Jonathan Chait became an unlikely member of the burn-it-all-down pundit caucus when the tiny minority of obstructionist Democrats, most prominently Senators Manchin and Sinema, seemed determined to follow through on their bad-faith “my way or the highway” strategy to defeat the Democratic Party’s agenda.
Now Chait sees “glimmers of hope” in Manchin’s latest utterances, and maybe he’s right. An excerpt from a column published earlier today:
The biggest problem Democrats face is financing the [BBB] program, given that every dollar Democrats can raise, either through higher taxes on the wealthy or reduced spending on prescription drugs, has a team of lobbyists pleading its case. Manchin laid out a practical way through: repeal of the high-end portion of the Trump tax cuts to pay for it. “I want to do a tax overhaul,” he said. “One thing you understand that all Democrats agreed on, there’s not a lot of things we all agree on, is that the 2017 tax cuts are unfair and weighted toward the high end. Let’s fix that.”
I’d quibble with Manchin’s self-serving “there’s not a lot of things” Democrats agree on framing since upwards of 95% of Democrats in Congress, overwhelming majorities of voters and the POTUS agree with the policy agenda that Biden and the Democrats ran on and got elected to implement. The obstructionists are the flies in the ointment.
But I take Chait’s point, which is that Manchin and the other flies in the ointment are on record opposing Trump’s plutocrat-friendly tax cuts, so maybe they could be persuaded to view funds generated from a repeal as revenue that could then be spent to improve regular people’s lives. Chait also notes that Manchin made mildly favorable mouth-noises about the child tax credit, so that could be a spending peg Himself would countenance. Dog knows people could use the help.
Of course, no one knows how this scheme would fare when subjected to Sinema’s inscrutable “Is it mavericky? YES/NO” decision tree. And unless there’s serious spending to address the climate crisis in the reconciliation package, lots of Democrats will decline to support the infrastructure deal in exchange for obstructionist support on reconciliation. And they’ll be right to do so, in my opinion.
Still, it’s the start of a potential framework to reach a deal that was allegedly mostly hashed out months ago. Open thread.
Kittens! Well, Just One Kitten, But She’s Adorable!
p.a.
Aaaarrrrgggghhhhhh. This is like unlocking the nuclear football and handing it to a toddler (Sinema) or a know-it-all, I’m the center of the universe, teen (you-know-who).
jonas
A big problem is that neither Manchin or Sinema seem to really know what they want, or if they do, they aren’t telling anyone. For some reason. And if Manchin thinks his donors are upset now, wait until he tries to whip up a big ol’ tax hike on them. You think the lobbyists are swarming now…
New Deal democrat
Just a note that even if the infrastructure bill is defeated in the House, it can be incorporated into the reconciliation bill, or shoehorned into (or replace) another bill later. And (correct me if I’m wrong here) the Speaker can then vote against it and bring it up again later.
topclimber
Give climate change Max dollars, renew extended child credit, let Medicare negotiate drug prices, get a start on tax equity by repealing 2019 cuts. Works for me.
feebog
@jonas: I think Manchin has a pretty good idea what he wants in and out of the reconciliation bill. The Maverick from Arizona, not so much. I also think it is possible that Sinema may take Manchin’s lead and fall in line when all is said and done.
rikyrah
Manchin, though an azz , is predictable and actually acts like a Senator. Comes with a list to debate.
Watch LarryO’s opening segment from last night.
Sinema is a Phucking clown?
Major Major Major Major
Agree with everybody else. Manchin is a big boy team player and we all know what he’s doing and how it will end up. Sinema is a teenager with BPD, by contrast.
Betty Cracker
@jonas: I agree, which is why maybe it’s at least a teeny-tiny bit encouraging that Manchin mentioning a specific thing, however obliquely, rather than gassing on about entitlements and inflation or whatever the dodge du jour is. Of course, he’s only one of several nuts that have to be cracked, and you’re right about the lobbyist swarm too. But that also makes his comment about the Trump tax cuts kind of interesting, if you squint and squoonch your face up just so…
Walker
It is not Manchin. Manchin can be bought. The problem is Sinema. And until someone shows me hope with Sinema this is not going to happen.
Kay
Ugh. If that’s his take on what Manchin said I don’t trust the rest of his analysis. Manchin’s proposal is a cut in the child tax credit. The only reason he put it forth is to block a renewal of the tax credit that isn’t means tested.
IMO, this is about the climate change piece. A shit load of powerful and monied people don’t want any of the climate change provisions to go in. Conversely, the most passionate liberal Democrats won’t give way on the climate change piece. The rest of the stuff is negotiable and will be weakened by Manchin and others, but aren’t what the fight is about.
citizen dave
Just realized that Sinema is the woman in front of me in line at The Dollar Tree buying 27 little plastic plants for some reason and 15 other things, as I stand by both patiently and ragingly waiting to buy 2 packages of cheap AA batteries.
Dave
Fine. The net effect and result is pretty much the same (increased progessivity) so sit down and rewrite the bill.Regarding the climate change portion it might be time to subside methane fuel cells and consider coal as a primary petrochemical source (petroleum energy density is hard to replace)
Betty Cracker
@citizen dave: Please persuade her to do an AMA here at Balloon Juice. That could definitely get us over the almost-top 10K hump!
Kelly
Legislative rules like this, the filibuster, single Senators holding up nominations, articles in the press lauding a legislator’s mastery of the arcane rules remind me of my days maintaining financial software running ancient spagetti code.
Baud
I still think Manchin is the key and Sinema won’t be out there on her own.
germy
Betty Cracker
@Kay: I probably misrepresented Chait’s point because he does address the means testing thing and does some optimistic hand-waving about how it could be addressed. I agree on climate change. I generally don’t like “X or bust” positions, but this one is an exception, IMO.
Baud
@New Deal democrat:
I think that’s right. Ideally, we wouldn’t give the Senate another opportunity to vote on it though.
Omnes Omnibus
@Baud: Agreed. Also, now Manchin has put a number out there. The end result should fall somewhere between.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
I’m not sure what bust gets us though. And it’s not yes or no on climate. The climate portion is a lot of different pieces, no?
WaterGirl
@Major Major Major Major: is BPD bipolar disorder?
germy
germy
Anonymous At Work
Manchin has a game plan and is keeping his options open as he works his way there. He’s just far more slow at his pace than anyone can stand.
Sinema, I’m increasingly convinced, is just a troll. She was a Green to troll Democratic leadership but still have a profile. Now, she’s a Democrat but has found another way to troll leadership. I think she’s increasingly decided to play chicken with the primary when she’s up for re-election. Does Arizona have a Sore Loser law?
matt
Boy, if you set out to design a politician to make casual voters hate Democrats, you couldn’t do much better than Sinema. Does she have any professionals on staff?
Baud
As I’ve said, I am not certain what the right thing to do is on the infrastructure bill if it gets voted on today.
But if “burn it all down” means something other than voting no on that bill, I am adamantly opposed.
Major Major Major Major
@WaterGirl: borderline personality disorder.
matt
@jonas: Manchin just wants the Republicans to keep partying with him on his boat and giving him money.
gene108
I wish Democrats would just pass shit that’s popular and will help people, then brag about how fucking awesome the plan is and how Republicans just want to help rich people.
This shit on the Build Back Better proposal has been hanging around since the spring. Carving out infrastructure as separate from the rest was already one concession.
Now it feels like whatever Democrats do will be a loser for them. Pass the $3.5 trillion 10 year BBB bill and it’ll be demonized, because Manchin and Sinema painted it as too high a price tag. Make it smaller and Democrats sacrificed kids, granny, or the environment to appease lobbyists.
No one really cares about the details. A lot of voters, and especially the media, just react to optics. If you get things done and declare victory, you’ll be depicted as a tough take charge winner by the media, which helps influence voters towards thinking the same. If the overall legislation is actually good for most people that’ll make the attitude of winning justified.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud:
I agree.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: the infrastructure bill is good and has some important stuff (rural broadband, big transit bump) so I’d hate to see it die…
germy
@Anonymous At Work:
I don’t trust any politicians from the U.S. Green Party.
The ones I’ve seen on the local level take Republican money to be spoilers. The national ones don’t impress me.
citizen dave
@Betty Cracker: Ha! Maybe I’ll tweet an invitation to her when this episode of Disfunctional Democrats is all over.
Betty
@Kay: The one hope with Sinema is that in the end she won’t want to stand alone. So far Manchin has given her cover. Please let it be so.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: “Burn it all down” in the OP = vote no on the infrastructure bill unless the obstructionists honor their original agreement to support the reconciliation bill in exchange for support for the infrastructure deal. As we all know, that could mean neither bill would pass, which would suck. But IMO, that’s preferable to rewarding the obstructionists’ bad faith, which is what passing the infrastructure bill without a reconciliation bill that addresses the climate crisis indisputably does.
Omnes Omnibus
@gene108: Part of that is on us – the Democratic voters. When something eventually passes, we need to talk up the good things that are in it and not bitch about the things that didn’t make it. My confidence is not high that this will happen.
citizen dave
@gene108: F’in A! Branding. No Child Left Behind. Race to the Top. Mission Accomplished.
Just now realized you all’s use of BBB is for Build Back Better and not Better Business Bureau.
Baud
@gene108:
I don’t like the delay either, but it’s up to all of us to sell it if something decent does pass.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Omnes Omnibus: I didn’t get sprinkles on my ice cream, it sucks!
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
Thanks. I’m not concerned about you, but I wasn’t sure how that phrase being used in the wider Internet.
germy
Citizen Alan
@germy:
I have genuinely wondered whether the problem with Kristen Synema is that at heart she still a Green, and she cares more about undermining the Democratic Party than any other objective
Kay
@Betty Cracker:
I think there has to be a recognition in the Democratic Party that the liberal position on climate change cannot be jettisoned by liberals. They can trade away a lot and they will trade away a lot but not that. That would be a profound loss for them. To ask them to suck it up and take the entire hit on probably the one issue they are most genuinely committed to is too big an ask.
People can go so far and then they can’t go any further. We’re at that point on not addressing climate change. It’s like asking them to vote to invade Iran. They can’t do it.
J R in WV
@Baud:
I thought it was Bi-Polar Disorder also too. But for Sinema, Borderline Personality Disorder sounds more accurate now that I think about it, which I sometimes do do. Disorder is sure in there, tho.
JPL
@?BillinGlendaleCA: Go to Boston some time and they will give you all the jimmies you want.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Kay: The solution is to elect more and better Democrats and address it in the next Congress when we’re not relying on a conservative Dem from West(by God) Virginia. If they want to go off and pout, not getting climate change addressed is on them.
germy
@Citizen Alan:
Her motivation seems to be to amass as large a fortune as possible, so that her memories of financial hardship remain distant. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her drop out of politics eventually to open a winery or something.
I don’t see her co-hosting The View as long as Joy Behar is still there.
https://decider.com/2021/09/29/the-view-debates-boogeyman-us-politics-progressives-republicans/
Major Major Major Major
@germy:
Damn, things must be serious if they’re willing to eat into their regular two week vacation.
debbie
@germy:
Yep, just heard her on NPR saying the same thing. ? ?
Baud
@germy:
With that conflict, think of the ratings!
@Major Major Major Major:
Recess isn’t always vacation time. It’s also a time for people to go back and talk to people in their districts.
Anyway
Pharma is whipping up opposition to letting Medicare negotiate drug prices. I’ve seen/heard quite a few scareeeey ads about how evil politicians will get between you and your doctor, you will have looong waits for prescriptions, your doctor will have no choice etc etc. Manchin is in the pocket of Pharma, right?
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: this is “committee time” ie staffers write stuff.
Anonymous At Work
@germy: Outside of Sinema as a former Green, who are the “national Greens”? Same thing without any “former” for Libertarians?
And both sides are Azzhats and Useful Idiots; the only difference is that the Libertarians are just more blissfully ignorant of both facts.
jimmiraybob
@matt:
Lawrence O’Dondell last night suggested no.
Baud
@Anyway:
I don’t know about Manchin. I’ve heard more about Sinema and Pharma and a handful of House Dems.
Betty Cracker
@?BillinGlendaleCA: There’s a time limit that we’ve already run up against. How often do you think Dems will have the trifecta of the presidency and both chambers to address an issue that is literally existential? It’ll be too late next time. It may already BE too late. But it’s definitely now or never.
Brachiator
Here’s the thing.
Biden is aware of this, and his plan includes some tax increases and increased IRS enforcement.
I don’t understand what Manchin is playing at. If he wanted an emphasis on tax overhaul, he could have brought this up sooner.
It makes the Democrats look stupid to bring this up after major negotiations have already taken place, and as you get closer to the midterms.
Is Manchin smart? Did he have good proposals that were ignored early on? Maybe there is something deeper going on, but all I see is a dope who keeps throwing obstacles in the path of Democrats with no clear point.
And I know that some politicians and pundits keep looking at a number, $3.5 trillion, and losing their minds. But the economy is strong, the rich and a chunk of the middle class are getting richer, the stock market is soaring, and interest rates are low. Biden’s plan is not going to sink the economy. I wish that his economic advisers would lay out a clear, simple explanation. Otherwise it is too easy for dumb pundits to shout “tax and spend!” Or to prematurely raise the false fears of inflation.
ETA. Some of the current inflation is really more about companies trying to make up for lockdown decreases in revenue. Not much to be done about this.
geg6
@Major Major Major Major:
You keep saying this and it seems to be in the surface. But people I trust tell me it’s not all that great. It won’t create as many jobs as it seems to. It has big $$ being shoveled to the top 10% and corporations and does nothing to address much of anything but roads, bridges and rural areas. This is why the CoC loves it so much. I’m sick of all bait and switches we’ve had to swallow. The Obama stimulus was the same shit. On a smaller scale, locally, we’ve got a shitty, gigantic cracker plant being built here that we were told would create thousands of jobs, would not pollute and would change the economy here forever. Instead, we got hundreds of assholes from LA, TX, OK shipped in to fill all but a handful of the jobs, a COVID super spreader site, and strange odors coming from the site that no one feels the need to explain. I’m at the point that, if a Republican or conservadem likes it, it is, on its face, a bad idea that will come back and bite you in the ass. I say no thanks unless it’s tied to a Dem priority that benefits the poor and middle class and preferably bites a huge chunk of the 5%’s and corporations’ asses.
Kay
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
Yes, in upside down world on this blog the only people addressing climate change will thus be blamed for the lack of climate change mitigation. If they had just voted for the bill with no climate change mitigation they would get climate change mitigation!
Conservatives took 90% of the climate change provisions in the infrastructure bill out. Liberals were told that would be addressed in reconcilation. Now they’re told they have to jettison the whole issue and also pass the infrastructure bill conservatives wrote. Does this seem ridiculously lopsided to you?
taumaturgo
When approaching the possibility of defeat democrats could do as the GQP does, when they are about to lose they change and even break the rules. They keep raking up wins at the expense of a puny opposition. Simple, yet incomprehensible for the creaky, don’t ever deviate from the old playbook democrats.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
Is this bill supposed to be comprehensive enough to solve climate change? We’re going to have to keep the trifecta to finish the job, I think, even if the whole $3.5 trillion we’re to pass, which it won’t.
Baud
@taumaturgo:
I sorry, what does that mean? What rule would you change to get around the fact that we can’t lose a single vote in the Senate if we want to pass anything?
JoyceH
Looks like Manchin is saying he could live with 1.5 trillion. What do you folks think? Should we take it, call it a win and try to come back for more later?
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Betty Cracker: Then it will be never, we don’t have the better Democrat part in place to get the whole loaf, we are going to have to settle for half a loaf now and work to get the better Democrat part in the next election, that’s just reality. As Another Scott says, Forward.
geg6
@Baud:
That’s a ridiculous argument and no one is claiming it will solve climate change. But it will start to address many of the factors that cause climate change and is certainly a giant step forward from how we are currently addressing it. Which is NOT AT ALL, IN ANY FUCKING WAY.
Baud
@geg6:
I didn’t make an argument. I asked a question in response to a statement suggesting that we will likely lose our trifecta later.
Cameron
@Brachiator: Yes, he could have brought his issues up earlier. But then he couldn’t SUDDENLY SWOOP IN AT THE LAST MINUTE TO SAVE THE DAY, could he?
Major Major Major Major
@geg6: if the only thing it does is rural broadband it’s worth it. Incidentally it does $450 billion dollars of other new stuff too.
here’s lefty economist Noah Smith on the bill. https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/pass-the-damn-infrastructure-bill
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Kay: When you have to depend on the vote of a coal state Democrat to advance things forward, well, some stuff you want and I’ll add is necessary aren’t going to be there. The solution is to get better folk that agree with you(via elections) and pass it then.
Frank Wilhoit
Occam’s Razor says that malice dominates stupidity (yes, I know, everyone always gets that backwards, but my way is right). But that (nor its opposite, if you are still not convinced) does not mean that stupidity is harmless. Manchin is the kind of fool who is completely unpredictable. He has the memory of the proverbial goldfish and is therefore able — I do not say willing, I say able — to completely upend his notion of who his audience is, multiple times a day. For someone in his position, this is actually an inadvertent survival skill. The game is to pin him down; or failing that, to throw a bag over his head. The relevant question, throughout this whole preposterous farrago, is What Would Lyndon Do? And while Mr. Biden knows that that is the question, he is not able to answer it; and the worst of it is, it is not fair to expect him to be able to answer it. In historical perspective, every politician after Nixon will be seen as, first and foremost, a lightweight; that will be regarded as more explanatory than any question of ideology or propaganda.
Kay
Political reporters should start getting used to these fights being about climate change. In a decade it will so dominate politics nothing else will even come close.
There’s going to be two sides and on this liberals are on the right side. Conservative Democrats and Republicans are on the wrong one.
Fair Economist
deleted
Peale
@citizen dave: I’m thinking BBB is the new S&P rating on US Bonds if we fuck up and don’t increase the debt ceiling.
taumaturgo
@Baud: An example of rule changing is McConnell stealing 2 seats from under the nose of democrats while they decried, “oh no but this is not allowed.” It was.
The rule that says the Senate majority can’t make shit up, (McConnell can’t stop laughing at this one) The rule that insists on bipartisanship even if defeat is certain, the rule that says the rulings of the parliamentarian are the last word, the rule that says that democrats can’t violate the sacred filibuster (Biden is hanging his legacy on this bs, which makes the R’s laugh even harder) the rule that any social program must be paid for while tax cuts for the rich go on the credit card, and finally, the rule that says democrats shall always turn the other cheek.
JoyceH
@Fair Economist:
Huh – when I look at the list upthread, the amount spent on passenger rail, publish transportation and electric charging stations is more in total than the roads and bridges part.
schrodingers_cat
@Kay: Since when did the guillotine caucus become liberal, they are leftist not liberal.
Kay
@Major Major Major Major:
They know they’re not going to get anything after the infrastructure bill. I would actually prefer if that were just admitted and they were given a “this or nothing” ultimatum. That’s at least respectful and akcnowleges their big loss.
Baud
@taumaturgo:
So you didn’t answer my question. Just about everything you want to do requires 50 votes. McConnell had 50 votes. It’s pretty clear we don’t. There’s no way around that.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud:
Obviously you can’t solve it… reducing emissions is great but I wish people were more willing to focus on mitigation. We’re locked in to two degrees Celsius, possibly 2.5. The world is on a glide path to between 2.5 and 3 as well (recommend NYMag piece “beyond climate alarmism”). So yes we need to secure that as a ceiling but we also need to be grownups about geoengineering and stuff. Every x number of inefficient green jobs we make is a barrier island or sea wall we don’t get to have.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@taumaturgo: Rules in the Senate are made by the majority
You want to eliminate the filibuster, fire the Parliamentarian, get a majority to agree and it’s done. But until you have a majority of Senators on board, ain’t gonna happen.
catclub
How about give manchin a copy of the bill that only has $1.5Tr, but pass the full bill.
lowtechcyclist
@Baud:
I think you’re right. At any rate, if Manchin and the rest of the Senate Dems excepting Sinema can work out a deal that preserves the climate change stuff, they ought to put it up for a vote and make Sinema either go along, or be the only Dem helping the Rethugs kill it.
@Kay:
@Betty Cracker:
Seconding you both. As I said in one of last night’s threads, I want reason to hope that my 14 year old won’t see the world burn up before he reaches retirement age. If we fail now, he and all of his contemporaries, and everyone coming after, will pay the price.
schrodingers_cat
@Major Major Major Major: Be that as it may the purity of essence of the Squad and Squad lite (Jaypal, Ro Khanna etc) is more important than that, they are holding the line. And most of the lefty bloggers like Josh Marshall and several BJ frontpagers and commenters agree.
Peale
@?BillinGlendaleCA: I’m in favor of the US nationalizing West Virginia coal mines and mandating that they employ 1,000,000 people as a trade off for global warming legislation. Now we won’t sell any of it and will just let huge piles of it build up until it avalanches on some village. But if they want to be ’miners so badly, might as well let them be miners.,
Kay
@schrodingers_cat:
I get it- pass Manchins and the Republicans infrastructure bill and we’ll all call it a win. This was not negotiated in good faith. They’re right to be furious.
They can still vote for the Manchin/Sinema/Republican infrastructure bill and they probably will they always end up supporting the Democrats, unlike their Right wing colleagues but they were treated dishonestly and shabbily by the Right wing Democrats and that is going to stick.
Major Major Major Major
@Kay: sure but that’s different from flinging shit at the bill and calling it analysis.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
Right. I’m 100% with the progressives when it comes to doing something on climate here. I just don’t understand the play. If you can’t get Manchin on climate, you can either settle for infrastructure or sink infrastructure, but you’re not getting anywhere on climate untill you have better majorities. Obviously, it would be great if we can get Machine to give on something here, but either way, completing the work still requires better majorities.
schrodingers_cat
@Kay: I said nothing about Manchin, just clarified that the people you called liberal are anything but.
Kay
@schrodingers_cat:
What is it you’re demanding they do? Vote for the conservative infrastructure bill and give up on anything else? Are they permitted to object or is that “pouting”?
Omnes Omnibus
@taumaturgo: Assuming arguendo that you are right, it does not change the fact that we must get the votes of all 50 senators who caucus with the Democrats. That’s not a weird Senate rule.
lowtechcyclist
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
In all likelihood, this bill has to be a home run for us to be able to elect enough better Democrats to hold both houses of Congress next November.
I remember 2010 and 1994, thanks.
RaflW
Read earlier today that Manchin gave Schumer the number $1.5Tn this past summer. As in, spend in ten years what we spend on bombs and bases in two.
wHy wON’t tHe ProGreSSiVeS negotiate? $6Tn -> $3.5Tn -> $1.5Tn.
Damn.
Betty Cracker
@?BillinGlendaleCA: The “forward” thing sounds demented in this context, like the “This is fine!” dog meme. I understand that Paw Paw Black Lung is part of the equation and the effort may ultimately fail, but Democrats need to go to the goddamn mat. “Oh well, maybe next time” is no longer an option.
Kay
@Major Major Major Major:
I just love how the goalposts have moved from “infrastructure plus something” to “infrastrucuture and you get nothing”
I’m sure they’ll do it. The progressives in Congress are much better team players than the moderates, but it’s a bitter fucking pill for them and to demand they then go out and sell the Manchin/Sinema bill is just an amazing ask.
Manchin and Sinema are in front of cameras constantly. They never shut up. Maybe they can sell their bill.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Omnes Omnibus: I believe that getting a majority of the Senate to vote to pass legislation is in that Constitution thingie.
Citizen Alan
@geg6: Not to be a complete asshole, but I’ve pretty much given up on the environment and climate change. The problem would be incredibly difficult under ideal circumstances, but presently, almost half the country belongs to a death cult that genuinely wants to see the world destroyed because they honestly think they’ll be Raptured up to heaven where they can lounge about and laugh at everyone who ever disagreed with them or hurt their feelings as we suffer infinite torture. And frankly, with the current SCOTUS, I expect the EPA to be struck down as unconstitutional within 5 years, which will make federal action on climate change completely impossible.
Cameron
@Kay: There is a self-styled “EcoRight” group of Republicans (republicEN), but I would be surprised if you needed both hands to count the number of members it has.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@lowtechcyclist:
If that’s the criteria, then we’re screwed. There will always be folk who didn’t get what they wanted, you just have to better the odds in the future. Even if it is a shit sandwich, say it is the best shit sandwich you can get and you’ll love it. I remember both 1994 and 2010 well.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Betty Cracker: There’s always a next time, pass what we can, sell it as the best thing ever, get more and better Democrats in future elections and build on what we pass now. There is no other way.
Citizen Alan
@taumaturgo: Oh for fuck’s sake. All those “rules” are inviolate because the same 2 conservadems who oppose everything else think they should be inviolate. If Manchin and Sinema were on board with abolishing the filibuster, I think it would be gone tomorrow. They’re not, and without them, we only have 48 votes. Are you fucking innumerate?
Frank Wilhoit
@schrodingers_cat: False distinction. There is no left. There is no liberalism. There is only conservatism and anti-conservatism. The distinction between them is presently defined only at a level of subjective pinpricks, and therefore no use can be made of it. The necessary distinction emerges from the central practical proposition of conservatism, which is that business (and certain other privileged groups) must be above the law. This shows that anti-conservatism can only be, and must be only, the proposition that business (and every individual, and every group) must be subject to the law. For the moment, that proposition is so controversial that no one — not how far “left” you may place them on your personal spectrum — dare propound it. But it is not “left”, and it is not “liberal”; it is civilization. Call it what you like: call it “leftism”, call it “liberalism”, call it “blue-bunnyism”; no one will understand what you mean, because everyone will impose their own prejudices upon it, while flinching from its reality. I wrote as long ago as 1987 that “civilization has lost its fan club”; and so far, I was only channeling Freud; but that is our problem. If you do not have universal consent to universal accountability, then you have nothing and you can have nothing — except blood, blood, blood, and more blood.
Baud
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
I agree. Even in the best of circumstances, this bill wasn’t going to be a home run.
Omnes Omnibus
@?BillinGlendaleCA: Exactly. But I can already see lots of people here getting ready to poor mouth whatever passes. At the very least, we need to say that whatever it is was a great first step and something to build on.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud:
@Omnes Omnibus: Yup.
Kay
@Cameron:
I think the conserva-dems don’t want to talk about the climate change piece, especially the conserva-dem House members from the east coast with a college educated voter base, so we get these ridiculous vague statements of their “beliefs”. Liberals won’t admit the climate change piece is the sticking point because it’s not populist so they’d rather talk about dental benefits in Medicare.
But that is the sticking point. It will be hard as nails for them to give up and they won’t just blithely move on. It’s a real hit for them. I actually think Pelosi is quite progressive on the issue, so she’s an ally and that’s the only reason they got as far as they did. They said as much today- they said they trust leadership but they don’t trust some of their colleagues. They shouldn’t trust them. They negotiated in bad faith and were dishonest.
Major Major Major Major
@lowtechcyclist: no bill will hold both houses of Congress.
Major Major Major Major
@Kay: I said nothing of the sort. What I did say was the infrastructure bill is a good bill and I hope it passes.
Old Man Shadow
I’m starting to feel like installing some trapdoors that lead down to a lion’s den underneath some of our more troublesome congressmen would be a good idea.
“Now, Senator, would you like to offer up a counter-suggestion to me or would you prefer to talk to Simba?”
Ruckus
Joe Manchin and Mitch McConnell are both relatively well off in their states, they both make over 3 times the US average annual income in 2020 of $56,310, Mitch is supposedly valued at $22.2 million, Joe is something less than that. They both have worked in politics for a long time, Joe has held political office since 1982, Mitch since 1975. And they are worth and get paid far more than their state averages. They may not be Jeff Bezos wealthy but they aren’t doing badly. Wealth, privilege, power, the trifecta. How did they get that way being reasonable politicians in their states? They get paid well in congress, Joe currently $174,000 per year and Mitch $193,400. So where does the rest of Mitch’s worth come from, how does Joe live so well in WV? They live, not in the upper stratosphere of Bezos money, but for sure farther up the money chain than most. Do they really represent the people of their states? Or the far wealthier few? Manchin founded the coal brokerage Enersystems in 1988, in a state that depended upon coal for it’s financial survival.
My point is that many/most politicians in our congress are wealthier than most of us, they often seem to work for money than for their constituents. Granted we all work for money, but they seem to work for MONEY. Their goals do not often seem to be the same as the citizens they represent. I have no idea how to fix this or if it is even possible, but it makes getting laws, support, help for those that need it, etc a lot more difficult. We’ve talked on BJ about taxing the wealthy better/higher, restoring some order upon the tax system, etc. How do we do that when the people voting for those changes are some of the people who would pay more? How do we have a country run for it’s citizens when the people running it are often in it for themselves and stand to be negatively effected, even minimally, by the changes that they have to vote for?
Betty Cracker
@?BillinGlendaleCA: I understand that the scenario you describe is the prevailing pattern because I’ve seen it repeated for more decades than I care to name. And if nothing else, habit will prompt me to drag my ass to the polls and vote for the Democrat until climate change pushes the water level over my nostrils.
But I’m not kidding when I say it’s now or never. I feel it in my bones. There won’t be “more and better Democrats” if we don’t find a way to address this now — or at the very fucking least show we’re fighting for it as a party instead of knuckling under to corrupt assholes yet again and trying to frame that as a good outcome. People will give up on the possibility of Democrats as a vehicle to solve this problem, and honestly, I won’t blame them.
Kay
@Cameron:
I do tens of hours of mediation professionally every year, as a party, not the mediator. It is hard for me to imagine a more inequitable outcome for one party than this one. I just want an acknowlegement that they got screwed, and not by Republicans, by their colleagues. You don’t utterly decimate one side like this and then everyone just goes back to work. They’ll remember this.
They cannot trust their colleagues in a negotiation. One side reneged. That’s a profound change.
Hoodie
@Baud: Yeah, Bernie was already saying it was a compromise. I don’t understand where this “we have to pass the whole thing or all is lost” stuff is coming from. The bill was supposed to be a down payment on a lot of things, not the be-all and end-all. The idea that we need to get this all in now because we’ll never be in power again is also puzzling. What’s to keep a subsequent GOP Congress from repealing big chunks of it? The almost did that with the ACA but for McCain giving the thumbs down, probably mostly to fuck Trump.
Of course, I’d love to have a Congress that would pass the whole thing. We don’t have that. I get the people are frustrated with Manchin, Sinema and a few asshat House members, but that’s what you have to deal with unless you can make them irrelevant by electing more and better Dems.
Kent
No, she is the Karen, who, after all that is done, spends 10 more minutes arguing with the clerk about an expired coupon for a different item that she isn’t even buying. And then changes her mind and wants to swap something out for a different color that they don’t have in stock and demands that the clerk search the back room for something that doesn’t exist. And then you get to wait longer while she fishes through her purse looking for coins
Yes, such people actually do exist in the wild. But normally we don’t make them Senators.
lowtechcyclist
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
Well sure, but if 65% of Americans feel they got what they wanted, the other 35% were never going to vote Dem anyway.
Maybe next year will be the exception, but it’s pretty reliable that the party occupying the White House loses seats in midterms. I don’t share your faith that selling a shit sandwich as filet mignon will change that. (Not to mention the states that will flip a bunch of seats from D to R via gerrymandering, which will make holding the House even more uphill.)
I have to assume that whatever doesn’t get done now, won’t get done, unless we hit the home run that will suffice to hold both houses.
If we pass a lot now, we may get the opportunity to do even more in 2023. If we don’t pass much now, that’s almost certainly all we’re going to get.
Kay
@Major Major Major Major:
But the piece you linked to tells progressives to “take the win” and chides them for not immediately embracing it and moving on. They know they won’t get anything past infrastructure. It’s a distinction without a difference.
If they can swallow the loss they should pass the infrastructure bill. I think it’s a bridge too far for the conservadems to demand they then go out and sell it though. Manchin doesn’t even sell it. He’s out there whining about means testing.
Kent
@Ruckus: Don’t forget that Mrs. Mitch McConnell is a shipping heiress. Her family is worth hundreds of millions.
MomSense
I had to just let this go. Biden Harris Pelosi Hoyer Clyburn Schumer and Durbin know WTF they are doing. They will get the best outcome they can from these assholes.
Keep your eyes on Clyburn.
West of the Rockies
@Kay:
I hope they get figuratively repeatedly shivved by their colleagues.
Burnspbesq
Umm, you do understand, I assume, that the trucks that are an indispensable part of the supply chain for pretty much everything you consume use those roads and bridges. And if the newly repaired and/or upgraded roads and bridges extend the useful life of those trucks, some tiny portion of the cost savings will likely pass through to you the consumer.
I’m sure you know these things. Which means you’re just trolling.
Fair Economist
@JoyceH: That’s because it doesn’t list the 700 billion for new roads and highways.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Betty Cracker: I agree that we need to address this now, but we don’t have the votes to get the bill that would fully address that. We have to get the best we can, and use that as a basis for future legislation. There’s no other way to do that in our system of governance.
One thing to keep in mind, even if we passed the best bill ever, if the Republicans ever control the Congress and the White House, they can repeal it.
Major Major Major Major
@Kay: It is a win! And I linked the piece because it actually talks about what’s in the bill instead of throwing big pieces of poop with “written by lobbyists!” carved on them. And of course it’s written by a progressive lefty Warren stan.
Fair Economist
@Burnspbesq: We don’t need *new* roads and highways, which is what most of the money (not included in that list) goes to. We need to better use what we already have by stopping sprawl.
Burnspbesq
@Citizen Alan:
Based on what?
Another Scott
@Frank Wilhoit: Johnson had as many as 68 Democrats in the 89th Congress in the ’60s. Lots and lots of things are possible with a big enough team…
Cheers,
Scott.
lowtechcyclist
@Major Major Major Major:
OK, then it’s now or bust. That’s what you’re saying. Gotcha.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@lowtechcyclist: I’m a bit more optimistic than you, just as an example, we lost 3 seats here in Southern California in 2020(Katie Hill’s seat was lost in a special). They were all close races won by the R’s.
Kay
@West of the Rockies:
A good faith negotiation by the conserva-dems with their colleagues would look like this- the conservadems would make a real offer- their number is supposedly 1.5 trillion so they would get off cable tv and carry that offer to the liberals. It would be specific and it would acknowlege that the liberals have to move and that it is hard to compromise. They conservadems would then tell the truth about their position- “it’s this or nothing” and liberals could then make a grown up decision.
But they haven’t done any of that. Instead they started dishonest and got more dishonest with each passing day. They still won’t make a real offer. It’s bad faith. Liberals would be completely justified in walking away. They won’t, but they are justified in doing so. They cannot trust their colleagues on the Right in a negotiation. It can’t function without that.
lowtechcyclist
@Burnspbesq:
Oh goody, that’ll save the world from global warming.
Ruckus
@Kent:
This is true of course, but he on his own is not of average monetary means. And it is her family not as much herself. She herself has been a politician since 1988 and is worth $24 million.
My point is that these people play in far different circles than most of us and likely see life a lot differently than most of the population of this country. I see it being almost impossible for them to understand how most people live in this country.
Kropacetic
More like “Sorry, no ice cream left for the healthcare workers, educators, and childcare workers; we used it all making lavish sundaes for construction workers…again.
jonas
@Peale: Hardly anyone in WV works in coal anymore — it’s a couple of thousand workers and a small handful of companies. But there are a lot of laid-off and retired (and usually sick/disabled) former miners still there who blame the dfh’s for driving their employers out of the state or out of business (note: it was cheaper, open-pit mining in WY and gas fracking that did it, neither of which dfh’s supported) and have voted R to avenge themselves ever since.
Fair Economist
@Kay: I think this is the big issue. If we pass *just* the infrastructure bill, with *nothing* of Build Back Better, it’s obvious the progressives were totally rolled. If there’s something meaningful for the good guys, we can go back to the voters and say “get us bigger majorities and we’ll get you more”. But if it looks like the good guys are gullible morons who got totally played, that doesn’t work and there will be much disillusionment, especially with those concerned about climate change, which isn’t something we can wait maybe ten years or so on, based on American political cycles.
Kay
@Kropacetic:
This country consistently and constantly demeans the work that women do and elevates the work that men do. It’s disgusting and backward and it’s so pervasive I don’t even know how to start to change it. I find myself wishing these assholes can’t find a home health care worker to change their diapers when the time comes. Maybe if we put them in trucks and gave them hardhats people would recognize it as “work”.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@lowtechcyclist: How about if they’re electric trucks?
Frank Wilhoit
@Another Scott: If he had had 50 + 50 + 1, those 50 would have lived in bowel-emptying terror of him.
Kropacetic
Based on an unexplained ruling in the dead of night, perhaps?
lowtechcyclist
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
In a Presidential year where we won the Presidency. I’m not sure why we underperformed last year in House and Senate races, but there’s no reason to assume we’ll overperform next year.
I have hopes that we will hold Congress next year, but they really depend on (a) passing big, immediately helpful legislation now, and (b) passing anti-gerrymandering legislation.
And I still don’t think that guarantees us anything; it just gives us a decent chance. So damned if I’m going to tell my Congresscritters to leave climate change stuff out because we can get it in 2023.
Maybe we can. But I think of what the world might be like when my 14 year old is 50 or 60, and I want to make sure we pass legislation now, rather than possibly in 2023, to address that.
Kropacetic
This. Precisely.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
I get the frustration by progressives. They did negotiate in good faith and the behavior by conservatives is shameful. I don’t think Sinema and Manchin have anything to lose though. Blocking both bills won’t hurt them. Manchin is going to retire and be replaced by a crazy Republican. Sinema is going to cash out. They are backed by 50 united GOP obstructionists who do not care if an infrastructure bill passes or not, otherwise one would have passed when they were in power. If both bills fail, they, with a big assist from right-wing media, will blame Dems. If the bills pass, they will take credit for the parts their constituents like and blame the Dems for the stuff they don’t like. Either way, pass or fail, they lose nothing.
My question is this, though, are there things in the bipartisan bill that progressives want? If there aren’t, they should vote against. If there are, then, unlike their opposition, they have something to lose.
lowtechcyclist
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
Since we were talking about existing trucks, the answer is, very few of them are.
Maybe we’ll have a lot more of them, IF we get all that vehicle electrification stuff passed.
Kay
@Fair Economist:
I kind of reject the “gullible morons” part because I think there’s too much of that in Democratic politics.
I’m not asking people to care about their feelings. I’m simply asking for a decent, respectful, HONEST negotiation with their colleagues. The liberals were right to trust their colleagues. Their colleagues were wrong to treat them so shabbily and dishonestly. They’re not trustworthy.
The liberals are at work right now. What’s stopping the conservadems from bringing them a 1.5 trillion offer? What’s stopping them is they hope to offer nothing once their infrastructure bill passes. That’s bad faith. The conservadems may win this but they blew up more than reconcilation. They blew up a trust structure that allows them to function.
Ruckus
@Fair Economist:
Actually we do need roads and bridges. This country has grown a lot in population since a lot of the current stuff was designed and built. And even a lot of the newer stuff is 2 or 3 decades old. Roads wear out, bridges fail. Sure we need better things like commuter trains. The LA area has a pretty good system and it’s being upgraded and added to because LA county has a larger population than 41 states and one of the newest freeways was opened the year after I graduated HS. I’m 72 yrs old, HS was a while ago. The population of LA county is over 50% larger now. The US population is now 50% bigger than it was when I graduated HS.
My point is that life isn’t static, there are more of us now, there is a need for housing and for transportation and for maintaining and replacing for that additional population, as well as the future. We may not have the land to build enough roads in some areas but we do need to replace the old when it wears out, which it always does.
sab
@Kay: We have been kicking the can down the road on climate change since Reagan. My stepkids won’t have kids because they are afraid they won’t be able to eat twnty years from now.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@lowtechcyclist:
Isn’t that included in the infrastructure bill?
Kropacetic
@Ruckus: Actually we do need roads and bridges.
Yes, we do. We also need a certain sector of society to recognize that’s not all we need.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@sab: Remember it was St. Ronnie that removed the solar panels that Jimmy had installed on the White House roof.
Another Scott
@lowtechcyclist: 2010 was a disaster because the economy recovered too slowly, and because the GQP was screaming about Obamacare 24/7. That’s not happening in 2022.
Biden knows how to do this politics stuff. We’re not doomed.
Forward!!
Cheers,
Scott.
Kent
@Ruckus: My only point is that Mitch McConnell is far wealthier and moves in far more rarified circles than his personal 8-figure net worth would suggest. I would not be surprised if they have enormous wealth hidden away that is not reported.
Fair Economist
@?BillinGlendaleCA: The infrastructure bill pays for some charging stations. The electric vehicle incentives are in the reconciliation bill.
Citizen Alan
@Burnspbesq:
Based on the fact that it’s premised on Congress’s Commerce Clause Power and the holy grail of the fucking Federalist Society is the reinstatement of Lochner and the near total elimination of Congress’s ability to legislate in that area. Fucking /OSHA/ won’t survive this SCOTUS, let along the EPA.
Anomalous Cowherd
@germy:
Doesn’t green stand for “getting republicans elected every November?” AFAF…
Ruckus
@lowtechcyclist:
No matter how much we want to change the world and make it better, we still have to feed and house the population, give them some place to work, some way to get to work, to the grocery store, the doctors office, pick up the kids at school because satan above, we can’t let them walk, etc, etc. And unless someone can come up with a better solution, that last “mile” is trucks. Better propulsion options would help but there are about 7 billion people on this planet and they all have to eat, crap, work and move around. Until there is a better way, we are stuck with what we have, you can’t just say no more, you can’t do any of the things you do now. We have to deal with it, good or bad, it is what we have.
Citizen Alan
@Fair Economist: Not to mention the fact that the total humiliation of the progressive Dems will lead to another Nader/Stein spoiler in 2024 which we do not need on top of everything else.
Kay
@Fair Economist:
You’re a conservadem and you’re operating in good faith and you want your infrastucture bill. You do or don’t want a Build Back Better Bill, but you made a deal so you go to the liberals and give them your BBB deal and say “pass mine and I’ll do this”. The liberals scream a lot but they’re not fools and 1.5 is worse tha 3.5 but better than nothing. They pass both.
Instead, we have the conservadems refusing to counter and insisting they get their infrastructure bill and their colleagues may or may not get nothing, maybe now, maybe later, maybe never, there’s no telling, that’s a secret.
No one in their right mind accepts this. It’s bullshit. It can’t even be called a “negotiation”. There’s no counteroffer.
Kent
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: I disagree. Right now Sinema is running hard core as being the primary author of the BIPARTISAN infrastructure bill that is bringing lots of of stuff to AZ. If it all falls apart her Mavericky bipartisan leader shtick crumples and she becomes nothing but a spoiler .
I think she REALLY wants to run as the leader who brought bipartisanship back to Congress. She needs that win. She is just balking at the price, which is going along with the reconciliation bill.
If she gets nothing, what does she run on? The Senator who accomplished nothing and stopped everything from happening?
I don’t see her cashing out yet. And honestly, she has become so toxic in Congress that I have to question how good of a lobbyist she would actually be. If I were a Senator I’d tell whatever Lobby to keep Sinema the fuck away from my office if they want me to listen to what they have to say
The Senators who make good lobbyists are those who are like Tom Daschle, who spent his long Senate career actually getting shit done and cutting deals.
Ruckus
@Kent:
I believe that was my point. I can’t guesstimate his new worth, I can quote what is given and that is dated as 2014. I can easily believe that he’s worth far more, but we will likely never know.
Baud
Senate passes continuing resolution to prevent shutdown. 65-35.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@Kent:
I don’t think she is going to make another run for office as a Democrat. At the end of the day, if she really believes in her strategy, she’ll end up running as an independent. If she was serious and felt like she had something to lose here, she would be negotiating and she isn’t. Like the GOP, if the bipartisan bill goes down, she’ll point her fingers at the progressives and the right-wing media will broadcast it.
Geminid
@lowtechcyclist: UPS and others are already ordering hundreds of thousands of electric delivery vehicles. And Cummings Engines is producing electric drive packages that can be retrofitted to medium trucks and school buses. Maybe we should have seen these vehicles 10 years ago, but we will be seeing them all over in the next 10 years. The clean energy transition is happening. We just need action on the federal level to turbocharge it.
E.
@Burnspbesq:
The Commerce Clause underpins pretty much everything the federal government does that we hold dear: environmental regulation, labor laws, public lands, federal health and safety regs, and so on. Alito and Thomas are on record saying they want to revisit whether the Commerce Clause actually allows these things. I am guessing those other two who I cannot bear even to name will be on board leaving that beer-swilling frat boy rapey guy as the swing vote. God help us.
Another Scott
@jonas: One of the issues that Manchin campaigned on:
It looks like it became part of an omnibus bill in December 2019 and was signed into law. I’m sure Manchin has similar things he wants to do for coal miners in the state…
Cheers,
Scott.
Fair Economist
@Citizen Alan:
Right. I dread the possibility us doing nothing for decarbonizing electricity and little for transportation, and facing a Green candidate running on “vote for me if you want something done about climate change.”
Major Major Major Major
@sab:
Oh for fuck’s sake. This is what happens when all climate reporting tends towards “we’re all gonna die! We have five seconds to prevent the end of civilization!” 100% a media problem. Congress passing a fifty trillion dollar carbon tax with a solar mandate will not fix it.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud: Just got a news alert that the House passed it too, on to Pres. Joe.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Major Major Major Major:
This is true.
Kent
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: I don’t see how she runs as an independent in Arizona. How does she get on the ballot? There are closed primaries. Well, independents can vote in either primary but basically she needs to pick a party I think. Or she would have to collect a lot of signatures to get on the ballot as an independent and would have to run in a 3-person race. I’m not sure how that would work.
Fair Economist
In tactical terms, I think it’s no coincidence that today, as it becomes clear the progressives really can block the infrastructure-only bill, Manchin suddenly talks compromise.
Major Major Major Major
@?BillinGlendaleCA: speak for yourself, I’m gonna be an immortal robot. Or live on through my genes, seems easier.
germy
Kropacetic
@germy: Joe Manchin is the only entitled one I see.
germy
@Kropacetic:
He’s a coal baron who lives on a yacht.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Major Major Major Major: Yeah, whatever fantasy gets you though the night.
Ksmiami
@germy: who seems to do no work…
Fair Economist
@Major Major Major Major:
It’s a slight exaggeration, but right now we are seeing huge hits to production of tree fruit, tree nuts, shellfish, and more, due to the insane summer weather in the West. Similar weather in the Midwest would cause some serious staple food shortages. 125 degrees in British Columbia made it clear we’ve grossly underestimated the worst possible short-term effects for global warming.
For the most part, people I deal with seem to underestimate the possible effects of global warming. I’ll grant the media doesn’t do a good job of presenting the reality, which is that really horrible things are basically already guaranteed to happen, but that aggressive action now can prevent much more horrible things from happening, and they do present it as a case of “everything stays as it is” vs “complete and total collapse” when the reality is to what extent we’ll mitigate the disaster.
WaterGirl
If anyone wants to take a break from speculation about the horror show in congress, you can come to the next thread and help welcome some lurkers who are brave enough to stick their necks out and join us. :-)
Geminid
@Fair Economist: I read a Politico article posted this morning that said that President Biden’s team has been implicitly encouraging Progressive Caucus to dig in on linking the physical infrastructure and reconciliation bills. I’m not trying to erase the Progressive Caucus’ agency, but I think they are not going it alone.
E.
@Major Major Major Major:
Mmmm I don’t think this is totally a media problem . . . My town has been nearly evacuated twice in the last four years. This year we escaped by a single low ridgeline. NASA predicts the oceans will no longer provide more than trivial amounts of food by mid century. Shrugging this off as some media problem that will be ultimately solved by technology is irresponsible and callous. Single issue people like Greta Thunberg and others we all loathe and despise are starting to make more and more sense every time they have to be the ones to give in to our betters.
Ksmiami
Hmm I’ve been hearing that the 6 monsters in robes at the inferior court are starting to get heated about the deserving criticism they are receiving. I’m thinking we should get their home mailing addresses and start a letter writing campaign- that yes we see that they are partisan fucking hacks and this court will likely exceed Taney’s as a study in viciousness and mendacity. No institutions that run afoul of a majority will have any permanence, nor respect.
MomSense
@Fair Economist:
The loss of plankton is what keeps me up at night. Good luck breathing without it. The good scientists at Bigelow Labs used to issue warnings about plankton. Now it feels like they are just lying down under their desks drinking whisky and muttering that they tried to tell us.
Cameron
Probably everybody else who posts here (and most of their pets) knows more about politics than I do, so I hope you’ll bear with me for a few brief thoughts. Ever since the two-track approach was announced, I assumed that not all of the goodies in the reconciliation bill would make it out of Santa’s bag and wind up under the tree – that’s always been the way these things work.
While we continue to push for action at the federal level, wouldn’t it be worthwhile to simultaneously promote action at the state level for those desired items that didn’t make the cut in reconciliation? True, individual states don’t have the muscle of the fed, but they can certainly make some useful efforts. I think it would be a good message that Democrats are fighting for you at all levels of government, and we won’t be shut down by temporary setbacks. Might even help with some of those state and local elections.
Anyway, that’s my story.
Major Major Major Major
@E.:
I would love to see a link for that!
germy
Baud
New CFPB head confirmed. That’s Elizabeth Warren’s agency.
Major Major Major Major
@?BillinGlendaleCA: Child-having: the ultimate unachievable fantasy!
Baud
@germy:
Oh, she’s going to have him whacked. She might as well have kissed him on the cheek.
Gravenstone
If true, then she really needs to start walking the walk and try whipping some Republican support to go along with the Democrats. Good luck with herding those cats.
Major Major Major Major
@Fair Economist: It’s not a “slight exaggeration” to go from “agriculture will be disrupted in notable ways” to “American children will starve en masse so you shouldn’t have any.” As I said above, and you allude to, I think the real conversation needs to be around mitigation. Cutting emissions is great, and there are loads of reasons to do so other than CO2, but we don’t have a lot of control over how many coal plants China and India build. (The good news is, they have recently decided to build far, far fewer.)
germy
@Baud:
Kropacetic
@Major Major Major Major: For me, climate change is just one major point on a whole list of reasons I would feel irresponsible by having children.
Kay
@germy:
West Virginia ranks 47th of 50 states on just about every measure. Perhaps their senator could stop playing President and figure out why his state has tanked for the last 50 years.
No state should follow the economic lead of West Virginia. A race to the bottom. Joe Manchin’s agenda is not Joe Biden’s agenda and Biden is President.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kay: And Congress is a co-equal branch of government. Biden is not Manchin’s boss.
Kay
The conservative justices are out whining about how they have no credibility again.
Maybe we could go back to the old way, where the court spoke through their orders and opinions. Oh, right- this court doesn’t write opinions anymore- they issue unsigned midnight two paragraph decrees, hence why they have to go out and campaign.
Kay
Lifetime appointments, huge nearly unchecked power and the conservatives on the Court are walking around with a huge chip on their shoulders abut how they are victims.
The level of entitlement is just off the charts. Who raises these fucking people? They’re all giant walking egos.
Kay
Not realizing how they sound is a measure of their insular, protected status and sense of entitlement.
They should know how they sound.
Morzer
I fear this whimpering about how repealing Trump’s tax cuts might be possible is just Manchin trying to hide his own swinish greed while waddling towards regretfully being unable to agree to anything the Democrats might put forward.
Major Major Major Major
@Kropacetic: Out of curiosity, what are the others?
Ksmiami
@Kay: I want them smashed into oblivion personally- but dismantling the court works too
Kropacetic
@Major Major Major Major: Financial stability is too hard to come by. I see too many people working two jobs and not able to leave their parents’ house. Children just make the risk and the consequence for failure worse. This country seems determined to continue exacerbating this problem.
And climate change isn’t the only environmental problem we’re creating. Every extra child adds to this. Meanwhile, plenty of children don’t have guardianship or aren’t taken care of well enough.
Human civilization is not sustainable as currently constituted. Best not to add to that.
Ksmiami
@Morzer: yep – I think we’re done but that’s ok… America’s future is pretty bleak for most.
EmperorIceCream
@Major Major Major Major: Unfortunately, imo the problem is not the reporting (although media and political messaging around this is abysmal), the problem is climate science. It is terrifying and getting more dire within a shorter timeframe since reality is racing ahead of the most alarming models. Sadly, the decision not to have kids seems quite reasonable to me.
UncleEbeneezer
@lowtechcyclist: We didn’t canvass in 2020, the GOP did. That won’t be the case in 2022. Every Dem canvasser I know is vaccinated and ready to go. And these are the people who helped Hill and Cisneros to victory in 2018 but couldn’t risk it in 2020. No guarantees of course, but we will be much better positioned to fight for House/Senate seats in 2022.
E.
@Major Major Major Major: Okay. https://news.stanford.edu/news/2006/november8/ocean-110806.html
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Kay: What it means is the outrage over that Texas crap law is working.
UncleEbeneezer
I’m with Progressives on this. Dems ran on big ideas (expanding healthcare, addressing Climate, protecting abortion rights etc.) in 2020. Most of the countless postcards I wrote mentioned stuff that is in the BBB plan. Not infrastructure (which is great, but isn’t what Biden or most Dems ran on).
Geminid
@Cameron: A lot of states controlled by Democrats are implementing clean energy legislation. New Mexico is one good example. And even under Republican control, the Texas wind energy industry has really taken off this past decade.
Wind and solar electrical generation costs have achieved cost parity with that of natural gas, the cheapest alternative.* With incentives or just regulatory support, the federal government can accelerate the transition to clean energy for electrical generation.
Now that plentiful, stabilly priced clean energy sources can replace scarce carbon-based, much of the transition has become a matter of financing, not cost. An electric school bus costs more up front than a diesel school bus, but it’s life cycle costs are much less.
This is where the U.S. government can step in. Our borrowing capacity great, and we pay less interest on our debt than just about any countries besides Germany and Switzerland. Investing in the clean energy transition will be pay off in the medium and the long term.
There is a lot of resistance to a robust clean energy transition. Some of it has to do with private interests, and a lot is ideological. But once federal and state level energy transition initiatives start kicking in, people will see the tangible benefits, and I believe they will vote accordingly.
* See Robert Pollin, “We Need a Better Green New Deal,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March 2019. U. Mass. economist Pollin has helped draft clean energy prograns for several states. I learned a lot from this article.
Ksmiami
@EmperorIceCream: the models are all exceeding worst case scenarios…
Major Major Major Major
@E.: Alright, so it’s from 2006 and not by NASA. Let’s check in with a prominent co-author. Wow, sounds like things have improved dramatically in some areas, just because people tried, and we aren’t doomed at all! What a concept. Indeed, your link even says, way way down where people won’t read to,
Seems like a better thing to report! Nice call to action, some optimism, might keep people from making decisions they’ll regret like not having kids because they’ve been told we’re all going to starve
Just… everybody just read this great NYMag piece. “After Alarmism: The war on climate denial has been won. And that’s not the only good news.” https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/climate-change-after-pandemic.html
E.
@Major Major Major Major:
I guess we will just have to accept that we have different standards for the sort of news that alarms us. Me, I am alarmed by a study like this one. You are . . . encouraged?
Cameron
@Geminid: Climate is the biggest priority, but I think a lot of other items in the package (e.g., child care) can be at least partially addressed at the state level, too.
Geminid
@Cameron: This is certainly true. We have to make progress where we can, and put attention and energy into state and local government like we do into federal.
I’ve seen this start to happen in my state. Virginia has odd year elections, and Republicans used go benefit from a relative dropoff in Democratic votes in state elections. But Democrats turned the tables in 2017 and 2019, and won control of the legislature on a Republican-drawn map (a federal court order under the Voting Rights Act helped by redistricting 11 Delegate districts east of Richmond in time for the 2019 election that added 6 seats for a 55-45 Democratic majority in the House of Delegates).
Will Virginia Democrats sustain this energy? I guess we will find out this November. But I sense motivation in my Democratic cohorts that is not fading. I suspect this dynamic operates in other states too..
Kay
He really couldn’t resist rubbing it in? A graceless, arrogant oaf.
Kay
Let’s see if the conservadems can resist taking a victory lap after killing all the progressive parts of the bill.
Oh, wait, they’re already doing it. Absolute contempt for their colleagues. If they showed as much fight when fighting Republicans as they do when screwing Democrats we wouldn’t be in this mess.
J R in WV
@jonas:
Actually, the last formal number I recall seeing was 16,000, which is a lot of jobs in a rural state with a shrinking population. And I chat with people getting gas for their trucks at the neighborhood B-Mart, who work in the mines, 6 — 12 hour shifts a week!!!
That young man was going to quit mining for a factory job where he would be a mechanic working on floor equipment stamping body parts. Which seemed like a great job compared to the one he has. Less money, but gets to spend time with his baby daughter. I told him nothing will substitute for the time he gets to spend with his kids! Hope he believes me!
J R in WV
@Citizen Alan:
OSHA is and has been dead for years. They show up after accidents that kill people, after whole classes of people are damaged, after factory buildings collapse. AFTER shit happens, not while it happens, not preventing anything.
EPA isn’t much better. I worked with EPA for years, discovered it is mostly busy work. No prevention there either. SAD!
misterpuff
@lowtechcyclist: Well, one of the races I saw that went that way in OC in the reddest part of OC was campaigned on the TV ads without mentioning that the candidate was an R. They were not campaigning on being Trumpy but more on regular voter dissatisfaction. I believe there was another race here in SoCal run like that.
Noise in the system.