Investment in American Infrastructure

[jackd]

Someone needs to point out to them that failure to enact the reconciliation bill will guarantee loss of the Congress and give Trump a strong chance in 2024.

[LFC]

Moderate Dems in the House are demanding a smaller infrastructure bill. Of course they aren't giving an real specifics, they just want it smaller. Now a poll shows that the approval rate for the proposed $3.5T bill vs. smaller versions doesn't really change. Since the Dems are paying for most of the bill I don't understand exactly what the objections are outside of "that's too big" which is a pretty content free objection.

Here's the topline total for strongly support plus somewhat support among Dems, Independents, and Republicans. The question was "Lawmakers in Congress recently introduced a $___ trillion proposal to increase access to health care and child care, expand the use of clean energy, and increase educational opportunities. Do you support or oppose this proposal?"

$3.5T : 87% D, 63% I, 34% R

$2.5T : 90% D, 56% I, 43% R

$1.5T : 84% D, 66% I, 43% R

Manchin and Sinema are NOT being helpful. A tiny minority of Congressional Democrats are jeopardizing a policy which is wildly popular with their constituents and they can't even articulate WHY with any specificity.

Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) are privately advising the nine House centrist lawmakers trying to force Speaker Nancy Pelosi to hold a quick vote on the Senate-passed bipartisan infrastructure deal, lawmakers and aides tell Axios.

Why it matters: The two moderates who've stirred the biggest frustrations and held the most sway in their party over the infrastructure negotiations are helping allies in the House to stake out — and defend — their centrist position.

• They're offering encouragement and advice on how to negotiate with the White House and congressional leadership.

• Their behind-the-scenes support also indicates the degree to which Manchin and Sinema have prioritized getting the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure deal to final passage and in front of Biden for his signature.

[LFC]

A small number of House moderates are balking at the infrastructure bill but I still haven't heard why other than "it costs too much." Without funding that might be a reasonable criticism but I've yet to hear them lay out their case for why this mostly paid for program simply must be cut. Do they think there is unwise spending? Do they believe in tinkle down economics and don't want to tax the "makers?" I really want to hear some kind of details but I haven't seen squat.

Who’ll Blink First?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) late-night talks with the moderate Democrats who are trying to force her into holding a vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill before voting on the $3.5 trillion budget resolution ended without an agreement.

• Pelosi and other Democratic leaders are slated to continue negotiations this morning before the House votes on the resolution at 12:00 p.m. ET.
• The leadership plans on daring the moderates to vote “no,” according to Punchbowl.
• Other House Democrats are furious with the moderate holdouts and were unafraid to say so: Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) declared that he was “pissed off,” Congressional Black Caucus Chair Joyce Beatty (D-OH) asked “How dare you” and one unnamed lawmaker called the centrists “fucking assholes,” according to Politico.

[LFC]

I followed some of the links from above to find what statements have been made by which moderates. Here's Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL) who's saying the bipartisan bill has to be passed first because ... well, BECAUSE! I literally see nothing in her statement about why negotiations on the reconciliation bill can't happen first. It just should be that way. The brushing aside of the progressives' concerns is also a bit too glib for me.

The two legislative efforts are distinct. Blurring them is confusing to the public. Plus, the reconciliation process won’t be — and shouldn’t be — quick or easy. Democrats will need to make tough, thoughtful decisions about how much to spend given the state of the economy, how much to raise in revenue given the state of the national debt, and which priorities to include and exclude. As we work through these challenges, the infrastructure bill will sit there, stagnant. It makes no sense.

Finally, make no mistake: the current strategy is rooted in mistrust on the part of more “progressive” Democrats toward “moderate” Democrats like myself. They think we will abandon reconciliation once infrastructure becomes law, even though we’ve made clear we won’t.

In any event, if Democratic leaders believe they need to hold a good bipartisan bill hostage — and strong-arm their fellow Democrats — in order to achieve their desired policy goal, perhaps they should reconsider whether their overall approach is the right one.

[LFC]

I found the letter from the 9 Democratic holdouts. It makes the same case as above i.e. we should pass the other bill first because we oughta'. There's nothing about the reconciliation bill's price tag or priorities even mentioned. That tells me that they know the Senate bill is being used as leverage and they simply want it to go away before speaking about reconciliation. Since House leadership doesn't know just how Manchinesque they'll be I can understand why they refuse.

From the Politico piece the Hour Rules Chair obliterates their "cuz we need it now" argument.

“You all have to vote for the goddamn rule,” House Rules Chair Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) added, to cheers and applause in the room. “Why wouldn’t we begin this process? Whether we pass it today or on Oct. 1, none of the money can be spent until Oct. 1.”

So the only stated reason is pure politics. I didn't come across any statements from this crew about the size and priorities in the reconciliation bill. I think they're intentionally dodging.

[LFC]

Oh, look! The House Democrats who are holding out have an ally!

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) cheered the attempt by some moderate Democrats in the House to decouple the two infrastructure bills, threatening the future of the Democrats’ sweeping reconciliation package.

“I wish the moderates in the House success,” McConnell said on Fox News Tuesday morning. “They want to split the infrastructure bill away from this massive $3.5-to-5 trillion reckless tax and spending bill, and deal with the two separately.”

The group of moderates has been demanding an immediate vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by the Senate earlier this month. The group has claimed that “families can’t wait” for the hard infrastructure improvements like retrofitting homes and resurfacing roads. But that rationale seems cloudy, given that none of the money to do those improvements can be spent until October 1, the beginning of the federal government’s fiscal year.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has no interest in moving the bipartisan bill individually, as that could potentially free up the centrists to get the smaller bill, which they like better, passed, then walk away when it comes time to pass the reconciliation package that’ll include progressive priorities.

[Traveler]

Aug 24, 2021 15:55:12 GMT LFC said:

Oh, look! The House Democrats who are holding out have an ally!

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) cheered the attempt by some moderate Democrats in the House to decouple the two infrastructure bills, threatening the future of the Democrats’ sweeping reconciliation package.

“I wish the moderates in the House success,” McConnell said on Fox News Tuesday morning. “They want to split the infrastructure bill away from this massive $3.5-to-5 trillion reckless tax and spending bill, and deal with the two separately.”

The group of moderates has been demanding an immediate vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by the Senate earlier this month. The group has claimed that “families can’t wait” for the hard infrastructure improvements like retrofitting homes and resurfacing roads. But that rationale seems cloudy, given that none of the money to do those improvements can be spent until October 1, the beginning of the federal government’s fiscal year.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has no interest in moving the bipartisan bill individually, as that could potentially free up the centrists to get the smaller bill, which they like better, passed, then walk away when it comes time to pass the reconciliation package that’ll include progressive priorities.

Manchin and Sinema have been caucusing with these idiots for some time.  Talk about back stabbers.   

[LFC]

Aug 24, 2021 16:04:04 GMT Traveler said:

Manchin and Sinema have been caucusing with these idiots for some time.  Talk about back stabbers.   

[jackd]

Looks like the "moderates" got what they wanted: a vote on the infrastructure bill on September 27 before the Senate votes on Reconciliation. Am I missing something?

[LFC]

Aug 24, 2021 20:49:55 GMT jackd said:

Looks like the "moderates" got what they wanted: a vote on the infrastructure bill on September 27 before the Senate votes on Reconciliation. Am I missing something?

Now it's all just nail biting to see if just one or two assholes are going to torpedo the entire party. Having read the "arguments" from the foot draggers I don't have much faith.

[Traveler]

Aug 24, 2021 21:57:36 GMT LFC said:

Aug 24, 2021 20:49:55 GMT jackd said:

Looks like the "moderates" got what they wanted: a vote on the infrastructure bill on September 27 before the Senate votes on Reconciliation. Am I missing something?

Now it's all just nail biting to see if just one or two assholes are going to torpedo the entire party. Having read the "arguments" from the foot draggers I don't have much faith.

Seems to me that they got jackshit.  

Pelosi held firm and eventually gave the renegade members the skimpiest of fig leaves. In a written statement, she declared, “I am committing to pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill by September 27. I do so with a commitment to rally House Democratic support for its passage." A promise to try to pass a bill by a certain date, of course, is utterly unenforceable.



At her news conference on Wednesday morning, Pelosi called the agreement a “clarification,” a sly way to sustain the charade that moderates had gotten something while also diminishing its significance. She also pointed out that the infrastructure bill had to be put to a vote anyway by Sept. 30, so this was only a matter of a few days — another dig at the band of nine. She nevertheless insisted their participation was “constructive.” She didn’t need to embarrass the nine; they had done that on her own. She did, however, restate that Democrats were not going to lose track of Biden’s “vision.”

[jackd]

And if the Senate hasn't sent the reconciliation bill to the House by September 27, you're suggesting she'll reneg on the deal? Don't forget she needs those nine votes to pass the reconciliation bill when it does get there.

[Traveler]

Aug 25, 2021 20:02:32 GMT jackd said:

And if the Senate hasn't sent the reconciliation bill to the House by September 27, you're suggesting she'll reneg on the deal? Don't forget she needs those nine votes to pass the reconciliation bill when it does get there.

Well, she could blame the Senate for being late, no?  Also, that bill expires Sep 31, so its not like they cannot wait a few days.  The chances of them voting against reconciliation because Nancy was mean seem pretty slim to me. But never underestimate the ability of Dems to shoot themselves in the foot.   


This whole palaver seems overblown.  It makes my head hurt. 

[goldenvalley]

Aug 25, 2021 20:20:23 GMT Traveler said:

Aug 25, 2021 20:02:32 GMT jackd said:

And if the Senate hasn't sent the reconciliation bill to the House by September 27, you're suggesting she'll reneg on the deal? Don't forget she needs those nine votes to pass the reconciliation bill when it does get there.

Well, she could blame the Senate for being late, no?  Also, that bill expires Sep 31, so its not like they cannot wait a few days.  The chances of them voting against reconciliation because Nancy was mean seem pretty slim to me. But never underestimate the ability of Dems to shoot themselves in the foot.   


This whole palaver seems overblown.  It makes my head hurt. 

I don't know much about these 9 people but I suspect they want to go into re-election campaign season saying they opposed the big spending but got beaten down by the evil Nancy.

[jackd]

Or they want to help Manchin and Sinema reduce the size of the bill.

[LFC]

Bernie Sanders is going to pitch the reconciliation bill across the country (paywalled).

While Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) centrist colleagues in the House try to flex their muscles ahead of the party’s $3.5 trillion reconciliation package reaching their chamber, Sanders is planning to spend the next few weeks selling the bold legislation to Americans — specifically, Republican voters in the Midwest.

Sanders told Politico he hopes getting Republican voters on board might quell concerns about the package’s price tag from some of his more centrist Democratic colleagues. Two in particular.

During the interview with Politico, Sanders said he would travel to all 50 states if he could (his first two stops are Iowa and Indiana, and he is set to co-host an event with Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) in Michigan). He notably didn’t rule out the possibility of making some stops in Arizona and West Virginia, the homes of the only two colleagues of his in the Senate who have made themselves known as a possible obstacle to the budget reconciliation package.

Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) have both expressed concerns about the cost of the bill; Sinema said something about it as recently as last week. The squishy opposition could all be for show — an attempt to have something to point to when questioned about the price tag. But Sanders told Politico there’s no budging on the topline.

“I already negotiated. The truth is we need more,” he said. “The needs are there. This is, in my view, the minimum of what we should be spending.”

This is what dozens upon dozens of Democrats in both the House and Senate need to be doing. Make the damn case loud and clear and back the handful of foot-dragging Dems and Republicans in purple states into a corner where they have to explain their objection. Preemptively hit them on price tag.Force them to state exactly what they would cut. The nebulous "it's too big" is a lame cop out that refuses to acknowledge the face we're making up for decades of neglect.

[goldenvalley]

Aug 27, 2021 13:46:46 GMT LFC said:

Bernie Sanders is going to pitch the reconciliation bill across the country (paywalled).

This is what dozens upon dozens of Democrats in both the House and Senate need to be doing. Make the damn case loud and clear and back the handful of foot-dragging Dems and Republicans in purple states into a corner where they have to explain their objection. Preemptively hit them on price tag.Force them to state exactly what they would cut. The nebulous "it's too big" is a lame cop out that refuses to acknowledge the face we're making up for decades of neglect.

I agree that Democrats need to do this.  Bernie needs to stay home.  He will only be heard by those who already agree with him and he'll make others mad simply by existing.  If this is seen as a Bernie project it will be "socialism in the bad sense" with the result of continued foot dragging.

[jackd]

It's hard for me to see how Manchin and Sinema, as well as those hiding behind them, are going to be "forced" to agree to the bill as written. I think Biden expects to have to negotiate and the negotiation will be on price not nature of benefits. That doesn't mean Democrats shouldn't market the bill; only that they shouldn't expect the objector's voters to pressure them.

[LFC]

Manchin again. He's decided that current short-term inflation (not outrageously high) is his new excuse. He seems to have zero understanding or interest in the fact that this supposedly enormous spending amount is making up for multiple decades of infrastructure neglect and desperate need for modernization. Way to excuse your fecklessness, Joe, without telling us what you'd actually cut.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) has decided that spending $3.5 trillion on a reconciliation package slated to contain much of President Joe Biden’s agenda is too much, threatening to derail the Democratic agenda possibly for years.

“I, for one, won’t support a $3.5 trillion bill, or anywhere near that level of additional spending, without greater clarity about why Congress chooses to ignore the serious effects inflation and debt have on existing government programs,” he wrote in a Thursday op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.

“Instead of rushing to spend trillions on new government programs and additional stimulus funding, Congress should hit a strategic pause on the budget-reconciliation legislation,” he added, saying he is also uncomfortable adding to the national debt.

He made similar comments Wednesday to the Virginia Chamber of Commerce, saying that he wants to “hit the pause button” due to “runaway inflation,” according to a Bloomberg report.

Manchin’s squeamishness could tank not just the reconciliation package, which is expected to include historic and desperately needed climate change mitigation measures, but also the smaller bipartisan infrastructure bill. It could also end Democrats’ chance to meaningfully legislate for years.

[jackd]

Let's be grateful that he claims to be open to being given "clarity". He's been saying 3.5T is too much for months. Then there's Sinema.

[LFC]

Manchin is now finding out that he's not the only one with the power to torpedo a deal. He wants the bipartisan infrastructure first? Fine. Multiple progressives are lining up and saying no. And they have as much individual power in the Senate and as much small group power in the House. If he blocks the reconciliation bill he'll own the whole outcome. Ditto Sinema to a lesser extent. That may seem unfair but the fact is that the Democratic establishment will see it that way and they'll bury him for it.

Progressives are firing warning shots right back at Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), who is demanding that Democrats put a “strategic pause” on the $3.5 trillion infrastructure bill.

• Senate Budget Committee Chair Bernie Sanders (I-VT) kept it blunt: “No infrastructure bill without the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill,” he tweeted.

• Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) offered an alternative to Manchin’s demand: “Or maybe we hit the ‘cancel’ button on this so-called ‘bipartisan’ charade of an Exxon lobbyist drafted infrastructure bill unless we actually pass a law that helps people’s lives with healthcare expansion, childcare, climate action, etc,” she tweeted.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
@aoc

Manchin has weekly huddles w/ Exxon & is one of many senators who gives lobbyists their pen to write so-called “bipartisan” fossil fuel bills.

It’s killing people. Our people. At least 12 last night. Sick of this “bipartisan” corruption that masquerades as clear-eyed moderation.

• House Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), who’s been at the forefront of hammering out the sweeping $3.5 trillion proposal, declared “no more pauses. No more excuses.”

• Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) ripped Manchin for trying to throw a wrench into passing legislation that addresses climate change even as extreme weather events like Hurricane Ida wreak havoc across the country:

Rashida Tlaib
@rashidatlaib

Instead of writing op-eds, why don't you look into the faces of my residents who have had their basements flooded with sewage multiple times and their power out for days, Senator Manchin. We deserve better.

[jackd]

A circular firing squad? Playing chicken? The only thing that will accomplish is nothing passing and a wipeout in the midterm election.

[LFC]

Sept 3, 2021 19:57:54 GMT jackd said:

A circular firing squad? Playing chicken? The only thing that will accomplish is nothing passing and a wipeout in the midterm election.

The wipeout is coming without big moves anyway.

[jackd]

The sad thing is that the Democrats could make the Republicans own the disavowal of Roe v. Wade, coupling it with seriously helpful legislation and win the midterms decisively. But they can't compromise. Hubris by all factions.

[LFC]

Manchin's opening bid is $1.0-$1.5T and all funded with new revenue.