Democrats in the Senate are negotiating the stimulus bill:
Like the House bill, the proposal under discussion would send $1,400 checks to people earning up to $75,000 and households earning up to $150,000, with those earning more receiving smaller payments. But the Senate proposal would end the checks altogether for those making $80,000 or couples earning $160,000, while the House measure had a higher cap of $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for households.
Apparently this would save about $15 billion from a $1.9 trillion bill.
A decade ago the 2009 stimulus bill got cut down from the (approximately) $2 trillion that it should have been to about $1 trillion. That was a mistake, but at least it's understandable. If you're a deficit hawk, that's a big chunk of money you've saved.
But $15 billion out of $1,900 billion? That's a cut of 0.8%. What's the point? Is it just part of an obsession with being able to tell your constituents that you helped cut a wasteful bill down to skin and bones? Does anyone buy this?
Well, Manchin keeps getting elected in West Virginia. Do Kevin and the other pundits and bloggers who second-guess him know better than he does how to get reelected as a Democrat there? Blue dogs are probably a necessary evil - the alternative is a Republican.
But the 2022 and 2024 elections are most likely to be decided on how well the economy is doing overall. Or at least if it doesn't pick up a lot there is a good chance that Democrats will be out again. Swing voters don't base their votes on a check list of economic issues, but if things don't look good they will vote for change. Democrats need to get the bill through as soon as possible even if some things have to be given up. Let the blue dogs have their signals or whatever they are.
+1
+1
manchin keeps getting elected partly because he comes from a popular old line w.va. political family. saving $15 billion in a bill with nearly $2 trillion in spending isn't going to do anyone much good. in fact it might just piss some people off.
Reply to mudwall jackson: 👍
It surely will piss people off.
Really? I mean, there are hardcore Dem partisans who think any opposition is a betrayal, but there are damn few of those in WV. And the restrictions are almost laughably small -- now individuals with 80-100K income, couples with double that, and heads of household with something in between, will get none of the $1400 instead of some of it. Take the midpoints -- $700 out of $90K. Is that really gonna upset too many people?
And conversely, it establishes his cred as a gen-u-wine Maverick, a big swingin' d**k who can tell them libruls like Nancy Pelosi and Kama-whatever what to do and they gotta DO it. That plays big in WV.
I think he's got the politics figured right. And frankly I think Biden et al. do too. This is kabuki. Let it play out, then pass the damn bill.
Reply to bbleh:
12 million fewer people will get checks. Probably not many in West Virginia, but still, 12 million will be smarting come next election, when historically the party in power loses seats.
Wrong, the party in power loses seats historically in the 2nd term of the President tenure. Not necessarily the first term.
@Midgard
Not remotely true.
Since Truman:
(19 midterms: gained - lost - even)
House: 2 - 17 - 0
Senate: 4 - 13 - 2
1 of 13 presidents gained House seats first term
4 of 13 presidents gained Senate seats first term
Biden should have promised a billion dollar project to the states of each of the Sanators that were demanding this symbolic nod to being fiscally responsible.
In my mind, this makes Biden look very weak, and too eager to please these guys.
Not good at all.
Biden wanted a $1.9 trillion stimulus and got a $1.885 bill and that is a loss that makes him look weak? I’m sorry, but I just don’t see it.
Jabberwocker is proof positive of the Jabberwocking maestro's contention that Americans are innumerate.
OT, but a note about some Americans' professed acquaintance with math.
The paragraph below is from Kristof's email today:
Then Again, I’m an Overconfident American Man
A word of warning: American men seem to be particularly vulnerable to the kind of intellectual arrogance I’m describing. My column cites one study in which young people around the world were asked to describe their competence in 16 areas of math, including three that don’t actually exist (“declarative fractions,” “proper numbers” and “subjunctive scaling”). It turned out that claimed excellence in nonexistent fields correlated to being male, affluent and American or Canadian.
I’m sure women and overseas readers are nodding sagely at this.
Big Barney Stinson, Ted Moseby, & Robin Schabatzky energy.
(Been catching up on How I Met Your Mother on LAFF. Never watched when firstrun. It's chuckleworthy, though Ted ruins most everything.)
Kristoff himself is a good example.
Precisely because of the tiny amount. It shows that may be he himself has the in him the residual habit of the Democrats past, to wit, do something, any thing, to signal that you are not like those wacky leftists of the Progressive caucus, even when it is insignificant or even when you know that whatever you do, the right will never agree with you, as in the Obamacare negotiations of Democrats with themselves.
This view is further confirmed by his despicable desire to not do anything against the Prince of Saudi Arabia even after his culpability in Khashoogi murder is now finally and officially in the open.
12 million fewer people -- voters -- will get stimulus checks. That will bite some Dems in the ass in 2022. Not worth it, IMO.
I doubt it. Economy is coming back stimulus or no stimulus. Just moving on from covid will cause this economy to overheat by 2024. Unemployment is 2-3% here we come. Also will expose the overrated Trump era economy as incomplete. The Boomer withdrawal has knocked down the nairu.
You may be right. But all those voters are relatively comfortable, and if the economy's booming in the fall of 2022, it probably won't make that much difference.
We apparently differ in our estimation of how long an American’s memory persists.
There is no justification. It is a conditioned reflex. You can see this because the alleged moderates justify their cut by claiming it "targets money to the poor," and in the next breath want to cut unemployment assistance from $400 to $300. Sure, they didn't get that, but who do they think unemployment assistance assists? The wealthy?
Of course there's a justification. It's called "political messaging." (See the comments below about Manchin).
Progressives might hate him, but he's FAR better than having a Republican in that seat. (You think a Republican from West Virginia is going to vote for a 1.885 trillion relief package?).
+1
Short term: better than nothing.
Long term: killing the Democratic Party.
Which one is more important? I think that's where the argument is on this one.
Bikeshedding.
This situation is not comparable to the Great Recession. Back then the compromise was with "moderate" Republicans (Collins and Snow). They wanted real, substantial concessions. They were not interested in a package that would set Obama up for a successful mid term election.
This time it is Joe Manchin. He wants something he can tell his rather conservative voters. He won't tell them that he cut the package by a measly, irrelevant 0.8%. He is going to tell them that he saved the tax payers 15 billion (!!!!!). Few of them will even remember how big the package was. So the 0.8% cut is just fine for his purposes. He also wants to make clear that he has a lot of power (all politicians enjoy it when they have it) without really sabotaging Biden's agenda. After all, Biden will deliver better for his voters than any Republican would.
It's not comparable because a larger stimulus was not going to speed things up much after a credit seizure in 2008. This is where the progtards persistently hurt themselves. This isn't a credit contraction, but a artificial downturn unrelated to credit markets.
in a macro sense you're right. but if you're one of those hurting, you don't give a damn about the macro.
Yup.
It seems inane, but I have to believe Biden and his people are experienced enough to ask for more than they really think they needed. So, the goal is, say, 1.7 trillion. It's pure win for them as long as the final number comes in above that.
I'm glad it looks like we're going to get a big relief bill passed, but I'm not glued to the 1.9 trillion figure, and I always figured they had padded the original request. Negotiating tactics 101.
Heck, it even fits into the kabuki that even if they come out better than they had hoped, because if they didn't the other side will feel like they left too much on the table.
+1
You just showed us the savings rate and how it jumped after each check. Why give people earning 600% of FPL a check? Surely, giving people below FPL an UBI would be a better goal.
The federal poverty level is an enormous joke. It's far, far too low.
Forget running for NYC mayor: Andrew Yang should run for governor to replace Cuomo, Jr., & trial UBI in the Empire State.
(Think how thankful Trumpers in Western NY will be for the spike in their collapsible table budget.)
Because as someone who is above that line but still lives largely paycheck to paycheck, I NEED HELP TOO.
Yep. Lots of people "fall" for it. It's messaging theater, and it works. All Manchin has to do is say "Look, I wanted it to be smaller still, but we gotta work together and we did cut some." Arguing about whether cutting any was the right thing to do isn't going to go anywhere, but something like this (which won't be all that harmful while still being effective political messaging) alters the narrative with low information voters. Dems from conservative places can use this as a way to deflate the attacks just a little bit.
Right. Manchin gets to burnish is reputation for being all "mavricky" and stuff. Who am I to argue? I've never won statewide office as a Democrat in West Virginia.
2022 is going to be a bloodbath. We just lost seats in the house and would have lost the senate too if it wasn't for Trump's big stupid mouth. Trump won't be on the ballot in 2022 and you're not going to juice up the turnout with stories about Marjorie Taylor Green alone.
This is an epic blunder. It may be small peanuts compared to the rest of the bill, but will be a lot less peanuts for a lot more people than what they got from Trump.
Honestly, at some point the Democrats ability to keep fucking up simple things has to be intentional.
Less agitation from the controlled opposition at Brand New Congress, & we likely hold another 10-12 House seats & pick up Gideon & Greenfield in Senate. (Would say Cunningham, too, but fuck that guy.)
Waste of a post. Bloodbath for the Republicans it will be, especially in the Senate.
but trump's big mouth is going to be there still in 2022. if the the dems lose seats in the next election it won't be because of $15 billion sliced out of what is essentially a $2 trillion bill.
knock the democrats all you want but in 2020 they did something that rarely happens in american politics: they knocked off an incumbent. and picking up the senate was no mean feat given the odds stacked against them.
Who cares about Trump. It's about letting state parties pick candidates, dccc supporting candidates and have the guts to negatively attack said Republican candidate
Why even post this nonsense.
Epic blunder is overheated. Some folks won't get a check they weren't sure they were going to get anyway. A lot of them probably can do without it and bunch of the others have no idea they are part of the discussion.
An epic blunder? Please. In a week, no one will even remember it, much less a year and a half.
‘Epic blunder’? Oh, good grief. The important thing is to ensure that there is no interruption in ongoing benefits like the augmented UI and student-loan deferments. That is far more consequential for the individuals receiving them than checks to $75k+ earners. If this helps speed passage, which seems to be Biden’s objective, OK.
I’m one who’s not going to get a check now, and it will have zero effect on my vote in 2022; it would have gone to my local food bank and other charities in any case. Which I will continue to support anyway..
This is going to pass along a party line. And it will be the Democratic Party passing it.
So, what you're saying is, big-time lower middle class workers making over $75k aren't going to give a shit one way or the other about the fact that the Democratic Party has decided they don't deserve money, because as they earn over $75k, they're clearly in the money and having an amazing time of it?
This is how you lose more middle class voters who look at the Democratic Party as a party that only helps the wealthy and the poor.
You can disagree with me here, that's fine, but in a short-term vs. long-term situation, I don't think the Democratic Party should be telling more middle-class voters that they're doing A-OK and should just go ahead and fuck right off, but hey, vote for us next election!
Means-testing is a Republican gimmick and anytime a Democratic politician starts using it, they should get slapped in the mouth with a rolled up newspaper.
Gives a shit if some millionaire gets $1,400.00? No one, not even the millionaire.
But for some, apparently uber alles workers really bringing home the bacon with their $77,000 income BEFORE taxes, it probably matters.
The Democratic Party could put their boots on the throat of the Republican Party if it wanted to and was a united party, but unfortunately Republicans d/b/a Democrats Manchin and Sinema would rather lose the 2022 Senate so they can go back to their full time roles as Mavericks™.
In what world is 75K as a single person "lower middle class"? Get real. That's close to the median income in the richest counties in the country, and the national median income is in the low-60K range. So earning 75K+ puts a single person at least in the top 50%, and probably closer to top 40%.
The point is, it's a symbolic cut that allows Manchin and other Blue Dogs to say they saved $15 billion (which sounds like big money out of context), but doesn't reduce the bill's impact in any significant way. The economy is not going to suffer if people making $75K a year don't get a relief check they didn't need in the first place.
If we were talking $150 billion, that would be a problem. But $15 billion? Whatever, let the Blue Dogs have their talking point. It's a small price for their votes to put the relief bill over the top. And if it helps even one of them beat a Republican challenger down the road, it'll be well worth it.
So, if you make over $75k, you don't need $1,400.00 tax-free dollars?
That's the logic you're going with here?
Damn straight. That is exactly the logic I'm going with. Go talk to some *real* lower middle class workers, who DO NOT make $75K, and see what it's like to really need that money.
You know the budgets of people who make over $75k and the budgets of people who make under $75k?
It's the same everywhere in your reality?
Congrats on omnipotence.
N.B. The above not submitted as approbation of Kristof or the NYT (signed up for the emails bc there are occasionally items of interest despite not subscribing to read them in their entirety).
The study that he summed up just reminded me of certain "experts" I've encountered, whom I found somewhat less amusing than this item, DC I that's my excuse for bringing Kristof into this space.