So where are we on infrastructure? I'm glad you asked.
On the Republican side, the latest offer is a trillion dollar bill that includes about $600 billion in new spending. However, it will take another week or two to "iron out the details," which gets us to the end of June with nothing more than v2.0 of what's on the table now. Like all the other Republican proposals, this one is an obvious attempt to run out the legislative clock. Democrats would be idiots to twiddle their thumbs waiting on this.
On the Democratic side, Chuck Schumer says he's fine with some kind of Republican compromise, but he intends to get the rest of what Democrats want via a separate bill that he can pass with 50 votes via reconciliation. Republicans would be idiots to accept this.
I'm unsure what to make of all this kabuki. Republicans are pretty obviously not acting in good faith, but I suppose this all has to play out until they finally rub Joe Manchin's nose in the fact. Democrats aren't really acting in good faith either, but I suppose the reconciliation track also has to play out until Joe Manchin recognizes that it's the only way anything will get done.
Long story short, we're all waiting on Joe Manchin. Same as always.
" has to play out until Joe Manchin recognizes that it's the only way anything will get done."
Is it really plausible manchin doesn't get this already? I'm not sure what his goals or strategy are, but pretending he doesn't understand the basic politics at play here seems silly.
As Brian Williams sarcastically said the other night, "Oh, look, Joe Manchin is getting lots of media attention."
Is it really plausible manchin doesn't get this already? I'm not sure what his goals or strategy are, but pretending he doesn't understand the basic politics at play here seems silly.
Came here to post the same thought but you beat me to it. I find Kevin constantly attributes good faith where it's unwarranted. (Or maybe I'm cynical to the point of inaccuracy?).
Far more likely than lack of understanding on Manchin's part (a wily, 73 year-old politician who's managed to have a long career in West Virginia as a Democrat) is that he wants maximum political cover. Which means making it look like no effort was spared to court Republicans. He also, I believe, desires the blanket media coverage suggesting he's the most powerful man in America. And honestly, is he not? (Which gives him another powerful argument to court WV voters).
Actually we're not waiting on Joe Manchin, we're waiting on Bernie Sanders. Reconcilliation has to go through a budget process, that means the Budget Committee has to pass its budget first. That will take a while. Sanders is aiming for a top line number of $6 trillion, the final number will likely be less than that.
Once the budget process is done, maybe July, we can pass Infrastructure by reconcilliation in August-September.
Leading up to that there will be several votes (or fillibusters) on the various bipartisan and compromise proposals to keep Manchin happy. But since Republicans will block them all, nothing will come of it.
This has got to be the most insightful and valuable thing about this whole process that I have read to date.
Thanks
& after Andrew Yang comes from ahead* to lose the NYC mayoralty & Nina Turner chokes in the clutch to miss out on her chance** at a hostile takeover of Squad leadership, #OurRevolution will be looking to lashout@ to salve their frustrated ambition & diminished ego.
I expect Bernie will not bend on 6 trillion, & may even go for fourteen figures.
*Pulls a Shrillary2016.
**Replacing Black Bluedog Marcia Fudge.
@Like when Saddam invaded Kuwait to deflect from the draw with Iran.
Manchin isn't up for re-election until 2024, plenty of time to cover his butt whatever he may do to save the union.
In a state that Trump carried by nearly 40%, Manchin realizes that he must pretend to be a Democrat and act like a Republican. His Democratic senate colleagues realize that too and basically leave him alone. One of these days the voters will tire of this cat and mouse game and put him out of his misery. Manchin just hopes that it won't be in 2024.
Darn. I was hoping KD would comment on the Intercept's story about a Manchin zoom call with big donors (on Monday, so, fresh news). From my perspective, it was a fascinating look at How Stuff Really Works. I.E.. here's a powerful senator talking with a bunch of billionaires about what he needs from them if they want him to stay on board.
Long story short, my read is that Manchin is, cleverly, telling Democrats he won't dump the filibuster in order to get them to "moderate" on stuff. (Like the voting rights bill, on which they are already moderating.) This makes Manchin look powerful, I guess. Meanwhile, he's clearly telling the big donors and Republicans the opposite: he will dump the filibuster (well, change it in ways that would make keeping tax rates low a lot harder, let's say) if they don't push a few Republicans his way so that he can say: see, there is bipartisanship.
Interestingly, the issue on which he presses the billionaires is the 1/6 Commission. He tells the billionaires as directly as a politician says everything: use your clout to get 4 GOP Senators to vote for the commission so that I have a reply when the "far left" says bipartisanship is a dream. The implication is: or else I'll dump the filibuster and then you guys are on your own on the really important stuff like undoing Trump's tax law.
Of course where the rubber meets the road here is that even the big donors, with, presumably, McConnell's help, may have trouble pushing 4 GOPers to vote for the commission, since the commission is viewed as "anti-Trump", and to be "anti-Trump" is the biggest sin in GOP politics these days and could jeopardize a future of lobbying, corporate boards etc.
Sure looks to me like this is where the GOP decides whether it can live with Trumpism or not.
https://theintercept.com/2021/06/16/joe-manchin-leaked-billionaire-donors-no-labels/
My prediction is the GOP really can't break with Trump. Meaning 4 GOPers cannot come to Manchin's rescue. Then I guess we see whether Manchin dumps the filibuster on them. I think it's telling the Manchin is drawing the line on a relatively symbolic, economically (to the superrich) unimportant issue like the commission. He's saying to the billionaires: you gotta help me on this symbolic stuff, so that I can help you on the substantive stuff. I take all of this to mean Manchin, ultimately, would rather keep the billionaires happy than the Democrats. But he may not be able to pull it off.
Sorry. Correcting a word in one sentence. It should be "He tells the billionaires as directly as a politician says ANYTHING..."
Also, "I think it's telling THAT..."
Forcing the billionaires to see they've lost control?
They're stuck with Trumpism until 2024, or until it finally, irrevocably fails and they're out of power and going to jail everywhere.
I like this, though I have an objection. I do not see the 1/6 commission as less important than tax rates. I see it as more important. Calling it "symbolic" sounds dismissive to me. If we're to maintain our Republic, we need to clarify just how awful this sequence of events was. I'm guessing these billionaires do not see it as more important, but that's why you have negotiations and politics.
I get your point, and I'm basically in agreement, although I personally care more about getting a start on fixing inequality with a big infrastructure plan (i.e.. hopefully such a plan puts millions to work at good wages they wouldn't otherwise get) than I care about the commission. Also, I worry that in our current extremely polarized environment, a commission will just be a rerun of the impeachment hearings. We'll get some good tidbits on Trump's evil and GOP complicity, I would guess, but also give a platform for Jim Jordan, or someone similar, to do a lot of ranting and spreading lies.
I'm pretty much convinced that McConnell wants the Democrats to kill the filibuster. He expects to regain the majority and as leader he will have the best of all possible worlds: He can blame the Democrats for killing the filibuster; he will be free to prevent Biden and the Democrats from getting bills passed; and if a Republican is elected president in 2024, he can continue his efforts to enrich the already wealthy and destroy democracy. And he'll only need 51 votes to do it.
Mitch doesn't care about this country at all, at least not from a greater good standpoint. He doesn't care what the deficits are or how high the debt gets. Having the Democrats kill the filibuster would make him the happiest weasel on the planet. But, since he also doesn't care about being called a hypocrite, he will likely kill the filibuster himself later if he feels the need. His life, devoid of morals, ethics, fairness, and concern for the welfare of most Americans, coupled with contempt for our constitutional system, is so much easier than what Democrats face. And, of course, he is further assisted by having a sizeable voting constituency that reliably votes and is remarkably stupid and/or ignorant.
That doesn't mean the Democrats shouldn't kill or at least change the filibuster. It means we have to win elections. That is the only defense against the Republican assault on democracy.
Mitch already had the chance to kill the Filibuster for a number of years but did not do so. What makes you think he suddenly wants it dead now? He is already able to get his judges and tax cuts without it, it could be that he wants the Filibuster in place to prevent his own caucus crazies in check.
McConnell killed exactly enough filibuster and other rules to do what he wanted. Cut taxes for the rich and install judges for the rich.
He'll do the same should be ever be in the majority again (he's not exactly healthy).
Thing is the republican agenda of letting them rich steal everything doesn't require much legislation.
An American government that can't do anything basically accomplishes the republican agenda by default.
Precisely- it's hard to "win" at a game that your opponent is perfectly willing to completely sabotage and obstruct.
'That doesn't mean the Democrats shouldn't kill or at least change the filibuster. It means we have to win elections. That is the only defense against the Republican assault on democracy.'
The latter requires the Voting Rights bill, which requires that the filibuster be substantially changed or done away with.
Don't overlook Sinema's role. The latest story is that she has 11 Republicans ready to vote for 'her' bipartisan bill. It would not be a complete shock if she walks out of the party in a huff when her bill fails to get much support, and joins the Trump Republicans. Allegedly she's already much more comfortable in their company.
Yeah, she's been raking in the cash since she was elected which isn't abnormal, but it's a teensy bit suspicious here.
Krysten Sinema is the Sonoran Richard Shelby.
Status quo. They're not just taking the winds out of the sails, they're dowsing them.
My prediction… no infrastructure bill at all. And really… that’s ok. Why die on this hill? Explain to the American voters in 2022 that if they want more then they need to stop voting for republicans. I’m thinking Americans really don’t want it.
Correction: "Real Americans" don't want it.
Sure, why bother:
- addressing the need for clean energy
- increasing employment
- do SOMETHING about $1.2 TRILLION in infrastructure repair needs
This about having a functional government or not, and we know precisely what the GOP thinks about that....
If I remember correctly "waiting on Joe" means serving him drinks, "waiting for Joe" means waiting for him to do finally understand something. Is this confusion on purpose?
If it is supposed to be a Becket allusion it should be "for" if I remember correctly.
all i can say is go Bernie!!! (in terms of age 60 medicare plus pharmacy and dental).
really i think it will not help the dems in terms of 2022 and 2024 but who cares.
'Republicans are pretty obviously not acting in good faith, but I suppose this all has to play out until they finally rub Joe Manchin's nose in the fact. Democrats aren't really acting in good faith either, but I suppose the reconciliation track also has to play out until Joe Manchin recognizes that it's the only way anything will get done.'
Given that only one party actually wants to "get anything done" on infrastructure, I'm going to have to reject your False Equivalency, Kevin....