do not disagree with your post. The politicians tell the poor what they want to hear and then take the cash from the rich to write laws that benefit the rich. That is the history of the world. This scheme is also practiced by socialists because greed is universal.

However, there will always be people at the top, people at the bottom and the rest in the middle. I do not think that can be changed. Humans exist in a spectrum of talent and competency therefore success comes easy to some and never to others.

You also don't seem to understand that most wealthy people did not earn their wealth, either.

 

[Paul]

You also don't seem to understand that most wealthy people did not earn their wealth, either.

If we abolish inheritance we would still have wealth discrepancy.

What do you mean by did not earn? If I inherit 20 million dollars I did not earn that, but surely my ancestors earned that money.

 

[SaintForLife]

Meh, its a "moderate" success at this point if the 1.5 trillion plan passes. It's 150 billion a year, or a 3% increase in the annual budget of 4.8 trillion. That's right around the average rate of inflation. I guess it's better then passing a tax cut for the rich, but dear god the average DNP voter should be furious.

It's all a game and Machin and Sinema are the rotating villains who were chosen to take the blame for policies that the corporate Democrats would never allow to pass.





It's like when the Republicans pretend to be fiscally responsible when they are out of power and then when they regain power they spend money like it's going out of style.

The Democrats always talk a big game about the evil 1% and taxing the rich, but they are in bed with the US oligarchs just like the Republicans.

Well, that was fast. Less than 24 hours after Democrats introduced a new proposal for a billionaires’ tax, Democratic leaders have pronounced it on life support, after Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) expressed grave doubts about the proposal.

But saying Manchin is the one killing this tax — which is the narrative widely taking hold — might be a tad too convenient for other Democrats. Other factors are clearly involved here.
For instance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sharply faulted the proposal at a caucus meeting earlier this week, according to a Democratic aide who overheard the remarks. This aide told me Pelosi pronounced it a PR stunt that wouldn’t accomplish anything.

“Pelosi absolutely destroyed it,” the aide said.

...Now the proposal is struggling to survive. But Manchin isn’t the only one to blame. Rep. Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.), chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, has questioned whether it will hold up in court. That would dovetail with Pelosi’s private opposition, and both of them working together suggest there may be plenty of other House Democrats privately opposed.

And other Senate Democrats appear to oppose the proposal but don’t want to say so openly. After all, it’s not easy to come down on the side of protecting the wealth of billionaires.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/27/who-is-killing-billionaires-tax/

2010 article:

The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, it's Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, it's Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and "breaking with their party" to ensure Michael Mukasey's confirmation as Attorney General; then it's Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then it's Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they can't blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don't need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.

The Democratic Party's deceitful game

They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can pass

www.salon.com

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

If we abolish inheritance we would still have wealth discrepancy.

What do you mean by did not earn? If I inherit 20 million dollars I did not earn that, but surely my ancestors earned that money.

You implied in your previous comment that wealthy people generally have more talent and competence than poor/middle class people. There is zero evidence of that. In fact, the opposite is true in many or most cases.

 

[J-DONK]

This is a self-defeating attitude. The average democratic voter should be thrilled that they have a framework for 1.75T. It will improve the lives of millions of ordinary people. Which is not only something the Republicans haven’t done, it’s something they have vigorously opposed every step of the way.

If Democrats don’t celebrate this and proclaim its benefits from the mountaintop, they will deserve their defeat at the polls in the next election and not only will further progress be doomed but the Rs will roll back everything gained.

Your views are extreme. They don’t represent the majority of the party, let alone the majority of the people who vote in this country.

What is the deal with people on this board labeling those they disagree with as extremist. This is the second thread I've been labeled as such in as many days. I don't think most Democrats are happy with this version of the bill. It also hasn't passed, and progressives don't appear to be signaling that they will vote for it.

 

[Paul]

You implied in your previous comment that wealthy people generally have more talent and competence than poor/middle class people. There is zero evidence of that. In fact, the opposite is true in many or most cases.

Untalented people with money is generally due to inheritance. I am fine with abolishing inheritance.

If we exclude the above most people that become wealthy on their own are often quite talented. However, a bit of luck and hard work is also needed. Not all talented people make it to the top.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

What is the deal with people on this board labeling those they disagree with as extremist. This is the second thread I've been labeled as such in as many days. I don't think most Democrats are happy with this version of the bill. It also hasn't passed, and progressives don't appear to be signaling that they will vote for it.

There is nothing remotely extremist about what you said. It's possible this human infrastructure bill could do more harm than good for Democrats, due to all the criticism of it from the left and even from the middle. Apparently some of the key provisions have been removed from the bill, such as paid family leave and sick leave. What Democratic voter is against that???

It's obvious to virtually all Democrats that Manchin and Sinema are bought and paid for by corporate America. They definitely are NOT strengthening their position with voters in their home states.

 

[J-DONK]

You implied in your previous comment that wealthy people generally have more talent and competence than poor/middle class people. There is zero evidence of that. In fact, the opposite is true in many or most cases.

He is sort of right. The part that is proven is the schooling, and social connections gained from attending top prep schools, and ivy league universities is priceless. Not to mention the capital you can raise within your own family for business ventures. A good example from this week, Sara Blakely who just sold spanx. Who is her father? A founding partner in a large Florida law firm.