It looks like the Democrats' wealth tax has hit a snag:
The billionaires tax, officially unveiled early Wednesday morning, may have died before the ink was dry on its 107-page text. Mr. Manchin, speaking with reporters, said, “I don’t like the connotation that we’re targeting different people.” People, he added, that “contributed to society” and “create a lot of jobs and invest a lot of money and give a lot to philanthropic pursuits.”
Connotation? Hell, the proposal does target different people—with extreme prejudice. There's no connotation necessary.
This all just gets crazier and crazier. Do Manchin and Sinema have any funding source to offer? They seem to be opposed to taxes on the middle class, taxes on the rich, taxes on corporations, taxes on labor, taxes on capital gains, taxes on people who are evading taxes, and any other kind of tax you can think of. Maybe we could just tax Facebook? That should be popular these days.
Biden had already had to scrap his proposal to modify the stepped-up basis on capital gains (heirs pay no tax on appreciated wealth). So why did Democrats expect to get agreement on this more direct and probably more complicated tax on wealth? They appear to have been wasting precious time on this if Manchin really intended to veto it. Of course maybe he had already agreed in private and only wanted to make a public objection. Evidently the real deals with Manchin and Sinema have to be in secret.
Yes, this news is outdated. The negotiations are over. It's just when they announce the bills are up for vote.
There *is* no funding they will agree to, to enable this legislation, because they don't want the legislation to pass: Manchin, because climate-change action will hurt him financially and endanger his re-election; Sinema, because she just wants to reinforce her special-snowflake mavericky status (and keep getting checks from lobbyists).
Possibly. We'll soon find out. It's also possible there's a lot of kabuki going on here for public consumption, and we'll learn the actual details of what Manchinema ultimately signed off on shortly before the vote.
I have tried to refrain from speculating about motives, but I have come to suspect that, if Democrats could gain a few Senate seats in 2022, that Manchin and Sinema would suddenly become more coöperative, once the Washington press no longer hung on their every utterance.
Here's hoping! It's an eternal frustration that the media portrays "both sides" as offering an alternative to the other -- i.e., the idea is if Democrats can't get it done, then vote Republican -- rather than explaining that what Democrats need is 60 Senate seats.
Hopefully somewhere down the road this gives a push to DC statehood.
Puerto Rico, también
I realize it's a heavier lift than adding DC and PR as states, but I wonder* about breaking up states along urban/rural lines. If the Wasatch Front could secede from Utah, it would get three of the current four Reps, at least one of which would become a Democratic seat. Utah can move its state capital back to Fillmore, where it was originally.
Or we can keep the name, and rural Utah becomes the State of Deseret. Fine either way.
*Sounds like a great idea to me, but there are sure to be unintended consequences. And I would feel sorry for the people in Moab, still stuck in the same state with LaVerkin.
The unintended but totally predictable effect would be that any new state created without a major metro area, major university or existing state Capitol in it would probably immediately become one of the poorest states in the country. Rural areas generally suck up far more government spending than they pay in… and their residents’ incomes and wealth are lower than that of metro areas (unless they’ve got access to oil or some other valuable natural resource). Even in red states, the rural hinterlands aren’t cash cows for their state governments.
All Manchin's supposed reasons for opposing various aspects of the bill are bullshit. Virtually all taxes target different people based on income level, spending, investments types, behavior etc. He just doesn't want to tax rich people because they give him money and he's also rich.
Right? Does he want a tax where everyone in the country pays the exact same amount?
Steve Forbes has entered the chat.
Pretty clear to me that Manchin doesn't want the BBB / Reconciliation bill to pass, only the BIF- bipartisan infrastructure. His delaying tactics have worked, and the only thing that may bring both bills across the finish line is if House progressives stick to their guns and refuse to vote on BIF before BBB.
If they manage to enact both bills, it will be a big win for Biden and Dems. I remain skeptical that this will happen. Bracing for a very catastrophic 2022 election, and the aftermath which will be 100X worse than 2016-20.
I want BBB to pass because because there's some good stuff there the country needs (we hope; haven't seen final product yet, of course!).
But the notion that failure to get BBB to Biden's desk will doom Democrats next year is fanciful. There's tons of evidence persuadable voters in the main aren't fans of legislating in general (they tend to exhibit strong status quo bias). So, it's entirely possible passing BBB is actually worse for Dems in sheer political terms than not passing it. Remember the ACA? Or Clinton's first term tax overhaul? Or indeed Trump's tax cuts?
Democrats will probably lose some ground in the House next year, as well as in state governments. They have an opportunity because of the calender and retirements to do well in the Senate. The particulars will most likely turn on the economy and pandemic, not the specifics of what Biden is able to sign into law a year in advance.
Truth
Jasper-
Maybe'I want the BIP passed to juice the economy. Sure, it's not a big outlay but ANY outlay at this time will drive unemployment even lower and THAT will benefit the lower wage jobs more than anything. Already MOST jobs are paying more than minimum wage - even from the stingiest of employers. Starbucks is raising all pay across the country to $15/hr by next year. In a state like Alabama that will do wonders for the poor folks.
The problem is messaging
Tax cuts for the rich are popular because the Republicans say "oh you guys are next" and the middle class and poor folks jump for joy
Tax cuts for businesses are popular because businesses say we employ you so in order to keep your job vote for people who want to keep business taxes low.
Debt doesn't matter to either party
What is more popular? Tax cuts = more debt OR increased spending = more debt?
Tax cuts by far.
We have been duped by decades of intransigence by DEMs. They failed to get their ideas across in plain simple language that ordinary folks understand. They (as well as republicans) use voodoo economic theories to paralyze us with fear. They use fuzzy math and loopholes.
We just cannot comprehend this.
A more populist DEM could make headway in the next election, if he/she had a DEM senate. Because of the tied Senate too much power is in too few hands.
I thought Biden & Manchin fixed this at the weekend? Why are Democrats making hopeful statements, then looking stupid when Manchin publicly blows it all up?
Possibly for the same reason Republicans made statements for four years about “President Trump doesn’t really want to do X” followed by an all caps tweet shortly thereafter from POTUS stating “I TOTALLY WANT TO DO X RIGHT NOW!”
When you’re negotiating with people who are either unstable or acting in bad faith or both, you often get contradicted by them in later conversations. Have you never encountered someone in your life whom you could not trust to hold the same thought in their brain for more than a day or so?
I had a boss once who constantly changed her mind about everything. And then when I’d run with whatever she said to do yesterday, she’d publicly undercut me at a meeting the next day stating “we didn’t decide that” or “you misunderstood me.”
Started getting everything in writing (email) from her. And started saving all my receipts (emails). And then indexing them for quick reference in meetings, to undercut her undercutting of me. Helped that I was unionized.
She’s gone now. I don’t miss her.
Oppossing all taxation of the wealthy is a now a middle class requirement of government.
I just finished reading Woodward&Costa's "Peril", and turned it back in to the library because of the long waiting list, so I can't quote fom it. W&C reported on the inner negotiations of the American Rescue Plan, which you may recall as what the press called "the $1.9 Trillion Plan."
Manchin continued to oppose all drafts, and Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, and other Dems ended up coming down hard on him as month after month wore on without Manchin coming to "yes." This was stil early in Biden's administration and both he and the United States needed a win on the bill. Finally, after rude and nasty words were said, Manchin finally agreed and voted "Aye."
The chapter closes with Mitch McConnell observing how badly Manchin felt he had been treated, and how Mitch could use this in the future.
So this resentment is very likely powering a lot of Joe Manchin's refusal to ever find the BBB bill "acceptable." There can always be something else, to make Schumer and Biden pay for talking mean to him back then.
Seems to me that Democrats never really controlled the Senate. These two are ideological Republicans.
Manchin may be Holler John Breaux, but Sinema never stopped being G.R.E.E.N.*
*Getting Republicans Elected Every November.
The alternative was a McConnell led Senate with a bigger margin than Biden has now. So, though I'm in agony over what's happening, I still keep reminding myself that we could have had nothing pass--no Rescue plan, no judicial confirmations, no confirmations for major cabinet positions.
Exactly.
When. El Jefe is at World Series Game 4 on Saturday with Brain Damaged Herschel Walker, he will just have to wallow knowing he's in a Confederate state with one ((( U.S. Senator ))) & the other Senator a Thug.
Sorry Kevin, this has been scrapped for weeks. Nor did Biden campaign on it. Again, bye bye Trump Tax rates with the corporate rate at 25%. Just a poor post by you. The infrastructure side was never going to "paid for".
No. They support no funding mechanism. Maybe cutting other programs.
Nope
"Do Manchin and Sinema have any funding source to offer?"
Gee, it's almost as if Manchin and Sinema aren't negotiating in good faith. You know, like a lot of commenters here had suggested all along.
It would not surprise me if Sinema does what her idol John McCain did in the repeal of the ACA: keep everyone guessing until the floor vote, and then do her cute little thumbs down dance. Having first made sure, of course, that the House had passed the bipartisan bill she's so proud of.
If she does, I hope Biden vetoes the BIF and tells Democrats it's either both bills or neither.
Manchin and Sinema want to kill the whole idea without being seen as having done so. They have different reasons.
Sinema is like Kirsten Gillibrand, changing her beliefs like a chameleon with a timing precisely correlated to the next step in their ambition.
But Manchin? As near as I can tell, he probably isn't going to run again and is likely feathering his nest in preparation. That means making sure no one screws with his coal investments and that some wealthy person somewhere will provide him with a nice post-Senate sinecure.
Both of them are fucking scumbuckets.
Still big mad about Franken, huh?
Die mad, you salty bitch.
Manchin and Sinema want to kill the whole idea without being seen as having done so.
I'd say Manchin, at least is even more slippery than that. If he kills BBB by interminable delay, he leave himself the option of taking credit for killing Biden's key legislative proposal if that looks opportune a year from now (ie, if Biden's numbers are in the toilet).
But if Biden's numbers have strengthened, he can avoid taking direct blame.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twi...you ain't fooling me twice.
George Bush (also, every Democratic Senator not named Sinema or Manchin)
In a sane world Democrats could call Manchinema's bluff by saying:
"Yeah, it's actually not a bad idea to enact these spending measures now, but wait until the spring to take a look at funding legislation, when we'll have a better idea of the overall economic picture."
If Sen. Manchin is concerned about treating some classes of income differently than others, then it's time to do some significant tax reform with a single tax rate for all income earners and ONE rather large deduction per tax payer.
Set the tax rate high enough to encourage wealth to move toward business. A simple staggering of rates should offer incentive for people to keep money in the business world and less in their own pockets.
Offer a deduction as a cost-of-living exemption in the range of $15,000 - $50,000 and set that to automatically COLA [ cost of living adjustment ].
Leave a deduction for state & local taxes if you wish.
This kind of simple personal income tax system is "fair" because everyone has the same tax rate ( perhaps 35% with a corporate tax rate of about 25% ) and the exact same deduction amount per taxpayer. It is far simpler too.
This kind of simple personal income tax system is "fair" because everyone has the same tax rate
There's nothing "fair" about a Walmart heiress with a $70 million annual income paying the same rate as a kindergarten teacher earning $45,000.