And they say bipartisanship is dead...

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 11:15 am As predictable as the rain, I've already heard the beginning of the media greek chorus singing about how the 'Senate is not broken'. Hopefully we'll have a tweet of a clip of the same soon to put a point on this observation. I don't think we'll have to wait long for the counter cases to appear.
Of course. McConnell's main reasons for (probably) allowing this to pass is: (1) to have a shot at tanking the bigger reconciliation bill; and (2) to help protect the filibuster. This messaging is part of that, and unfortunately it's messaging that the red state Democrats have incentive to push as well.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Looks like I'm set up to get shafted again. It's non-binding but another shot at the blue states in the name of cynical populism. It's also dumb policy. Prices on many of these vehicles is high because it is new technology.
On Tuesday night, the US Senate passed an amendment that would limit the plug-in vehicle federal tax credit. Currently, tax payers are eligible for a tax credit of up to $7,500 based on the size of the vehicle's battery for the first 200,000 plug-in vehicles from a given automaker. But Republican Senator Deb Fischer of Nebraska introduced a non-binding amendment to the $3.5 trillion budget bill that would means-test this tax credit, restricting it to tax payers with incomes below $100,000.

Perhaps more significantly, Sen. Fischer's amendment also restricts the tax credit to EVs that cost less than $40,000. Consequently, the only battery EVs that will still be eligible for the tax credit will be the Hyundai Ioniq Electric ($34,250), Hyundai Kona EV ($38,565), Mini Cooper SE ($30,750), and the Nissan Leaf S Plus ($39,220). Chevrolet's Bolt EV and Bolt EUV are both below the price threshold, but in 2019 the automaker sold its 200,000th plug-in vehicle, at which point the tax credit began to phase out.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by El Guapo »

What the hell is the point of a non-binding budget amendment?
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 1:53 pm What the hell is the point of a non-binding budget amendment?
Mostly messaging but it also signals what they're willing to trade away in the final bill. We knew that Manchin and Sinema were going to force cuts. That it is enabling more of the same red states pillaging the blue states shouldn't be all that shocking. But still it is pure hypocrisy that a guy who parties with Republicans on his $700K house boat is enabling their populist politics while they aim to end democracy.

Edit: I also shouldn't be shocked at the targets. Manchin is against EVs? That's a no brainer but it highlights that our nation is beholden to edge case interests to govern. Hopefully he'll leave it at the messaging but that stupid (and arbitrary) phase out might make it because the progressives like them on the House side. This is the knife's edge but in the end it leads to bad policy compromises.

I'm especially peeved because the last 10 years or so I seem to always end up personally getting screwed over. I mean I think most people would be shocked at my tax load. And every time I hear something that indicates I might get some relief it gets snatched away by these corrupt politics and it's really aggravating.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 2:01 pm
El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 1:53 pm What the hell is the point of a non-binding budget amendment?
Mostly messaging but it also signals what they're willing to trade away in the final bill. We knew that Manchin and Sinema were going to force cuts. That it is enabling more of the same red states pillaging the blue states shouldn't be all that shocking. But still it is pure hypocrisy that a guy who parties with Republicans on his $700K house boat is enabling their populist politics while they aim to end democracy.

Edit: I also shouldn't be shocked at the targets. Manchin is against EVs? That's a no brainer but it highlights that our nation is beholden to edge case interests to govern. Hopefully he'll leave it at the messaging but that stupid (and arbitrary) phase out might make it because the progressives like them on the House side. This is the knife's edge but in the end it leads to bad policy compromises.

I'm especially peeved because the last 10 years or so I seem to always end up personally getting screwed over. I mean I think most people would be shocked at my tax load. And every time I hear something that indicates I might get some relief it gets snatched away by these corrupt politics and it's really aggravating.
Right. Thanks to our idiotic and archaic political structure all the political decisions get filtered through a process that elevates the interests of rural red states at the expense of the states where all the people live.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 2:10 pmRight. Thanks to our idiotic and archaic political structure all the political decisions get filtered through a process that elevates the interests of rural red states at the expense of the states where all the people live.
Not only that but we pay for their low tax regimes, then they lecture us about how they just stopped subsidizing us. My state is now dead last but that fluctuates year to year between CT, NY, and NJ. It's another massive systemic imbalance that is tearing us apart. I'd be personally happy to cut all funding to these red states except they'll explode in rage and try to kill us...more.

Edit: Quick note - I'm not against phase outs but more I'm against arbitrary numbers like $100K plucked out the air to sound like that is when someone is 'wealthy'. I'm in favor of them when they are levelized and adjusted for cost of living. $100K in AR is very, very different from $100K in NJ.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by LordMortis »

I'm especially peeved because the last 10 years or so I seem to always end up personally getting screwed over.
That's me for entire adult tax life. Mortgage breaks, cash for clunkers, education breaks and re-imburesments, all the relief money from the last couple of years. You name it, I just missed it by being a hair to early, it doesn't apply to me, or it phases out before I ever see it. I've always been on the outside looking in. My default is to always assume I won't get anything and such is life. I get by... Except I'm praying I will be able to take advantage of the ACA. I'm going to need it. We'll see.
User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Octavious »

100,000 in NJ is poverty level. You have to come live out in the sticks with me to get by on that. 3 more years and then I'm not stuck with schooling in the state. I'm sure the housing market will collapse again right then. ;)
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Octavious wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 2:33 pm 100,000 in NJ is poverty level. You have to come live out in the sticks with me to get by on that. 3 more years and then I'm not stuck with schooling in the state. I'm sure the housing market will collapse again right then. ;)
I read an article recently that a SALT tax deduction repeal would benefit the super wealthy. Their definition was $80K. I snorted out loud. That's less than the median household income here. People have no idea what COL is like here. I was doing research and I'll give a real example for the cheap seats about how insane it is - our father bought the first house that Oct and I lived in in 1977. It had property taxes that were about $400/yr. The family living there now pays property taxes around $12,500. That is the epitome of a middle class neighborhood in NJ. Up until 2017 they didn't pay taxes on money being spent on taxes. Now they are almost certainly paying federal taxes on money spent on those taxes. It's not right. SALT deductions go back to the 1800s and we are supposed to believe this cooked up modern tale about red states subsidizing blue states. It's preposterous.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by LordMortis »

I'm never really surprised by these

https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states ... overnment/
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by noxiousdog »

Octavious wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 2:33 pm 100,000 in NJ is poverty level. You have to come live out in the sticks with me to get by on that. 3 more years and then I'm not stuck with schooling in the state. I'm sure the housing market will collapse again right then. ;)
$100,000 is 20% higher than the median NJ household income ($82.5k)

Median US is $69k (2019). So $100,000 is a higher percentage over median NJ than median NJ is over median US.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Octavious »

Well I was exaggerating of course, but seriously 100k and a family would be no picnic in NJ. A two bedroom apartment in a shitty town is like 2,400 + utilities. A 350,000 2 bedroom home is a pile of garbage... The state is broken.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

The main takeaway is that a major tax deduction that was utilized by something like half of the population of the state was torn away in some convoluted theory about subsidizing us when we get the *LEAST* money back from the federal government. It was punitive policy aimed at the people of this state and others like it. Our politicians have a shot to change that. If they don't there will be big problems for them.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Isgrimnur »

Median is hard to get a feel for things in general.

Image Image
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Isgrimnur »

Image
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Octavious »

Ya but that doesn't account for the crazy pants property taxes. A 350,000 in my neck of the woods is like 8-9k a year in taxes. In Virgina? It would be like 2-3k. That's such a huge impact on your monthly bills.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Isgrimnur »

Image

Spoiler: New Jersey is 51st.

Image
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Octavious »

Malchior wake your ass up and make my point for me. ;)

I don't understand that chart. This one is what I'm talking about.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... erty-taxes

We're #1 with the highest effective rate. Which is what yours is saying too. Just ranking us at the bottom as the worst.

Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16435
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Zarathud »

When it comes to first principles, the Republican Party decided that sticking it to Democrats was more important than avoiding taxing money spent on taxes.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Octavious wrote: Wed Aug 11, 2021 11:34 pm Malchior wake your ass up and make my point for me. ;)

I don't understand that chart. This one is what I'm talking about.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... erty-taxes

We're #1 with the highest effective rate. Which is what yours is saying too. Just ranking us at the bottom as the worst.
Right highest effective rate and even worse for NJ it isn't the total tax picture. I think that is talking about the REAL-ESTATE portion. In almost all municipalities in NJ what we call our property taxes assess REAL-ESTATE + SCHOOL TAXES. My property tax bill is just shy of (checks) $15000 and 52% is the school tax assessment. Also, we pay between 6-8% in income tax, and then another 6+% on most purchases. We rank near the top of total tax burden overall but it varies year to year. But that really isn't the point. The idea that arbitrary "this is rich" income limits are established in tax law and phase outs has been a bad idea needing reform for years. Though it won't happen. There no mystery here. Tax and fiscal policy has been heavily skewed to benefit the minority of the country that controls the Senate.
Zarathud wrote: Thu Aug 12, 2021 12:28 am When it comes to first principles, the Republican Party decided that sticking it to Democrats was more important than avoiding taxing money spent on taxes.
Great point. I remember one of the NJ delegation (maybe Pascrell who has been vocal on this issue) made this point during the debate around the 2017 tax scam. Though I also suspect it isn't just about sticking it to the libs. They paid for massive tax cuts on the wealthiest *INDIVIDUAL* people and corporations by shifting the burden to *POPULATIONS* of Democratic leaning states. There were multiple purposes to this policy. It also supports fairy tales they tell about the economic growth power of 'low-tax' states. Meaning the reality is that high-tax states subsidize economic growth elsewhere. And we are getting angry up here because we are not fooled by this scheme.
User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Octavious »

This is what 325 gets you in NJ. Please god let me win the lottery so I can flee the country.

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/16-C ... e=txtshare
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Another silly democratic party gunfight breaks out. The whole thing could fall apart. They are still walking a knife's edge.
Nine Democratic House moderates are threatening to withhold their support for their party’s must-pass budget resolution until Speaker Nancy Pelosi changes course and instead allows their chamber to first vote on the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan the Senate approved this week.

The threat, outlined in a letter provided to CNN, could put Pelosi’s plans in jeopardy to advance the budget resolution later this month since she can only afford to lose three votes from her caucus in the chamber that they narrowly control.

“We will not consider voting for a budget resolution until the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passes the House and is signed into law,” the letter to Pelosi said.
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19980
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Carpet_pissr »

From Mal’s post upthread about infrastructure bill:

“It also happens to be way too small to close our huge output gap from the pandemic. It is a relatively small spend spread out over nearly a decade. It's a side show being marketed as the main show.”

This (although I’m not sure its intent was to close the output gap from pandemic).

My point is- it’s a tiny, watered down version of what was planned originally, and sorely needed.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:43 amThis (although I’m not sure its intent was to close the output gap from pandemic).
Yeah it's not but it is being heralded as so, so serious because both sides agreed. It shows the Senate works to certain media pundits [staring directly at Chris Cillizza]. :doh:

I mean what is not more serious than constantly seeking the approval of a radicalized political party that won't even support the investigation of an attack upon *themselves*.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:31 am Another silly democratic party gunfight breaks out. The whole thing could fall apart. They are still walking a knife's edge.
Nine Democratic House moderates are threatening to withhold their support for their party’s must-pass budget resolution until Speaker Nancy Pelosi changes course and instead allows their chamber to first vote on the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan the Senate approved this week.

The threat, outlined in a letter provided to CNN, could put Pelosi’s plans in jeopardy to advance the budget resolution later this month since she can only afford to lose three votes from her caucus in the chamber that they narrowly control.

“We will not consider voting for a budget resolution until the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passes the House and is signed into law,” the letter to Pelosi said.
Yeah, there's very little margin for error here. That said, it's generally in every Democrat's interests to make a deal here that gets both the infrastructure bill and the reconciliation bill passed on some form, so it *probably* happens - I'd say 60% - 70% chance. But it doesn't take that many stupid and/or stubborn people to torpedo everything.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Yeah I think it'll happen but the compromises they'll have to make along the way are going to be very aggravating and sub-optimal. Politics is compromise but that we see all this hostage taking INSIDE a caucus? I can only imagine what Republicans are whispering in folks' ears right now to try to derail this.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:20 am Yeah I think it'll happen but the compromises they'll have to make along the way are going to be very aggravating and sub-optimal. Politics is compromise but that we see all this hostage taking INSIDE a caucus? I can only imagine what Republicans are whispering in folks' ears right now to try to derail this.
This is closer to normal negotiating though. What really characterizes 'hostage taking' negotiation (like the debt ceiling standoff) is one side demanding concessions for not doing something that everyone agrees to be bad. Here each side has something the other wants and can veto the deal if they are so inclined, so there'll be some trade offs on both sides.

What makes this hard is that the nature of the parliamentary procedure here makes it impossible (I think) for this to be done through one agreement / bill, so I think someone will have to go first, which means that each side has to worry about getting double-crossed if their bill passes first (though I think the risk of that is fairly small as long as the bills are done relatively close in time).

Really Joe Manchin and AOC should just get into a room together and work out a handshake deal of some type.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:44 am
malchior wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:20 am Yeah I think it'll happen but the compromises they'll have to make along the way are going to be very aggravating and sub-optimal. Politics is compromise but that we see all this hostage taking INSIDE a caucus? I can only imagine what Republicans are whispering in folks' ears right now to try to derail this.
This is closer to normal negotiating though. What really characterizes 'hostage taking' negotiation (like the debt ceiling standoff) is one side demanding concessions for not doing something that everyone agrees to be bad. Here each side has something the other wants and can veto the deal if they are so inclined, so there'll be some trade offs on both sides.

What makes this hard is that the nature of the parliamentary procedure here makes it impossible (I think) for this to be done through one agreement / bill, so I think someone will have to go first, which means that each side has to worry about getting double-crossed if their bill passes first (though I think the risk of that is fairly small as long as the bills are done relatively close in time).
This dynamic is exactly what I meant by hostage taking. The attack on the sequencing pretty much says we know this is the heart of the whole deal. So maybe it's better to call it a bluff at taking a hostage but it's such a dumb bluff. They could have easily done this in a way that doesn't cause so much angst/distrust or signal so much weakness to the GOP.
Really Joe Manchin and AOC should just get into a room together and work out a handshake deal of some type.
I really hope this is happening right now (perhaps not between these two exactly - but some substantive Senate <-> House dialog)
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

There have been rumors on the wind that the Democrats had serious in-fighting going on between moderates and "the squad" over the reconciliation and infrastructure bills. That struggle has blown wide open and Pelosi pulled everyone back into town to try to broker a deal. Apparently it didn't work and several moderates are demanding an immediate vote on the infrastructure bill. The talk is Pelosi is trying to work out some technicality where both sides get a victory. It's still a high wire act in the Democratic party circus.





User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Pyperkub »

malchior wrote:
El Guapo wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:44 am
malchior wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:20 am Yeah I think it'll happen but the compromises they'll have to make along the way are going to be very aggravating and sub-optimal. Politics is compromise but that we see all this hostage taking INSIDE a caucus? I can only imagine what Republicans are whispering in folks' ears right now to try to derail this.
This is closer to normal negotiating though. What really characterizes 'hostage taking' negotiation (like the debt ceiling standoff) is one side demanding concessions for not doing something that everyone agrees to be bad. Here each side has something the other wants and can veto the deal if they are so inclined, so there'll be some trade offs on both sides.

What makes this hard is that the nature of the parliamentary procedure here makes it impossible (I think) for this to be done through one agreement / bill, so I think someone will have to go first, which means that each side has to worry about getting double-crossed if their bill passes first (though I think the risk of that is fairly small as long as the bills are done relatively close in time).
This dynamic is exactly what I meant by hostage taking. The attack on the sequencing pretty much says we know this is the heart of the whole deal. So maybe it's better to call it a bluff at taking a hostage but it's such a dumb bluff. They could have easily done this in a way that doesn't cause so much angst/distrust or signal so much weakness to the GOP.
Really Joe Manchin and AOC should just get into a room together and work out a handshake deal of some type.
I really hope this is happening right now (perhaps not between these two exactly - but some substantive Senate <-> House dialog)
That's a bit hard when Manchin is seen by Exxon as their top man in Washington

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... s-1192057/
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Kraken »

If they CAN still pull this off, it will be the greatest legislative achievement since the Great Society and Biden's presidency will get past the Afghan debacle. If it all goes down in flames, so does Biden. The stakes are huge, so of course it's incredibly hard to do.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

This is a surprisingly impactful session that is basically only being covered by a couple of people via Twitter. Jake Sherman has been my go to on watching this. The distinct impression I am getting is that there are moderates in both the Senate and House who want to spike the big bill while making it look like the Progressives actually took it down. My personal take is I can't help but think big money is behind this with corporate tax increases on the table.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Quick summary of where they are after last night moving reconciliation/infrastructure ahead:

* They were not able to pass anything last night and are reconvening today.
* The "moderates" are holding the whole budget process hostage. Democratic leadership wanted to pass a rule to begin consideration of the budget.
* They won't vote for it until the House passes the Senate infrastructure bill.
* Progressives are afraid this same group will vote for the infrastructure bill and then sabotage the budget bill
* The moderates are selling a 'this is too important to wait on it message' and said it is what Biden wants
* The White House disputed this directly
* House leadership points out this is a fake crisis since no matter what money can't be spent before Oct 1 (new fiscal year).

I still think this will work out but there are games afoot and the risk of failure seems to be rising a bit.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Zaxxon »

It wouldn't be the Democratic Party if members weren't tossing marbles in front of their own feet.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Zaxxon wrote: Tue Aug 24, 2021 8:47 am It wouldn't be the Democratic Party if members weren't tossing marbles in front of their own feet.
In this case, I think it's almost certainly wealthy people pushing them to throw the marbles. The Republicans don't have to worry about that issue.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Looks like I'm on the right track. If Chamber of Commerce is taking your side...this is probably Koch Network type money behind it.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by El Guapo »

Yup. Many (most?) are from reddish / purplish districts where it would be politically advantageous to have passed bipartisan infrastructure legislation and to have been seen to have stared down "the squad", so that may well be a factor as well. But it's hard to avoid the conclusion that this is also heavily about donor money and the rich not wanting to pay more in taxes as well.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by malchior »

Heh - yeah I went to see what districts the 9 was in. Someone already did the research. More than half are in deep blue districts. What little that is left of our democracy is bought. I sometimes get why the Drazzil's of the world want to tear it down -- unwise as it'd be.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by LordMortis »

malchior wrote: Tue Aug 24, 2021 12:04 pm If Chamber of Commerce is taking your side...
...then I would lay dollars to donuts you are on the wrong side. They are part of a network of corruption that exist in a political state to retain power against both existing law and the democratic process, advancing their cause by throwing political money at the court system. I've seen what they've done to the electoral system in my state. I have no use for them and I question those who proudly post their membership on their business front.

/jaded rant
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: And they say bipartisanship is dead...

Post by Defiant »

malchior wrote: Tue Aug 24, 2021 12:15 pm Heh - yeah I went to see what districts the 9 was in. Someone already did the research. More than half are in deep blue districts. What little that is left of our democracy is bought. I sometimes get why the Drazzil's of the world want to tear it down -- unwise as it'd be.

I checked one of them (Vicente Gonzalez), and Biden won the district by 2% point (The rep won by 3%) - not something I would call a safe blue seat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s ... l_district

Edit: Vela and Cuellar are also in districts that Biden won by 4%, although they themselves won by significant margins. The others are in safely blue districts.
Post Reply