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/

 

[Taurus]

Tribalism is never smart.

Yes it is, when you're a member of Tribe Billions and you can split Tribe Mensch into competing factions...Red and Blue.

 

[tigerfan]

Yeah, those roads and bridges and the other trillions of dollars of "free stuff" that my taxes pay for which I take advantage of every single day...Pretty sure the good people of Appalachia would appreciate bridges, dams, interstates, etc., that aren't only pretty kick arse and super useful but also updated with the most modern technology available. Rapid DNA tests could prevent further inbreeding but the good people of West Virginia will keep marrying their relatives because they vote against their interests.

Lol the infrastructure bill is not happening because of the liberal Democrats holding it up for their other programs

 

[tigerfan]

Article on socialism bogeyman
========================
President Biden’s Build Back Better Act started off at $3.5 trillion. Now it’s at $1.75 trillion and no longer includes provisions for guaranteed family leave or lower prescription drug prices. That’s still a lot of money.

But since the total cost is calculated over 10 years, the annual bill will be only $175 billion — or less than 3 percent of the federal budget — and it will be largely or entirely paid for by tax increases. (A bipartisan infrastructure bill will add another $120 billion a year.)

That seems pretty fiscally responsible compared with former president Donald Trump’s record of adding $7.8 trillion to the national debt.


Republicans know that the individual provisions of the Build Back Better bill, such as pre-K programs, a child tax credit and clean energy, are popular. They also know that most voters don’t seem to much care about deficits.

But Republicans still feel compelled to oppose major Democratic legislation, regardless of the merits. So to pillory this bill they fall back on the dreaded s-word.


House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) calls it a “socialist spending bill.” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) tweets: “A $1.75 trillion #BuildBackSocialist plan is just as socialist as a $3.5 trillion one.” (Note how he squeezed two s-words into one short sentence!)

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) harrumphs: “The American people didn’t vote for a massive socialist transformation.” Sometimes they even use the m-word: Marxism.


The s-word has become an all-purpose epithet that Republicans use to describe everything from an influx of undocumented immigrants to the supposed teaching of critical race theory to vaccine mandates.

Somehow, however, Republican spending bills or tax hikes are never socialist — only Democratic ones……..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/02/here-we-go-again-90-years-republicans-have-been-crying-wolf-about-democratic-socialism/

The lowered cost is mostly related to accounting tricks

 

[J-DONK]

The lowered cost is mostly related to accounting tricks

Go on, tell us about these accounting tricks

 

[tigerfan]

Go on, tell us about these accounting tricks

Here’s an example: the IRS expansion won’t bring in as much revenue as they claim

Also, the child tax credit is for 1 year only, instead of the 5 or 10 they originally had.

 

[J-DONK]

Here’s an example: the IRS expansion won’t bring in as much revenue as they claim

Also, the child tax credit is for 1 year only, instead of the 5 or 10 they originally had.

How much lower is the IRS expansion going to bring in? What's the window?

The CTC being one year isn't an accounting trick? I don't follow that.

 

[samiam5211]

People complaining about the cost seem to assume that none of these programs are an added value.

If you replace your carpet with hardwood floors, your home value is going to go up.

 

[MT15]

Here’s an example: the IRS expansion won’t bring in as much revenue as they claim

Also, the child tax credit is for 1 year only, instead of the 5 or 10 they originally had.

These are not “accounting tricks”

 

[J-DONK]

These are not “accounting tricks”

I would settle for any kind of well documented source that showed some math on why the IRS expansion will bring in less then expected revenue as a good faith argument.

 

[MT15]

Don’t hold your breath.

 

[MT15]

Looks like it will happen tonight after all

 

[SaintForLife]

The Republicans favor the rich! Both sides!

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[MT15]

You must be so salty that Biden and the Dems got infrastructure week finally accomplished, right? Oh wait, it will benefit all of us, so you’re basically willing to poop on it because of tribalism. Lol.

 

[MT15]

This is sorta unrelated but very cool, and the sort of thing that we should be encouraging:

Self-Driving Farm Robot Uses Lasers To Kill 100,000 Weeds An Hour, Saving Land And Farmers From Toxic Herbicides

The nutrient content of our vegetables is down 40% over the last two decades and our soil health is suffering due to increasingly harsh herbicide use, according to Carbon Robotics founder Paul Mikesell.

www.forbes.com

 

[SaintForLife]

You must be so salty that Biden and the Dems got infrastructure week finally accomplished, right? Oh wait, it will benefit all of us, so you’re basically willing to poop on it because of tribalism. Lol.

You love those Democrats that cater to their rich Corporate donors. You never are able or willing to respond specifically which shows you are nothing but a Democratic partisan.

 

[Paul]

You love those Democrats that cater to their rich Corporate donors. You never are able or willing to respond specifically which shows you are nothing but a Democratic partisan.

I am happy the bill passed. The main issue is whether they will find people that want to work. The bill will be a bonanza for big business as they cash in these juicy contracts. As long as the stock market stays up we are all happy. I actually think Biden has done a great job.

 

[SaintForLife]

These are not “accounting tricks”

But the infrastructure bill is also a missed opportunity. One that reflects so much of what is wrong with policy making in Washington, where political expediency and budget gimmickry always seem to take precedence over ideas that would give taxpayers the most bang for their trillion bucks.

Start right at the top of the $1.2 trillion package. The CBO projects that the bill will add about $256 billion to the federal budget deficit over 10 years. Actually, that number is likely to be closer to $400 billion because the infrastructure package includes a number of dubious offsets, particularly in how it proposes to reallocate unused funds appropriated in various COVID-19 emergency spending bills.

The bill is also larded up with provisions that will make infrastructure projects more costly for taxpayers. That matters, of course, because if you inflate the cost of building a bridge and you have a fixed amount of money to spend on new bridges, you'll get fewer bridges.

For example, the bill's "Buy American" provision is nothing more than performative patriotism and a handout to politically powerful unions. By mandating that materials used in road, bridge, and rail projects come primarily from the United States, Congress will effectively hike prices and engage in arbitrary protectionism. Just ask the currently hobbled Washington, D.C., metro system how well those laws work.

...While inflating the cost of actual infrastructure projects, the bill also promises to waste federal tax dollars on boondoggles like rural broadband internet. To justify $42 billion in subsidies for building out unnecessary fiber-optic lines, the bill cleverly changes the definition of "broadband" to make it look like fewer American homes have access to high-speed internet. Other provisions in the proposal virtually guarantee that those subsidies flow to publicly owned networks rather than private ones. This seems to fulfill an ideological goal—making internet access more like a public utility rather than a private service is what many advocates of broadband spending seek—rather than a practical one.

Congress Finally Passed Biden's Inefficient, Deficit-Hiking Infrastructure Bill

Finally, it actually was infrastructure week. After a long day of back-and-forth negotiations between Democratic leaders and the caucus' sometimes...

reason.com