Hoo boy, conservatives are pissed this morning. Not at liberals, for once, but at the 13 traitors in the Republican Party who voted to pass the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill. Philip Klein is typical:
Disgraceful House Republicans Rescue Biden’s Flailing Agenda
Just before midnight on Friday, we witnessed an utterly disgraceful act by a group of 13 House Republicans....On Friday night, after months of back and forth, it looked like Biden’s agenda could suffer another setback, as not all progressives were sold on the idea of agreeing to pass the infrastructure bill...With only three “no” votes to spare within her own caucus, Pelosi lost six Democrats — enough to sink the bill. Yet 13 Republicans swooped in to rescue Pelosi, provide Biden with the biggest victory of his presidency, and put the rest of his reckless agenda on a glide path to passage in the House.
This is a substantively bad decision that is political malpractice. It represents a betrayal.
....Every Republican who voted for this monstrosity who is not already retiring should be primaried and defeated by candidates who will actually resist the Left-wing agenda. Those who are retiring should be shamed for the rest of their lives. It also is not too soon to be asking whether Representative Kevin McCarthy should be ousted from leadership for his inability to keep his caucus together on such a crucial vote.
It is sort of interesting that 13 Republicans broke ranks on this bill. They usually show more discipline than that. But it's more interesting to parse the reaction from the right. Klein and other critics of the bill generally think we already spend enough on infrastructure—which I think is a defensible position—but their biggest complaint by far isn't substantive at all. They just hate hate hate the idea of giving Joe Biden a win—any win.
Needless to say, this is at the heart of political dysfunction in this country. It's one thing to oppose things that Democrats and Republicans have always fought over, but it's quite another thing to fight against everything across the board that comes from the opposition party. There's just too much stuff that's both necessary and relatively uncontroversial, but might also be considered a win for the bad guys. If you maintain a knee-jerk opposition to all of this, the country can barely survive.
Normally I'd be for democrats taking all the credit on this bill. But in this particular case I think Biden should have some of the republican senators and representatives who helped pass it figure prominently at the signing ceremony. Always take every opportunity to poke the republican party with a stick.
Einstein said World War IV would be fought with sticks and stones. What will be Civil War II fought with?
Normally, I would agree with this approach. But the Democrats have been forced by a small minority of the party to drastically scale down Biden’s agenda. The recalcitrant Democrats have succeeded in gutting many of Biden’s most popular policies which would have benefited a lot of people, including the minorities whose votes the party is seeing slowly slip away.
It occurs to me that the problem with the Democratic/Villagers version of bipartisanship is that only Republicans matter. The minority of Democrats who matter won’t countenance popular stuff, especially stuff that damages their backers and contributors. And the self described centrist ideologues won’t act without Republicans backing them. So what, exactly, does the Democratic Party have to offer to minorities, many of whom are somewhat culturally conservative but find the GOP off putting.
The Democrats are only delivering on a small fraction of what Biden promised. There’s not that much credit to go around and, consequently, I’m in favor of being very discriminating about who it gets shared with.
Is that true? They started with $6T - they have passed $2,7T with maybe $1.75T to come. The original 6 was probably a wish list anyway.
I think so. The relentless focus on the two assholes, which sparked the revolt by the centrist ideologues did immense damage. If this scaled down highway bill and BBB had passed in July and the centrist ideologues had honored the deal or if this scaled down bill had been the original deal, we would have done much better on Tuesday and had a shot at doing better than expected in the next election. Now, that’s extremely unlikely.
A bipartisan bill means this is something that enough Congress critters support which, in turn, suggests that it’s not something that requires a Democratic president or congress to achieve. Similarly, the preening and posturing by the assholes and the centrist ideologues made Biden and the party’s leadership look weak; the things cut from both bills were among the core issues that Biden campaigned on.
Stop, Manchin and Senema are not going to vote for the BBB.
How soon they forget that the Senate vote was 69-30?
I guess there are 19 "traitors" in the Senate.
In the abstract, yes, there’s a degree of normal cooperation that’s necessary for the country to function properly. But in the Trump era, the GOP’s focus is basically a form of guérilla theater. If they look at the Republicans elected in the past few years they’re either shameless hacks who retooled themselves or they’re complete culture war nutters who are disinterested in the normal functioning of government; that’s someone else’s job—they’re modeling themselves on the performers on Fox News.
At the same time, opposition to absolutely everything is the hallmark of Mitch McConnell’s philosophy of governance and it worked extraordinarily well during Obama’s presidency. He sacrificed everything for the power to remake the judiciary because (as we’re seeing) the Republicans are perfectly happy to rule through judicial fiat and antidémocratique means.
On this we are in agreement.
Well heck, if you think about it, opposition to everything (except tax cuts) was a hallmark of McConnell's philosophy during the Trump Admin...
Just as timidity and passivity were the hallmarks of the Democrats during the Obama, Trump, and now Biden administrations.
+1
Ah, right wing cancel culture is at it again. "Shame" them for the rest of their lives.
!
A Republican Congresswomen from NY who voted for it felt her yes vote was a strategic move against "The Squad"'s leverage and for the distinct possibility that the reconciliation bill wouldn't survive as a result.
Well, yes. Of ctourse. Tht is is obvious. The one constant is not that they again' it if we're for it, it's that the best working default assumption is to assume that they do absolutely nothing out of pure or higher motivation.
What, like Speaker Pelosi would climb out on a limb if Manchin or Sinema were still holding a saw? That Rep. must be new in town. I suspect a deal has been worked out in which Manchin and Sinema will get an amendment or two in the Senate, finish out their moments in the limelight, and the reconciliation bill will pass both chambers as amended, with enough ‘yeas’ from House progressives to outvote solid GOP opposition..
I'm not nearly as trusting as you, particularly when it comes to Manchema. Even if they have made promises, I recall an ancient quite from a governor of Louisiana, Huey "Kingfish" Long. It goes like this:
"But Huey, you promised. What am I going to tell them?"
"Tell them I lied."
I have no reason not to believe that either Manchin or Sinema has lied.
It’s not the first rodeo for Speaker Pelosi and President Biden. Remember how surprised the pundits were when VP Biden got out ahead of President Obama on equal marriage? But it worked, and Obama came around. Well, by promising that there is a deal, Biden has put Manchin and Sinema in a position from which they can only make that happen, or make their own party’s President look like a liar. I think it’s going to work, but time will tell.
But a good story about the Kingfish. And completely believable.
I've always wanted to write an alternate history where Huey Long became president. It's totle would be "A Kingfish in Every Pot"
My view also. Manchinema can posure as amenders of the Bill, which the House will pass. Just Kabuki.
And the counter-factual? Would the Dems have lost all six of their votes if the Republicans didn't step up?
Typically, it's been this way during an election year. You never want to give your opponent any win just before a national vote. The Democrats threw most of that playbook out during the pandemic, but the Republicans couldn't take yes for an answer.
I was just reading how Nixon wanted to go for national health care and another project (environment?), but Dems didn't want to give him that win in an election year. At the time, they thought McGovern had a chance, and would push those through themselves.
Gingrich tried, and O'Connell almost did, completely disrupt all governance, election year or not.
Of course, back in their home districts, the Republicans are claiming credit for things they voted against. And it's not like they voted against the bill for specific reason, but liked this or that part of it. If I recall correctly, they'll were out there claiming credit for items they specifically tried to cut. That's considered "normal" by the media, so little to no coverage by the MSM.
please read in the appropriate words that I left out 😉
Steve Daines of Montana is famous for taking credit for things he opposed. I'm sure that he'll be at the first project that ground is broken on claiming credit for making it happen. Fucker.
Shouldn't he be busy standing up an artisanal methlab?
Well, he does seem to be spending most of his time shoveling toxic sludge.
Nixon didn't just want to go for national health care-- he had a bill actually before Congress, and to the left of today's ACA, which the Senate, led by Kennedy, rejected because Kennedy thought they could get single payer through once a Democrat (himself) won the White House. A huge mistake because what we ended up with was Reagan and a much more rightwing GOP which put healthcare in the deep freeze for decades.
Few things more sinister and Leftist than funding infrastructure.
Thankfully we have RWNJs offering fact-free reactionary drivel to counter the evildoers.
Well, did Biden wear a button touting his love of trucks?
No?
Then this Democrat infrastructure plan is no good.
It's infrastructure. Seems like they would be taking credit. McCarthy should have had all of them vote for it. I guess they will be soon enough.
The fate of the BBBA will be interesting now. Pretty sure no Republicans will be helping out there.
Who says they ain't taking credit? Of course they will. Republicans took plenty of credit for individual provisions of the Biden pandemic bill enacted earlier this year despite the fact that not a single one of them voted for it.
I see I botched my first paragraph.
"I guess they will be soon enough" was intended to refer to taking credit.
The irony is that those 13 Republicans just successfully undercut Democratic progressives, who were holding up the infrastructure deal as leverage to get Manchin and Sinema to agree to BBB. Now we're left to hope those two come around on their own.
This was a smart play on their part. It could sink the whole reconciliation deal. If it does... well, at least we can enjoy some small schadenfreude at seeing them primaried for it.
This is a really weird take. If we assume that the progressives were undercut (and I don't), it wasn't by the 13 Republicans that voted for the bill; they don't control the agenda. It would have to have been Nancy Pelosi that undercut them by holding the vote. Once the vote is taken, there isn't a hostage, whether it passes or fails.
The progressives had more than enough votes to sink the bill if they had wanted to. It's clear that they were okay with going ahead and holding the vote. It's likely that they think the negotiations on the reconciliation bill are far enough along that everyone is committed to passing something like the agreed upon framework.
Alternatively, they realize they've been double-crossed but were sensible enough to know when to surrender.
Best working hypothesis. But that doesn't mean you don't still sit in while another round is being dealt.
Sinking the bill would have been politically disastrous.
But did those Republicans undercut the far left democratic progressives ( actually a small minority of the democratic caucus ) or help them? And did those 13 Republicans help or hurt their own party or democrats in crass political terms.
While some Republicans are as upset with them as shown in the comment kevin quotes , many ( mostly more quietly) are happy, including some hard line conservatives.
It largely depends on what would have happened if all 13 Republicans also voted no . Would those 5 democratic hard left holdouts have still voted no , causing it to go down and a huge black eye for biden and Pelosi? I doubt it . Enough would have caved in the end so it passes .
A few republican votes enabled those 5 to vote no , thus continuing the appearance of democratic chaos. Which mostly serves republican interests politically.
On one mostly republican site today , one person brought up whether Missouri Republicans could gerrymandering st Louis to knock out cori bush. But more savvy Republicans reminded him that politically that is the last thing they should want..
Last thing Republicans want is a real leftist calling homosexuals enemy of the proletariat like Fred and Karl did. Time to bring the real left back.
6. It was the squad + cori bush and jamaal bowman.
Frankly it's exactly what I would have done. Once the vote is gonna be held simply vote against it. Would have done the same for ACA. It was a shitty bill but still an improvement so I would voted for cloture to end devate but against the final bill as not good enough.
Infrastructure was important for Reagan Dems. They were getting mad. Sadly, supply sided progtards like George the not real Democrat McGovern followers can't see it.
BBB can be completed anytime. The framework is already done.
Hey, this is the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, right? That's how it escaped a filibuster in the Senate.
This is the bill that was negotiated with Republicans who wanted to say, "We are prepared to work with the President for the good of our country and our constituents." This bill, negotiated with Republicans, was their proof of sincerity.
As usual, the incoherence on the right is amazing. Some are arguing that Biden deserves no credit, because this is 'Trump's bill' that Democrats refused to pass in some alternative dimension's 2020. Why Republicans should still have opposed it, they don't explain.
BTW one of the 13 'traitors' was Jeff Van Drew, who was briefly a Trump pet after he switched parties in 2019. He will now have the distinction of being thoroughly detested by both sides of the chamber.
Does this infrastructure bill have anything in common beyond its popular naming ("infrastructure bill") with the Jefe infrastructure plan?
Since the various Drumpf infrastructure "plans" never got beyond back of the envelope spitballing (if it even got that far) and were largely based on tax cuts facilitating public asset giveaways to corporations, the quick answer is no. But when you consider that the bipartisan infrastructure bill, at Republican insistence, steals hundreds of billions of dollars already allocated by Congress for other purposes, both plans have that unmistakable whiff of Republican mendacity and corruption.
Pardon me for the "ramble"
There are different thoughts running through my mind
First - there is ONLY $600B over 10 years in NEW spending. The rest was previously authorized funding. For republicans to scream deficit/debt after the Trump tax cut added $2T over ten years. The arguments against the BIP from a debt standpoint was laughable.
Second - everyone loves infrastructure - this runs true from both sides but the optics of who proposed it and who gets it passes seems to be whats important
Third - in 2007 the 35W bridge collapsed in Minnesota killing 13 totally innocent people. Why do I bring this up? Well you would think that even a stalwart republican from Minnesota would vote FOR this bill given that this event still brings bad memories back for most Minnesotans.
But in todays world one - ONE of the DEM representatives from Minnesota broke ranks and voted AGAINST helping her own constituents - her own STATE.
Representative Ilhan Omar should be recalled or taken off all committee assignments. For her from Minnesota to vote against strengthening roads and bridges is a testament to her naivete and an abdication of her duties to protect her constituents.
I am flabbergasted by her no vote. Of ALL people she should have had the "excuse" to say "The events of 2007 just south of Minneapolis are still fresh on all Minnesotans minds, therefore I will for FOR this much needed spending for roads and bridges."
She is one pathetic individual in my mind
The unattainable perfect must never be replaced by the achievable good...
I'm from MN and I really don't like Omar but this dumb take is pretty dumb.
As long as the reconciliation bill passes, none of the six Democrats who voted against the infrastructure bill will ever have to answer for that. So I take this as an indication that a deal has been worked out for a reconciliation bill which can pass both houses. There will be 535 unhappy people in DC, because everyone is going to have to settle for much less than they wanted, but millions of parents, elderly, caregivers, etc. will be happy. And the President, who as VP called the ACA a “big f*cking deal”, will not miss an opportunity to tout the accomplishment. Democrats had better follow his lead and brag up the benefits of the bill, not run away from it as they did ACA in 2010.
With only three “no” votes to spare within her own caucus, Pelosi lost six Democrats — enough to sink the bill. Yet 13 Republicans swooped in to rescue Pelosi...
Nancy Pelosi is a master vote counter. It's vanishingly unlikely six Democrats would have bolted had she not privately told them it was ok to do so (since she had some extra votes to spare, courtesy of the GOP). This is a classic Pelosi power move: pure win for the Dems, since the specter of "GOP traitors saving Biden's agenda" is sure to attract primary opposition for said traitors. Which may help Democratic House candidates in the midterms.
I for one will miss the Speaker when she departs.
Wife and I are admirers of the Speaker,too.
I love Nancy Pelosi, and I guess a fair number of Republican representatives do, too, although they wouldn't say so. It's hard to see how Kevin McCarthy will manage as well if he gets the gavel next.
I don't give "The Squad" that much credit.
Good thing those 13 were willing to insure the wrath of the trumpistas and cross the aisle, or The Squad would have scuttled the bill. I do not see them accepting the achievable good in place of the unattainable perfect and pure.
Ensure... once again, a comment system which makes Mother Jones' attack dog Coral look good...
What these Republicans have done is violate the Gingrichian theory of Congressional representation where a Congressperson doesn't get things for the district or "bring home the bacon." They're job is to be cogs in an ideological machine which votes the way the party leadership tells them to. To show such independence is to the Right is "getting pork" for themselves and not operate in the way a parliamentarian party would do so, the way Gingrich envisioned it. So these 13 GOP House members (and 19 in the Senate) are apostates in the mind's of Philip Kleins of the world. There probably would have been more had the bill came up for a vote earlier in the fall. To see this mentality finally do down would be of huge important in Congress.
As for the "Squad" one can only hold in contempt. Even if was true they would have voted for BIF if Pelosi needed their votes, well, what was the point of voting against it, especially when pretty much of the rest of the Progressive Caucus supported the bill. Who the hell are they trying to impress? The Young Turks podcast. What a joke! Especially when so many places in this country desperately need funding to repair water systems for example. Are they saying they're against this? Join with Jordan, Gaetz, Green and Boebert in opposition? Never underestimate how unopular the far Left can make themselves even with the best of intentions.
Bottom line is Pelosi was kind of enough to the Progressives to give them leverage by not bringing the bill to a vote. But even if they had voted it down, then what? You think they could have struck any deal on BBB with the moderates after that? When Pelosi decided to bring the bill to the floor and vote on it, that's when their leverage ended.