[btomba_77]

I just listened to Joe Manchin on the state of the union. It seems pretty clear he is going to vote yes for something in the reconciliation bill. He was completely unwilling to say what his toys $$ ceiling was. Which tells me he is currently wheeling and dealing.

[kaldridgewv2211]

Dana basically called him a energy shill right to his face.

Something I learned visiting my cousin that didnt make national news. Wilmore dam almost broke. They evacuated a bunch of people. Not the same dam as the Johnstown flood but couldve had some similar results for the towns around there. They connemaugh river looked like it was raging with water coming over the spillway.

[link=https://www.tribdem.com/news/watch-video-wilmore-residents-back-home-after-storm-evacuation-dam-operates-as-intended-emergency-officials/article_a957088e-0b29-11ec-b493-f7fa05e78d29.html]https://www.tribdem.com/n…b493-f7fa05e78d29.html[/link]

[btomba_77]

[link=https://fortune.com/2021/09/13/democrats-slash-biden-corporate-tax-rate-appeal-pro-business-moderates/]https://fortune.com/2021/09/13/democrats-slash-biden-corporate-tax-rate-appeal-pro-business-moderates/[/link]
[h1][b]Democrats Float corporate tax rate to 26.5% to appeal to pro-business moderates[/b][/h1] [b]
[/b]
House Democrats have drafted a package of tax increases that falls short of President Joe Bidens ambition, an acknowledgment of how politically precarious the White Houses $3.5 trillion economic agenda is for party moderates.

The Democratic proposal would raise the top corporate tax rate from 21% to 26.5%, less than the 28% [link=https://fortune.com/2021/08/30/democrats-taxes-biden-3-5-trillion-budget-plan/]Biden had sought[/link], people familiar with the matter said Sunday night. The top rate on capital gains would rise from 20% to 25%, instead of the 39.6% Biden proposed, the people said.

The package of proposals, estimated to raise more than $2 trillion, are slimmed down to appeal to business-minded Democrats, many of whom hail from swing districts. And Democratic leaders, who need the partys full support to push Bidens agenda through Congress, will almost certainly pare them down further in the weeks ahead. 
 

[satyanar]

Wait. I thought they were all going to cave under Pelosis iron fist?

[btomba_77]

The “cave” part was regarding a moderates demanding a stand alone vote only on the bipartisan plan without also voting on the reconciliation package.
 
I think that is still operative.

[satyanar]

Gotcha. You are more up to date on all of the wrangling. I am more interested in what come out in the end. Nice to see there is such a thing as a pro business democrat. 

[btomba_77]

Given a magic wand I would markedly lower the US corporate tax rate in order to encourage businesses to onshore in the united states.
 
I would make up the revenue by taxing the shareholders …. by making cap gains and dividends equal to income tax while making the income tax rate more progressive.
 
That would be good for business and good for economic growth, would keep the government revenue adequate to provide services, and would help to address inequality.
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

Hmmm, all the billionaires are Republicans? Any billionaire Democrat is really anti-business?
 
Really.
 
And let’s not forget about which party improves the economy for several past decades now.
 
 
[link=https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/the-billionaires-party/]https://www.nationalrevie…he-billionaires-party/[/link]
 
[link=https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2020/09/08/republicans-or-democrats-who-is-better-for-the-economy/]https://blogs.cfainstitut…etter-for-the-economy/[/link]
 
[link=https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jul/29/tweets/republican-presidents-democrats-contribute-deficit/]https://www.politifact.co…ts-contribute-deficit/[/link]

[satyanar]

Quote from Frumious

Hmmm, all the billionaires are Republicans? Any billionaire Democrat is really anti-business?

Really.

And let’s not forget about which party improves the economy for several past decades now.

[link=https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/the-billionaires-party/]https://www.nationalrevie…he-billionaires-party/[/link]

[link=https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2020/09/08/republicans-or-democrats-who-is-better-for-the-economy/]https://blogs.cfainstitut…etter-for-the-economy/[/link]

[link=https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jul/29/tweets/republican-presidents-democrats-contribute-deficit/]https://www.politifact.co…ts-contribute-deficit/[/link]

 
I was being facetious but it doesn’t surprise me with your binary mind you don’t get it.
 
Thank you for noticing how your posts look to others.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Thank you Tucker.

[satyanar]

Quote from Frumious

Thank you Tucker.

 
There you go again. What is wrong with you? You truly don’t believe someone can have a reasonable moderate view of politics and policy?
 
At least dergon is willing to engage on some reasonable level. 

[satyanar]

Quote from dergon

Given a magic wand I would markedly lower the US corporate tax rate in order to encourage businesses to onshore in the united states.

I would make up the revenue by taxing the shareholders …. by making cap gains and dividends equal to income tax while making the income tax rate more progressive.

That would be good for business and good for economic growth, would keep the government revenue adequate to provide services, and would help to address inequality.

 
That’s a good thought. My ideas are similar in that I have always believed any corporate tax cut should be somehow tied to how well a business treats its employees. If the government can’t so a good job of providing a safety net then corporations and small businesses are all we have left.
 
Put your political hat on? How likely is that with all of the Democrat billionaires Frumi just lectured us about?

[kaldridgewv2211]

Quote from Nutty Buddha

Quote from dergon

Given a magic wand I would markedly lower the US corporate tax rate in order to encourage businesses to onshore in the united states.

I would make up the revenue by taxing the shareholders …. by making cap gains and dividends equal to income tax while making the income tax rate more progressive.

That would be good for business and good for economic growth, would keep the government revenue adequate to provide services, and would help to address inequality.

That’s a good thought. My ideas are similar in that I have always believed any corporate tax cut should be somehow tied to how well a business treats its employees. If the government can’t so a good job of providing a safety net then corporations and small businesses are all we have left.

Put your political hat on? How likely is that with all of the Democrat billionaires Frumi just lectured us about?

I’d like to see that tax on high frequency trades too.

[kayla.meyer_144]

A tax on high frequency trading would be a good thing. It has no inherent value except for the traders & houses who have both the means to see changes of values in fractions of a second and the means to take advantage of that time increment not available to everyone else. Everyone else who have to plod along in 10 minute delayed postings or “real time” that has no comparison to computer times and reactions even if lagging by seconds.

[btomba_77]

Biden is planning on meeting (separately) with Manchin and Sinema later today to discuss the pending reconciliation package, according to a person familiar. The first big opportunity for those three major players to engage directly on the $3.5 trillion package, person says.

[clickpenguin_460]

Republicans could see it as a win-win.
 
If they don’t pass it – win
If they do pass it – will be terrible for the country and Repubs will easily take over in 2022 and 2024 (see 1994 and 2010 after huge Dem $$$ bills)
 
Only bad thing is as we all know – once you start to give away something for free, you can’t take it back. 
 
I don’t see how any rational person (who isn’t a selfish stakeholder) could possiblty think 3.5 trillion dollars mostly spent on things we don’t need + all the things that make no difference (climate stuff) + plus amnesty for illegals (if Parliamentarian says okay) is a good idea. You would have to believe that money truly grows on trees and you’re selfishly protected from the fallout – which I think is what liberals must believe.
 
Obamacare looks like sound policy compared to this thing. 

[btomba_77]

The dem reconciliation package *much* more popular than say the ACA or the Trump tax cuts.   (Multiple polls have it at over 60% approval … compared to both Trump tax cuts in the 20s and the ACA in the 30s)
 
Maybe GOP messaging turns opinion against it, but the great majority of the provisions have broad support as do the progressive taxation measures.
 
I wouldn’t put much stock in counting on passage being a lodestone on Ds.
 
 
 

[kaldridgewv2211]

More hacking on networks of food producers. 2nd time this year and this has to be OKd by Putin. Time to drop the carrots and use the stick.

[link=https://www.axios.com/russian-hackers-target-iowa-farm-co-op-60857f6d-f4f2-4b08-bf8e-a332a3dd3c34.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_content=economy-business-russianhackersiowa]https://www.axios.com/rus…ess-russianhackersiowa[/link]

[btomba_77]

[link=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-09-23/are-democrats-in-disarray-or-just-negotiating]Democrats Are in Disarray, or Maybe Just Negotiating[/link]
Jonathan Bernstein

[b]Threats are flying among party factions and headlines are blaring about Bidens agenda in trouble. Maybe it is, but a lot of the noise is bluffing.

[/b]

To negotiate successfully, the biggest weapon everyone has is the freedom to walk away and oppose the bill, so its rare for anyone to explicitly say that he or she will vote for whatever emerges from the bargaining rounds. Quite the opposite: Theres a strong incentive for everyone to act as if theyll walk away if they dont get their way. Members can take that too far, especially in negotiations within one political party; at the very least, party leaders would expect someone who is absolutely a no to make that clear early. But for the most part, all the players know what the game is and expect this kind of scramble.

So everything that any of the players are saying at this point, including the warnings from [link=https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/09/kyrsten-sinema-threatens-infrastructure-bill-biden-build-back-better.html]moderate [/link]lawmakers and [link=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-21/progressives-threaten-debt-ceiling-bill-over-funds-for-israel?sref=etbrkpBG]progressive[/link] factions that theyre willing to derail Bidens agenda, is apt to be part of the negotiations. That includes what they say they want and why they want it, as well as any public (or semi-public) internal vote counts by party leaders. Capitol Hill reporting these days is excellent far, far better than it was 30 or 40 years ago but journalists cant report a conclusion that doesnt yet exist.
 
Ill venture just a few speculative (and contradictory) thoughts about the incentives involved right now. On the one hand, the fact that Democrats have voted for a budget resolution that precedes the reconciliation bill should make it more likely that theyll eventually agree to something. After all, if theres no final bill to pass, then Democrats leave themselves open to Republican attacks based on that budget resolution and its theoretical support for a $3.5 trillion bill without actually having any accomplishments to brag about in return. And the sprawling nature of the bill means that everyone will have something to tout if it passes.

[/QUOTE]
 

[btomba_77]

[h1][b]Five House Republicans Now Back Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill[/b][/h1]  
Five House Republicans have announced they will back the bipartisan infrastructure bill when it comes up for a vote next week despite the GOP leadership whipping members against it, [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/house/573679-house-republican-comes-out-in-support-of-bipartisan-infrastructure-bill]The Hill[/link] reports.

( that could buy Pelosi a bit of breathing room to let a few of progressives vote NO to burnish their cred while still knowing the bill passes)
 

[btomba_77]

[link=https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/25/politics/house-budget-committee-biden-economic-agenda/index.html]https://www.cnn.com/2021/…omic-agenda/index.html[/link]

House budget committee pass reconciliation bill. One moderate democrat votes no.

[btomba_77]

[b]Two House Moderates Back $3.5 Trillion Plan[/b][/h1]  
Two of the nine House centrists who demanded Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) bring the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill to the floor by Monday are now publicly promising to vote for the separate $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package, [link=https://www.axios.com/scoop-centrists-back-35t-package-0cd900b0-b230-43d6-b9c4-6955b3cd1bc7.html]Axios[/link] reports.
 
By explicitly announcing their support for a big package targeting climate change and expanding the social safety net, Reps. Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX) and Filemon Vela (D-TX) are trying to convince progressives to vote for the infrastructure bill this week.

 

[btomba_77]

Pelosi says bipartisan bill vote on Thursday.

[btomba_77]

[link=https://thehill.com/homenews/house/574183-congress-shows-signs-of-movement-on-stalled-biden-agenda]https://thehill.com/homen…n-stalled-biden-agenda[/link]

The Hill: 
Congress shows signs of movement on stalled Biden agenda[/h1]

Congressional Progressive Caucus Chairwoman [link=https://thehill.com/people/pramila-jayapal]Pramila Jayapal[/link] (D-Wash.) spoke by phone and texted several key moderates, including Sen. [link=https://thehill.com/people/kyrsten-sinema]Kyrsten Sinema[/link] (D-Ariz.) and Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas). Biden held a conference call with the two top Democrats on Capitol Hill, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader [link=https://thehill.com/people/charles-schumer]Charles Schumer[/link] (D-N.Y.) 
 
And some liberals, who have been the driving force demanding a robust package expanding safety net programs and tackling climate change, began floating numbers much lower than the $3.5 trillion initially sought by Pelosi and House Democrats. 

There was also notable movement Monday on the initial liberal demand by lawmakers that the larger social spending bill must pass through the Senate before House progressives will support the bipartisan infrastructure bill on Thursday. Democratic leaders have been scrambling to secure a commitment from centrist Sens. [link=https://thehill.com/people/joe-manchin]Joe Manchin[/link] (D-W.Va.) and Sinema that theyll support some version of the social spending bill. Some progressives such as Huffman said such a gesture would be enough to win their vote on infrastructure. 

[/QUOTE]
 

[satyanar]

Thanks for making me
smile dergon.

[btomba_77]

Manchin starting to lay down his cards …

he wants a tax overhaul to address the Trump tax disaster before doing reconciliation spending.

Good chance Pelosi scrubs the vote on the bipartisan bill as the Senate haggles.

[btomba_77]

Just a reminder that Biden wants [b]both[/b] bills ….

[link=https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/30/white-house-progressives-manchin-sinema-514775]https://www.politico.com/…-manchin-sinema-514775[/link]

[h2]White House gives a wink to progressives as they threaten Bidens infrastructure bill[/h2]

[b]Progressives in the House are revolting. Inside the White House, theyre welcoming it.

[/b]

Ultimately, the White House wants to see the infrastructure bill passed [i]when [/i]it is brought up. But the idea that it would be comfortable with an effort by a portion of its own party to delay and put into question one of the presidents most important initiatives would have been unheard of in previous administrations. These, however, are not normal times. And this is hardly a normal legislative calendar.
 
 
Without any material commitments from their moderate counterparts, progressives in the House have vowed to tank the bipartisan infrastructure package, believing that if it were to pass they would be removing whatever leverage they still had to ensure the reconciliation bills passage. They argue that both plans are part of Bidens economic agenda a point that the White House has increasingly echoed in public statements as well.
 
 
The White House is convinced progressives end goal is still aligned with theirs and see the pressure theyre exerting as ultimately helpful rather than damaging.

[/QUOTE]
 

[clickpenguin_460]

Do you truly not understand 3.5T is really more like 5-8T and that it will either totally ruin this country or have to be significantly repealed in 2024?

Or do you just really not care because you get yours in your bubble and screw everyone else as long as you have the feels?

Also, the last 2 times Dems got hammered in the midterms wasnt because they didnt pass something, it was because they passed huge spending bills.

The best thing for the country is to take all the leftover covid money and use it for infrastructure. No new spending is needed. The economy is a mess already.

The only people who support a bill like this are ones who know the economy is bad right now and that their bill will shove it into complete chaos and get people to consider their cradle to grave socialism.

[kaldridgewv2211]

the country needs to spend money on infrastructure.  I have no doubts about that.  
 
Never hear many complaints when we run up the deficit to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

[btomba_77]

Manchin top line number is $1.5T

news reports coming now that Chuck Schumer has known this for months and signed off that he understood

hes been sticking to the bigger number hoping Manchin would budge

i say $1.2 bipartisan plus $1.5 T on social is still huge legislation

take
it

[kayla.meyer_144]

Senema?

[ruszja]

Quote from dergon

Manchin top line number is $1.5T

news reports coming now that Chuck Schumer has known this for months and signed off that he understood

hes been sticking to the bigger number hoping Manchin would budge

i say $1.2 bipartisan plus $1.5 T on social is still huge legislation

take
it

 
Throw in a broadband project for rural WV and you can get him to sign off on 2T.

[btomba_77]

Quote from fw

Quote from dergon

Manchin top line number is $1.5T

news reports coming now that Chuck Schumer has known this for months and signed off that he understood

hes been sticking to the bigger number hoping Manchin would budge

i say $1.2 bipartisan plus $1.5 T on social is still huge legislation

take
it

Throw in a broadband project for rural WV and you can get him to sign off on 2T.

prescient ….
 
[b]Biden Floats $2 Trillion Reconciliation Bill[/b][/h1]  
President Biden, meeting with House Democrats on Capitol Hill on Friday, indicated they must further delay a final vote on a $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill and scale back his $3.5 trillion social spending package to around $2 trillion range if either is to pass, [link=https://www.axios.com/biden-floats-roughly-2-trillion-price-tag-for-reconciliation-08740ed0-2db3-4ce7-8088-2a1d36644e38.html]Axios[/link] reports.

 

[satyanar]

Quote from dergon

Manchin top line number is $1.5T

news reports coming now that Chuck Schumer has known this for months and signed off that he understood

hes been sticking to the bigger number hoping Manchin would budge

i say $1.2 bipartisan plus $1.5 T on social is still huge legislation

take
it

 
Agree

[clickpenguin_460]

Quote from DICOM_Dan

the country needs to spend money on infrastructure.  I have no doubts about that.  

Never hear many complaints when we run up the deficit to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

 
Considering the share of taxes the “wealthy” pay continues to increase, this is a garbage comment.
 
Not to mention the fact that we don’t have a tax problem, we have a spending problem. 
 
As I’ve said before, eliminating about half of the federal departments and slashing the budget of the rest by about 40% would make us a MUCH better country and everyone would be WAY happier in that world than a world where everyone is taxed out their a$$ and has to rely on the government for everything.
 
There is nothing worse than something that is run by the government.  Nothing.  Only big universities can even come close.
 
This is the greatest country that ever existed and we didn’t get here through taxes and government programs.  Why ruin the successful method?
 
 

[btomba_77]

Two senators cannot be allowed to defeat what 48 senators and 210 House members want. We must stand with the working families of our country. We must combat climate change. We must delay passing the Infrastructure Bill until we pass a strong Reconciliation Bill.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), on Twitter.

(Someone might want to tell Sanders that 52 senators can absolutely defeat what 48 senators want.)

[kayla.meyer_144]

David Brooks makes a nice breakdown on the need and importance of the infrastructure bills, to help those in need and to help correct past policies that disadvantaged and made things more difficult for the middle class and lower class pushing up advantages and money to the upper income groups.
 
[link=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/30/opinion/federal-spending-democrats.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2…pending-democrats.html[/link]
 

I can practically hear the spirits of our ancestors crying out the ones who had a core faith that this would forever be the greatest nation on the planet, the New Jerusalem, the last best hope of earth.
 
My ancestors were aspiring immigrants and understood where the beating heart of the nation resided: with the working class and the middle class, the ones depicted by Willa Cather, James Agee, Ralph Ellison, or in The Honeymooners, The Best Years of Our Lives and On the Waterfront. There was a time when the phrase the common man was a source of pride and a high compliment.
 
Over the past few decades there has been a redistribution of dignity upward. From Reagan through Romney, the Republicans valorized entrepreneurs, C.E.O.s and Wall Street. The Democratic Party became dominated by the creative class, who attended competitive colleges, moved to affluent metro areas, married each other and ladled advantages onto their kids so they could leap even further ahead.
 
There was a bipartisan embrace of a culture of individualism, which opens up a lot of space for people with resources and social support, but means loneliness and abandonment for people without. Four years of college became the definition of the good life, which left roughly two-thirds of the country out.
 
The Democratic spending bills are economic packages that serve moral and cultural purposes. They should be measured by their cultural impact, not merely by some wonky analysis. In real, tangible ways, they would redistribute dignity back downward. They would support hundreds of thousands of jobs for home health care workers, child care workers, construction workers, metal workers, supply chain workers. They would ease the indignity millions of parents face having to raise their children in poverty.
 
Look at the list of states that, according to a recent analysis of White House estimates by CNBC, could be among those getting [link=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/31/infrastructure-bill-map-which-states-get-the-most-money.html]the most money per capita[/link] from the infrastructure bill. A lot of them are places where Trumpian resentment is burning hot: Alaska, Wyoming, Montana, North and South Dakota.

 
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

Brooks’ opinion aside, the 1st comment is spot on about the electorate’s ignorance of the function and advantages they get from government.
 
There’s a lot of government-hating in this country left over from the Civil War that was largely magnified and spread nationally by Reagan that continues today. Not exactly what the Founders believed they were building. A lot of ignorance about government in this country. The people who are new citizens know more about America and our government than do most Americans who were born here.
 

Holding infrastructure hostage and lumping everything into an omnibus spending bill proposed without educating the electorate and without building consensus is an outrageously stupid strategy. Big omnibus spending bills put Democrats in purple areas at risk. What the progressive Democrats do not understand is that most Americans are entirely ignorant about the benefits of the public sector that already impact their own lives.
 
E.g., I’d wager that 80% of SBA loan recipients do not know those loans are backed by the federal government.
 
They just do not know what government does. David knows. They don’t. It is inherently harder to convince someone like that to pay more for a government they don’t understand than it is to convince them they should be taxed less. And the progressives are never willing to do the groundwork of educating the public.

 
What I also fear is that like the ACA, should both bills pass that provides many advantages to the public, there will be a substantial enough number who are hostile to the bills while gladly accepting the benefits who will remain hostile without putting 2+2 together. You know the type, “Keep your government hands off my Social Security and Medicare!”
 
Ignorance is the new black.
 
 

[satyanar]

Quote from Frumious

Brooks’ opinion aside, the 1st comment is spot on about the electorate’s ignorance of the function and advantages they get from government.

 
Here’s where you lose me Frumious. Why should we leave Mr. Brooks’ opinion “aside” if he is making excellent points about the importance of attaining the goals you, I and he support? Shouldn’t we all work on this together if it is so important? Why cast aside his opinion that; “Holding infrastructure hostage and lumping everything into an omnibus spending bill proposed without educating the electorate and without building consensus is an outrageously stupid strategy.” when he might be right? Too afraid of the loss of political power that would come with doing the right thing?
 
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

??? You lost me. The post is self-explanatory and says nothing about casting Brooks’ opinion aside as in “I don’t agree with Brooks.” How do you get that when I posted agreement in the 1st place?
 
Read the 2nd post & ask a question that is not contradictory to what I posted in both or either. The 2nd post is very clear what I meant.
 
Did you read the post?

[satyanar]

Yes Id did. I guess I am not comprehending what you meant by adding Brooks opinion aside

My bad. I should have asked. It would be a big mistake if I have done anything to harm the more convivial relationship I am trying to cultivate.

[satyanar]

Quote from Frumious

??? You lost me. The post is self-explanatory and says nothing about casting Brooks’ opinion aside as in “I don’t agree with Brooks.” How do you get that when I posted agreement in the 1st place?

Read the 2nd post & ask a question that is not contradictory to what I posted in both or either. The 2nd post is very clear what I meant.

Did you read the post?

 
Thank you for explicitly stating that your intention was not to imply you don’t agree with Brooks. You and I have a tough time understanding each other. I should follow my own advice and not jump to conclusions when I read something I may have misinterpreted. 
 
I will take that to mean that you agree that “Holding infrastructure hostage and lumping everything into an omnibus spending bill proposed without educating the electorate and without building consensus is an outrageously stupid strategy.”?
 
I do. It would surprise me if you did but maybe I really don’t understand you very well. Since I did not think you would agree with the statement and chose to use the word “aside” and then highlight the rest of the paragraph about ignorance, I thought perhaps this was your way of coming to grips with conflicting ideas.
 
I am glad I was wrong. I am not glad I made the mistake if it furthered your resentment of me.

[kaldridgewv2211]

if we can trim down government to pay stuff let go.  We don’t need all the fluff positions.  Like KAC was told to get stepping from a board of visitors.  WTAF is a board of visitors.  If KAC was on it we don’t need it.  All of that BS needs to go.

[btomba_77]

[b] Biden Re-Links Infrastructure and Reconciliation Bills[/b]

President Biden told the House Democratic caucus that bipartisan infrastructure package aint going to happen until we reach an agreement on the next piece of legislation, Punchbowl News reports.

Said Biden to reporters: It doesnt matter when. It doesnt matter whether its six minutes, six days or six weeks. Were going to get it done.

At the same time the progressives move a bit too

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) told reporters she would not necessarily insist on a Senate vote on the budget reconciliation package before allowing progressives to vote for the infrastructure bill.

Said Jayapal: If theres something else thats short of a vote that gives me those same assurances, I want to listen to that.

[btomba_77]

House passes 30-day surface transportation funding extension to prevent lapse amid infrastructure negotiations

[satyanar]

Quote from Frumious

David Brooks makes a nice breakdown on the need and importance of the infrastructure bills, to help those in need and to help correct past policies that disadvantaged and made things more difficult for the middle class and lower class pushing up advantages and money to the upper income groups.

 
Glad you posted this. David Brooks is my favorite of the political commentators. I have stated that many times here. He and I have a lot of opinions in common.

[btomba_77]

Im so old that I remember when $2 to 2.5 trillion would be pretty big and bold.
Former Obama adviser David Axelrod
 

[satyanar]

Reading through the rest of the threads in this forum reminded me why I never used to participate. Its just a bunch of angry hobby posting with no potential solutions.

I believe one of my first forays into this place was to tell people about an organization nolables.org

They support the Problem Solvers caucus. The problem solvers are the bipartisan group that is working to secure an infrastructure deal.

I know they are a PITA for the progressive caucus. Its hard but its the right thing to do.

[btomba_77]

Pelosi sets new deadline for bipartisan bill vote …Oct 31

[satyanar]

Shes losing touch. My progressive friends have had enough.

[btomba_77]

Meh. Delaying a vote until 10/31 is a concession [b]to[/b] the progressives because it keeps the bipartisan plan and the reconciliation plan linked.
 
 
I have some liberals in my social media (you might find this hard to believe but I am actually pretty much right in the middle of the Democrats party spectrum) who are posting Manchin and Sinema memes with a sentiment of “just tell those two to get with the program and vote yes.”   That seems out of touch with reality to me.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Quote from dergon

I have some liberals in my social media (you might find this hard to believe but I am actually pretty much right in the middle of the Democrats party spectrum) who are posting Manchin and Sinema memes with a sentiment of “just tell those two to get with the program and vote yes.”   That seems out of touch with reality to me.

What exactly are Sinema’s objections? I am not clear what they are and I’ve heard no one including Sinema herself explain. And I’ve not read her presenting any road for her support. She being a former Green Party member, one might cynically believe she has no core beliefs other than now liking her newly found power and celebrity not to mention corporate donations.
 
As for Manchin’s, it’s seems more about the coal & fossil fuel industry support than anything else. But he has at least said words that might present an opening for his support for infrastructure.