Biden infrastructure/tax increase megathread

[nerd73]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

[Person Man]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

Hopefully people who would understand nuance and context in this matter.

[Torie]

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

[Person Man]

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Here’s hoping that the progressives at least force there to be a second bill even if it isn’t the one we currently have.

[Sir Mohamed]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

Not necessarily. The actual issue I see here that Biden & Schumer don't have much leverage to use against Sinema. They need her in the caucus and otherwise would lose the senate majority instantly. And she's not up for reelection until 2024. If Johnson was prez today, he'd likely offer Sinema and Manchin some extra funding for infrastructure in their states or so. The difference is that Johnson had larger majorities in congress and several GOPers were open for business with his admin on issues the Southern Dems opposed his agenda. Divisions in congress are not comparable to the 1960s, not even to the Reagan era.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Most moderate Democrats supported the two track strategy.  This nine nitwits aren’t moderates, they’re a handful of ***holes who are trolling for attention by adopting some position - anything, it doesn’t really matter what b/c these folks have no real ideology - to the right of the Democratic leadership. 

Calling them moderates is like saying Allen West or Larry Elder represent the average AA voter’s political views.  That’s not hyperbole; the “mods vs. Pelosi” framing really is that inaccurate.  Folks like Sinema, Gottheimer, Schrader, and apparently Manchin are basically just Lieberman-esque trolls whose schtick is arbitrarily opposing whatever most Democrats support just for the sake of doing so. 

What’s new about this recurring problem is that this time - unlike Obama, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc who generally did what they could - Biden has been proactively enabling these trolls - whether it’s b/c he’s doing everything he can behind the scenes to help them or he’s just a hopeless incompetent who is in over his head, I can’t say - to the point that in his way he’s almost as complicit as the trolls are.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Most moderate Democrats supported the two track strategy.  This nine nitwits aren’t moderates, they’re a handful of ***holes who are trolling for attention by adopting some position - anything, it doesn’t really matter what b/c these folks have no real ideology - to the right of the Democratic leadership. 

Calling them moderates is like saying Allen West or Larry Elder represent the average AA voter’s political views.  That’s not hyperbole; the “mods vs. Pelosi” framing really is that inaccurate.  Folks like Sinema, Gottheimer, Schrader, and apparently Manchin are basically just Lieberman-esque trolls whose schtick is arbitrarily opposing whatever most Democrats support just for the sake of doing so. 

What’s new about this recurring problem is that this time - unlike Obama, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc who generally did what they could - Biden has been proactively enabling these trolls - whether it’s b/c he’s doing everything he can behind the scenes to help them or he’s just a hopeless incompetent who is in over his head, I can’t say - to the point that in his way he’s almost as complicit as the trolls are.

I think this is because of Sinema, not the nine. She's just really really stubborn and there's not much we can do

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Most moderate Democrats supported the two track strategy.  This nine nitwits aren’t moderates, they’re a handful of ***holes who are trolling for attention by adopting some position - anything, it doesn’t really matter what b/c these folks have no real ideology - to the right of the Democratic leadership.  

Calling them moderates is like saying Allen West or Larry Elder represent the average AA voter’s political views.  That’s not hyperbole; the “mods vs. Pelosi” framing really is that inaccurate.  Folks like Sinema, Gottheimer, Schrader, and apparently Manchin are basically just Lieberman-esque trolls whose schtick is arbitrarily opposing whatever most Democrats support just for the sake of doing so.  

What’s new about this recurring problem is that this time - unlike Obama, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc who generally did what they could - Biden has been proactively enabling these trolls - whether it’s b/c he’s doing everything he can behind the scenes to help them or he’s just a hopeless incompetent who is in over his head, I can’t say - to the point that in his way he’s almost as complicit as the trolls are.

I think this is because of Sinema, not the nine. She's just really really stubborn and there's not much we can do

I mean, even if that were true, at this point - as someone else put it - Biden’s position is basically (at best) “I’ve tried nothing and I’m all out of ideas.”

[gerritcole]

is anyone clear on what gottenheimer and the crew actually won for themselves? seems like nothing but a save face maneuver

[Person Man]

is anyone clear on what gottenheimer and the crew actually won for themselves? seems like nothing but a save face maneuver

Moderates claim they won the ability the pass the infrastructure but to vote with the Republicans to defeat the budget.

[Morning in Atlas]

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Most moderate Democrats supported the two track strategy.  This nine nitwits aren’t moderates, they’re a handful of ***holes who are trolling for attention by adopting some position - anything, it doesn’t really matter what b/c these folks have no real ideology - to the right of the Democratic leadership. 

Calling them moderates is like saying Allen West or Larry Elder represent the average AA voter’s political views.  That’s not hyperbole; the “mods vs. Pelosi” framing really is that inaccurate.  Folks like Sinema, Gottheimer, Schrader, and apparently Manchin are basically just Lieberman-esque trolls whose schtick is arbitrarily opposing whatever most Democrats support just for the sake of doing so. 

What’s new about this recurring problem is that this time - unlike Obama, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc who generally did what they could - Biden has been proactively enabling these trolls - whether it’s b/c he’s doing everything he can behind the scenes to help them or he’s just a hopeless incompetent who is in over his head, I can’t say - to the point that in his way he’s almost as complicit as the trolls are.

Welcome aboard, my friend.

[politicallefty]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

Not necessarily. The actual issue I see here that Biden & Schumer don't have much leverage to use against Sinema. They need her in the caucus and otherwise would lose the senate majority instantly. And she's not up for reelection until 2024. If Johnson was prez today, he'd likely offer Sinema and Manchin some extra funding for infrastructure in their states or so. The difference is that Johnson had larger majorities in congress and several GOPers were open for business with his admin on issues the Southern Dems opposed his agenda. Divisions in congress are not comparable to the 1960s, not even to the Reagan era.

I'm almost certain he was referring to some of the more crude things LBJ would do. (I don't think it's anything he would've done in the presence of women.)

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Here’s hoping that the progressives at least force there to be a second bill even if it isn’t the one we currently have.

I don't see this as Pelosi having caved. The Congressional Progressive Caucus controls 95 seats in the House, 43% of the Democratic Caucus. The ultimate math for the bipartisan bill is whether the number of progressives that are willing to hold firm and take or kill the hostage (the bill) versus how many Republicans will end up voting for the bill. We're sort of going through a series of checkpoints where the two sides within the Democratic Party can try to extract concessions or potentially destroy the whole process.

Nothing has fundamentally changed. Manchin and Sinema are still needed in the Senate for final passage of the reconciliation bill. The Problem Causers Caucus isn't going to do anything worse than those two. There are a lot of players in this right now, but there will ultimately have to be some sort of agreement between progressives in the House and Manchin and Sinema in the Senate. If September 27th comes and there is no reconciliation bill, progressives can and should defeat the bipartisan bill. I imagine you're looking at a maximum of 30 Republicans that could potentially vote for the bipartisan bill. That wouldn't require many all that much of the CPC to kill it, even with some Republican votes supporting it. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a tacit agreement with Pelosi, especially as her views are in alignment with the CPC.

Even after this, people are still finding ways to doubt Speaker Pelosi's abilities.

[KaiserDave]

Gottheimer is one of the worst people in Congress, but I don’t buy this argument that Biden is in kahoots with him-at all.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Love to secretly plot with a no-name House backbencher to undermine the most important parts of my own agenda.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

Not necessarily. The actual issue I see here that Biden & Schumer don't have much leverage to use against Sinema. They need her in the caucus and otherwise would lose the senate majority instantly. And she's not up for reelection until 2024. If Johnson was prez today, he'd likely offer Sinema and Manchin some extra funding for infrastructure in their states or so. The difference is that Johnson had larger majorities in congress and several GOPers were open for business with his admin on issues the Southern Dems opposed his agenda. Divisions in congress are not comparable to the 1960s, not even to the Reagan era.

I'm almost certain he was referring to some of the more crude things LBJ would do. (I don't think it's anything he would've done in the presence of women.)

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Here’s hoping that the progressives at least force there to be a second bill even if it isn’t the one we currently have.

I don't see this as Pelosi having caved. The Congressional Progressive Caucus controls 95 seats in the House, 43% of the Democratic Caucus. The ultimate math for the bipartisan bill is whether the number of progressives that are willing to hold firm and take or kill the hostage (the bill) versus how many Republicans will end up voting for the bill. We're sort of going through a series of checkpoints where the two sides within the Democratic Party can try to extract concessions or potentially destroy the whole process.

Nothing has fundamentally changed. Manchin and Sinema are still needed in the Senate for final passage of the reconciliation bill. The Problem Causers Caucus isn't going to do anything worse than those two. There are a lot of players in this right now, but there will ultimately have to be some sort of agreement between progressives in the House and Manchin and Sinema in the Senate. If September 27th comes and there is no reconciliation bill, progressives can and should defeat the bipartisan bill. I imagine you're looking at a maximum of 30 Republicans that could potentially vote for the bipartisan bill. That wouldn't require many all that much of the CPC to kill it, even with some Republican votes supporting it. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a tacit agreement with Pelosi, especially as her views are in alignment with the CPC.

Even after this, people are still finding ways to doubt Speaker Pelosi's abilities.

If nothing has changed, if Pelosi didn't cave, why these efforts to bind the bills together in first place?

[KaiserDave]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

Not necessarily. The actual issue I see here that Biden & Schumer don't have much leverage to use against Sinema. They need her in the caucus and otherwise would lose the senate majority instantly. And she's not up for reelection until 2024. If Johnson was prez today, he'd likely offer Sinema and Manchin some extra funding for infrastructure in their states or so. The difference is that Johnson had larger majorities in congress and several GOPers were open for business with his admin on issues the Southern Dems opposed his agenda. Divisions in congress are not comparable to the 1960s, not even to the Reagan era.

I'm almost certain he was referring to some of the more crude things LBJ would do. (I don't think it's anything he would've done in the presence of women.)

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Here’s hoping that the progressives at least force there to be a second bill even if it isn’t the one we currently have.

I don't see this as Pelosi having caved. The Congressional Progressive Caucus controls 95 seats in the House, 43% of the Democratic Caucus. The ultimate math for the bipartisan bill is whether the number of progressives that are willing to hold firm and take or kill the hostage (the bill) versus how many Republicans will end up voting for the bill. We're sort of going through a series of checkpoints where the two sides within the Democratic Party can try to extract concessions or potentially destroy the whole process.

Nothing has fundamentally changed. Manchin and Sinema are still needed in the Senate for final passage of the reconciliation bill. The Problem Causers Caucus isn't going to do anything worse than those two. There are a lot of players in this right now, but there will ultimately have to be some sort of agreement between progressives in the House and Manchin and Sinema in the Senate. If September 27th comes and there is no reconciliation bill, progressives can and should defeat the bipartisan bill. I imagine you're looking at a maximum of 30 Republicans that could potentially vote for the bipartisan bill. That wouldn't require many all that much of the CPC to kill it, even with some Republican votes supporting it. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a tacit agreement with Pelosi, especially as her views are in alignment with the CPC.

Even after this, people are still finding ways to doubt Speaker Pelosi's abilities.

If nothing has changed, if Pelosi didn't cave, why these efforts to bind the bills together in first place?

I really don’t think there was a concerted attempt to bind them together

[politicallefty]

If nothing has changed, if Pelosi didn't cave, why these efforts to bind the bills together in first place?

I really don’t think there was a concerted attempt to bind them together

I think that is largely the case. Traditionally, a lot of this hostage-taking would happen during the actual process of crafting the legislation and moving it forward. Conservative Democrats extracted many concessions from both Pelosi and Reid before passing the ACA. However, the ACA also had a reconciliation bill that was passed immediately after (in the House and was signed a week later). It was a different process because they now want to show a bipartisan effort with one bill. The major centrepiece of the President's agenda is what is included in the reconciliation bill. It is only recently that that is subject to a filibuster in the Senate, hence the reconciliation process.

Without the reconciliation bill, President Biden will not have much to show. The American Rescue Plan Act was a great accomplishment, but it's analogous to the ARRA under President Obama. He needs something much bigger. Obama got the ACA. President Biden needs the reconciliation bill to incorporate his American Families Plan.

[pppolitics]

is anyone clear on what gottenheimer and the crew actually won for themselves? seems like nothing but a save face maneuver

Concession #2: The House will work only with a reconciliation bill that can get united Democratic approval in the Senate (or: 51 votes in the Senate).

It’s that second concession that seems to us to be the bigger deal, because it means that vulnerable House members won’t be voting on any measures that will be doomed in the 50-50 Senate (hello, BTU tax and cap-and-trade!).

[pppolitics]

The problem with the idea of Biden acting like LBJ against Sinema is that it'd cause a sexual harassment scandal (and arguably rightfully so)

Not necessarily. The actual issue I see here that Biden & Schumer don't have much leverage to use against Sinema. They need her in the caucus and otherwise would lose the senate majority instantly. And she's not up for reelection until 2024. If Johnson was prez today, he'd likely offer Sinema and Manchin some extra funding for infrastructure in their states or so. The difference is that Johnson had larger majorities in congress and several GOPers were open for business with his admin on issues the Southern Dems opposed his agenda. Divisions in congress are not comparable to the 1960s, not even to the Reagan era.

I'm almost certain he was referring to some of the more crude things LBJ would do. (I don't think it's anything he would've done in the presence of women.)

Maybe this is discussed above, but here is a good summary of the state of play on reconciliation and infrastructure. The two bills have been effectively decoupled it seems to me. Pelosi was forced to fold. The Dem moderates held firm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/house-moderates-provide-even-more-leverage-joe-manchin-reconciliation-n1277592

Here’s hoping that the progressives at least force there to be a second bill even if it isn’t the one we currently have.

I don't see this as Pelosi having caved. The Congressional Progressive Caucus controls 95 seats in the House, 43% of the Democratic Caucus. The ultimate math for the bipartisan bill is whether the number of progressives that are willing to hold firm and take or kill the hostage (the bill) versus how many Republicans will end up voting for the bill. We're sort of going through a series of checkpoints where the two sides within the Democratic Party can try to extract concessions or potentially destroy the whole process.

Nothing has fundamentally changed. Manchin and Sinema are still needed in the Senate for final passage of the reconciliation bill. The Problem Causers Caucus isn't going to do anything worse than those two. There are a lot of players in this right now, but there will ultimately have to be some sort of agreement between progressives in the House and Manchin and Sinema in the Senate. If September 27th comes and there is no reconciliation bill, progressives can and should defeat the bipartisan bill. I imagine you're looking at a maximum of 30 Republicans that could potentially vote for the bipartisan bill. That wouldn't require many all that much of the CPC to kill it, even with some Republican votes supporting it. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a tacit agreement with Pelosi, especially as her views are in alignment with the CPC.

Even after this, people are still finding ways to doubt Speaker Pelosi's abilities.

...and Republicans are going to runs ads about how Democrats voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill

Great job!

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Love to secretly plot with a no-name House backbencher to undermine the most important parts of my own agenda.

Progressive agenda for reconciliation =/= Biden agenda for reconciliation

[politicallefty]

...and Republicans are going to runs ads about how Democrats voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill

Great job!

If Democrats are going to run their legislative agenda based on what Republicans are going to run ads against, I suppose Congress should just go back to naming post offices.

I couldn't care less about what Republicans are going to run ads about. They're going to run ads against President Biden, against Speaker Pelosi, and against Leader Schumer. They're always going to find something. I'd rather have something to show for it for the American people than sit around and do nothing and lose our majorities anyway. I think Pelosi herself said that passing the ACA was worth losing the House Majority and her Speakership. If Democrats get can get the bipartisan bill, the reconciliation bill, and a voting rights bill through Congress, it would be a monumental victory for the party and President Biden going into the midterms.

[pppolitics]

...and Republicans are going to runs ads about how Democrats voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill

Great job!

If Democrats are going to run their legislative agenda based on what Republicans are going to run ads against, I suppose Congress should just go back to naming post offices.

I couldn't care less about what Republicans are going to run ads about. They're going to run ads against President Biden, against Speaker Pelosi, and against Leader Schumer. They're always going to find something. I'd rather have something to show for it for the American people than sit around and do nothing and lose our majorities anyway. I think Pelosi herself said that passing the ACA was worth losing the House Majority and her Speakership. If Democrats get can get the bipartisan bill, the reconciliation bill, and a voting rights bill through Congress, it would be a monumental victory for the party and President Biden going into the midterms.

Everything about your logic is wrong.

If you want the moderates to vote for the bills, you have to convince them that what they are voting for is good for their career and NOT a kamikaze mission.

In general, people don't like collapsing bridges, roads full of potholes, or lead exposure from lead pipes.

[politicallefty]

...and Republicans are going to runs ads about how Democrats voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill

Great job!

If Democrats are going to run their legislative agenda based on what Republicans are going to run ads against, I suppose Congress should just go back to naming post offices.

I couldn't care less about what Republicans are going to run ads about. They're going to run ads against President Biden, against Speaker Pelosi, and against Leader Schumer. They're always going to find something. I'd rather have something to show for it for the American people than sit around and do nothing and lose our majorities anyway. I think Pelosi herself said that passing the ACA was worth losing the House Majority and her Speakership. If Democrats get can get the bipartisan bill, the reconciliation bill, and a voting rights bill through Congress, it would be a monumental victory for the party and President Biden going into the midterms.

Everything about your logic is wrong.

If you want the moderates to vote for the bills, you have to convince them that what they are voting for is good for their career and NOT a kamikaze mission.

In general, people don't like collapsing bridges, roads full of potholes, or lead exposure from lead pipes.

Your logic takes progressives for granted. You don't get to disregard progressives so easily. We are tired of people having to take two jobs to make ends meet. We are also tired of children living in poverty. We also have Medicare that doesn't provide for vision or hearing coverage. I could go on endlessly about what the reconciliation bill does, but I won't. It would be the biggest transformation of wealth to the middle and lower class since the Great Society.

[Person Man]

Sometimes moderates have to understand that they won't be reelected no matter what they do and progressives need to understand that there are some seats that still can be saved.

[pppolitics]

...and Republicans are going to runs ads about how Democrats voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill

Great job!

If Democrats are going to run their legislative agenda based on what Republicans are going to run ads against, I suppose Congress should just go back to naming post offices.

I couldn't care less about what Republicans are going to run ads about. They're going to run ads against President Biden, against Speaker Pelosi, and against Leader Schumer. They're always going to find something. I'd rather have something to show for it for the American people than sit around and do nothing and lose our majorities anyway. I think Pelosi herself said that passing the ACA was worth losing the House Majority and her Speakership. If Democrats get can get the bipartisan bill, the reconciliation bill, and a voting rights bill through Congress, it would be a monumental victory for the party and President Biden going into the midterms.

Everything about your logic is wrong.

If you want the moderates to vote for the bills, you have to convince them that what they are voting for is good for their career and NOT a kamikaze mission.

In general, people don't like collapsing bridges, roads full of potholes, or lead exposure from lead pipes.

Your logic takes progressives for granted. You don't get to disregard progressives so easily. We are tired of people having to take two jobs to make ends meet. We are also tired of children living in poverty. We also have Medicare that doesn't provide for vision or hearing coverage. I could go on endlessly about what the reconciliation bill does, but I won't. It would be the biggest transformation of wealth to the middle and lower class since the Great Society.

How many of these "progressives" are running for re-election in Republican-leaning districts?