For years, progressives have floated the idea of acting as a bloc and using their power to shape the Democratic agenda, a tactic levied by several of the most influential congressional caucuses.
On Thursday, they finally did: Progressives stood by a threat they issued this summer, when they promised to vote against the bipartisan infrastructure bill if it was considered in the House without a concurrent vote on a much larger reconciliation bill.
....This move marks a huge shift in the way the CPC has used its power and what it has asked of its members. Prominent progressives have long argued that if even a subset of the caucus stayed united, it could influence major legislation and make ambitious policy demands — modeling themselves after methods used by groups such as the conservative Freedom Caucus and the moderate Blue Dog Coalition.
Imagine my excitement: Yet another intractable caucus more interested in playing to the Twitter crowd than actually legislating. This hasn't worked out very well for Republicans, but at least they can just shrug if they end up passing nothing. It will work out even worse for us Democrats, who will be utterly defeated if we end up passing nothing.
Now, it's frequently the case that just as the shouting reaches a peak, suddenly everyone comes to an agreement and a compromise package gets passed. Maybe that will happen this time. We can hope.
More generally, though, it kills me to see the opportunity that we're passing up. With Trumpism taking over the entire conservative movement, this is an ideal time for Democrats to present themselves as the only sane alternative and build an unbeatable coalition of centrists and progressives. But the only way to do that is to appeal to purple districts and states, and that means moving toward the center. Not a lot, but at least a little bit. Enough to seem non-scary to middle-of-the-road voters in places like Iowa and Ohio, anyway.
Instead we're doing just the opposite, insisting that these voters will love us if we adopt the Bernie agenda lock, stock, and barrel. I don't understand why even delusional progressives would believe this, but I can only assume it's because they live in a bubble and have never actually met a moderate voter from Iowa or Ohio.
But maybe I'm wrong. I sure hope so. Because if I'm right we're blowing the chance of a generation.
Kevin, the problem with your analysis is that you have the numbers backwards. This is not a few progressives holding the party hostage. It is literally a handful of "moderates" holding the rest of the party hostage. There are only 2 democratic senators who will vote against the current reconciliation bill. In the House, it looks like about 10 to 15 democrats who won't vote for it. The whole party is being held hostage by less than 20 people in the House and Senate combined. Not to mention the fact that the coupled 2 bills is the explicit Biden proposal.
Dude, 50/50 senate. 223-213 house. Got it yet???
Dude, a very small rump of "moderates" is blowing the chance of a generation, not the rest of the party. The infrastructure bill without the reconciliation bill is a huge loss for democrats, not a win. Both bills or neither bill.
Agreed! I was typing at the same time and not then replying to you.
Agree!
What Kevin doesn't get is that we aren't going for Ohio or Iowa any more. We need Phoenix and Atlanta. That is the new reality.
Nope. Trump's margin of victory in Ohio is inflated by 200,000 Democrats. Arizona's by 50000 fiscal conservative s. In Georgia it is 60000 Libertarian votes add ons.
Your a moron and a fool. You simply don't get it. When the Republicans run a free trader in 2024......bhahahaha.
Biden, with the last 2 states.
Right. So when a tiny bloc of centrists (2 in the Senate and maybe 20 in the House) throws a fit and refuses to negotiate ... you're gonna blame the progressives? That's gaslighting. not analysis.
19, not 2. Warner ain't voting for ME or the current child tax credit......oh, you didn't know that???
Form circle.
Face inwards.
Aim.
Fire…
WHAT THE FLYING FUCK. ARE YOU STUPID?
This entire thing made my eyes bleed.
Again, 50/50 Senate 223-212 house. Got it yet???
Why don't you post this a few dozen more times? In case somebody is actually as stupid as you think we all are?
Do you suggest to just not do any legislating whatsoever? Or would you legislate GOP priorities just to be able to pass something, anything?
Why don't you accept what is reality and deal you don't have the votes.
Psst, in reality getting votes is a process. Assigning an arbitrary cutoff date is something a child would do.
Kevin is either a troll now or he has lost his mind.
Sorry, this is so wrong that even the opposite isn't true.
Where do we begin? For starters what the progressives are fighting for is Biden's agenda, the one he ran on, not Bernie's (Bernie's is Medicare for all and the Green New Deal!).
Second: It was Biden himself more than anyone else who insisted from the start on a bipartisan deal. The Mini-Infrastructure bill they were not voting on yesterday is the result of that. It is nice (well, sort of nice) but it is not essential. Everything essential is in the big bill that the moderates had promised to support only about three months ago. Biden did learn his foreign policy lesson during the Obama years (which is good for America), but unfortunately not its domestic equivalent (which is bad for America).
Third: The GOP were going to run next year claiming the mini-bill as THEIR achievement (since it contains all their priorities this is actually plausible). Taking that away from them is well worth a little more delay in bridge and road repairs.
Fourth: At some point you have to call out people who consistently backtrack on commitments they made. You just can't let a faction of 4% of each caucus dictate the entire agenda. There are more members from purple states/districts than those 4 percent. They stuck to the deal and they are willing to support the reconciliation bill. The reelection committees should divert all campaign funds away from Manchin/Sinema and give the money to those moderates who are loyal.*
Finally: Even Pelosi has said that not doing the climate change part of this would be a "dereliction of duty". She at least has her priorities right. I for one am reassured by this.
Unfortunately the withdrawal from Afghanistan has damaged Biden's approval ratings. This has encouraged the Manchin's of this world to "speak up". They felt strong enough to break their promises. This was never about policy; the moderates are just used to dominate decision making and they flexed their muscle. A defeat like this might concentrate some minds. Losing the mini-bill is worse for Manchin than supporting the original deal would have been. Luckily the GOP are too stupid to take advantage. They could have voted aye and then claimed victory and an achievement to run on next year. But Trump wouldn't like that, so they don't.
Please Kevin, don't listen to too much CNN**. Dana Bash is not the person to take cues from. She and her colleagues are drunk on a bipartisanship ideology where compromise is a holy cow. This veneration of compromise as something desirable above everything else is pervasive and very bad. Compromise is a necessity. It is never the goal; it is a means to achieve other goals.
* I suspect withholding campaign funds and supporting primary challengers is the way the much greater discipline in the GOP caucus is established and maintained.
** CNN is at least less bad than the ABC/CBS/NBC crowd.
Afghanistan is irrelevant. Biden's numbers fell because of a surprisingly large covid wave. Bet his numbers rebound in the next few weeks.
Thank you, azumbrunn, for this good analysis.
We have to deliver Biden's agenda or we eat it. Full stop.
". Luckily the GOP are too stupid to take advantage. They could have voted aye and then claimed victory and an achievement to run on next year."
This why they are the Stupid Party. If they had applied the party whip in favor of the bill and gotten a discharge petition worked up, they could have passed it with 15-20 Democrat votes. But nooooooo! (as John Belushi would say). They just had to be partisan
Losing the mini-bill is worse for Manchin than supporting the original deal would have been.
THIS. The wheeze the Manchinesque types are trying to run is "I can hurt you, but you can't hurt me." Think on what that implies as to mindset of these sorts of people and how they customarily approach doing business with others. The corollary, of course, is that they will behave themselves _only_ when being creditably threatened with a big stick.
Pingback: The Biden child tax credit is a cruise missile aimed at the heart of a Democratic majority – Kevin Drum
Your political parties isn’t exactly functioning as political parties are functioning in more advanced democracies.
Democrats are a diverse group of hopeful contestants with a wide variety of opinions and no mutual agenda , many of them deeply concerned over how to finance their re-elections political principles being a second rate issues .
These people are supposed to cooperate in the Congress in order to get anything done but the truth is that many are more concerned over how to position themselves for a future carrier. It seems as if in these last years has the diversities of opinions widened considerably.
Republicans has taken a sharp right turn and ended up in a position best described as right wing extremists. “Moderate” Democrats has filled the space left empty and are best described as right wing conservatives (in an international perspective)
They are supposed to work with “progressives” who are having a more European style agendas but the left-right span is light years.
The elite of the Democratic Party are afraid of losing the undecided voters in between the Republicans/Democrats and are of that reason shunning “progressives” candidates and are more or less telling them to shut up. Your primaries are also not beneficial for the more “progressive” candidates just as your toxic version of campaign funding isn’t beneficial for them
You will never have the political climate needed for social progress if things doesn’t change… a lot
Biden has cautiously tried to initiate a process that started some 50 or 100 years ago in Europe, if we are talking social progress, but it’s not going that well
A Democratic Party supposed to represent the sane majority of +209 persons of voting age and the variety of opinions they represent presently is just not going to work in the long run.
It will be “interesting” to see what will be left of this gigantic budget when all the haggling will be over
Greetings from your Swedish friend
Since the political structure is not parliamentary it would be surprising if they were. Note: I agree the structure is pool.
But perhaps you missed that of the 470 Democratic legislators the decoupling is supported by.... 15. 455 support it. The House Leadership and the White House by definition the party elite, were not whipping votes for the small bill alone. Their position is the same as the 97% of party legislators.
If you want to make the case the party is structurally broken go for it, but something with 97% support is not where you go to make it.
*poor, not pool clearly
When it comes to a contest between a real Republican and a Republican-lite, the real Republican will win. If the Democrats move toward "the center" as Kevin sees it, they will become more and more Republican-lite, and less and less attractive to voters.
On any rational view of the political spectrum, the Democratic Party has to move a long way left to get to the center.
+1
I'm worried something is wrong with Kevin today. He's advocating for Kyrsten Sinema, who can't articulate a single thing she wants. WTF?
"Instead we're doing just the opposite, insisting that these voters will love us if we adopt the Bernie agenda lock, stock, and barrel."
The reconciliation bill is not the Bernie agenda, it's Biden's agenda, and almost every Democrat in congress is on board with it.
Kevin, it';s time that you listened to the Progressives involved:
“This is not progressives blowing something up. This is progressives being adults, sticking to the deal, and showing a lot of leadership in landing the plane.”
They are no longer their party’s chief antagonists, but Biden’s key defenders.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/10/what-if-the-progressive-revoltisnt-a-revolt-at-all/
Pingback: Nothing At All | Just Above Sunset
The only thing on offer yesterday was the BIB, which is hardly a game-changer--it's a routine spending bill with lots of goodies for business.
The "chance of a generation" is the Build Back Better bill--all the game-changers are in there. Biden wants that bill--it is his agenda. Who is blocking that?
I'm sure others have made this point but it bears repeating: Jayapal and the Progressive Caucus are acting in support of and in conjunction with both the House leadership and with President Biden.
The deal struck months ago *within the Democratic party* was: 1) that centrist Senate Dems and Republicans get to negotiate a bipartisan infrastructure bill; 2) that the Democratic caucus would vote for, and in return; 3) centrist congressional Dems would negotiate in good faith on and vote for the "Build Back Better" reconciliation bill, and; 4) that the two bills would be linked (i.e., centrists vote for the reconciliation bill and then they get their bipartisan bill, with support from the rest of the caucus).
All that's happened this week (as far as the rest of us can tell) is that the House Progressive Caucus placing a hold on the bipartisan infrastructure bill has brought Manchin, Sinema & company back to the (Democrats only) negotiating
table on the reconciliation bill.
The problem was what the progtards out into the reconciliation bill. The climate initiatives were a good example. 2 of them Joe Manchin simply could not vote for. Why put them in??? This pissed of the 19 which led to the poor reaction of trying to ram through the infrastructure bill(which Pelosi probably could do if last ditch).
Your idea of "moderate" is Trumpism shorn of the racism.
So basically, one political faction can go off the rails to the right into neo-nazi ethno-nationalism, do nothing legislatively but cut taxes for the already rich, thumb its nose at the center, and win political power without breaking a sweat. But the other side has to pander to "moderates" who are, for some strange reason, in deep existential fear of "deficits".
I for one would like more explanation for this novel theory of how politics works in the USA. Thanks.