What?? Aside from inflation, Manchin repeatedly talks about is the length of the benefits vs the real costs and it's his largest single objection to the bill. He was fine with $1.75T as a top line number. The problem was that only funded a few years of benefits but was paid for with 10 years of revenues. From his statement last week: “The American people deserve transparency on the true cost of the Build Back Better Act. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office determined the cost is upwards of $4.5 trillion which is more than double what the bill’s ardent supporters have claimed. They continue to camouflage the real cost of the intent behind this bill. " https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...o_address_manchins_bbb_complaints_146916.html Sen. Joe Manchin yesterday said he won’t support the House-passed Build Back Better legislation because he believes the true cost of the bill is masked with budget gimmickry. One particularly glaring and seemingly expensive problem is the bill’s one-year extension of the expanded child tax credit. https://slate.com/business/2021/12/manchin-democrats-bbb-spending.html But perhaps more importantly, Manchin also disagrees with his colleagues on the very structure of the bill—something that should have been evident for months now to anybody paying a semblance of attention. In order to make room for as many priorities as possible, the House version of BBB reduces the official cost of its programs by setting their funding to expire after a few years. Its child care and pre-K funding, for instance, lasts for just six years. The current child tax credit expansion only lasts for one year. The bill’s fixes to Obamacare would sunset after 2025. Manchin sees all of this temporary spending as a budget gimmick meant to hide the bill’s true long-term cost (since Democrats are counting on the programs being renewed). Instead, he wants each program that’s included to be funded for a full 10 years—which would require passing fewer initiatives, but would likely allow them to be permanent. “If you’re gonna do something, let’s do it, let’s commit to it,“ he told CNN reporter Manu Raju last night. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/01/us/politics/manchin-endorse-framework.html (this is from Nov 1 - so it's nothing new) Mr. Manchin found fault not only with the overall price tag, but the way the bill is structured. Its authors have phased in some policies over time and abruptly ended most of the programs — some of them after a single year — in hopes of showing that over 10 years, the plan would not raise the deficit. But proponents freely admit that they hope that many of those programs will be extended by future Congresses, a common strategy under budget rules but one that Mr. Manchin called dishonest gimmickry that he said would threaten the future of Social Security and Medicare. Manchin has repeatedly stated his key objection to the bill - the problem is no one listened, thinking they'd ultimately win him over with budget gimmicks.
Almost everything here indicates his issues with the BBB is the cost - which is what I said. He's not concerned about the benefits expiring, but rather the cost if they are renewed. The quote from Slate is the lone exception, but is typical of his chicanery - indicate he's willing to play ball, watch Biden and other Democrats make the cuts, and then again refuse to support. The guy has been a bad faith politician since Day 1, and his actions do not merit any benefit of the doubt (which you seem to be giving him based on very minimal evidence). As you noted, the Democrats are having to structure things this way due to Sinema refusing to repeal the taxes. It's not what I would prefer myself, but I see getting all of the programs established will (1) build public support towards making them permanent down the line and (2) allowing Republicans to be the ones to face the music if the programs aren't renewed.
That is two sides of the same coin. More specifically, Manchin is against calculating the cost of running the benefits for 1-3 years against the increased revenue over 10 years, because he suspects (and rightly so) that there will be a push to extend the benefits which will not be covered by the new revenues and will thus require more tax increases.
Yeah man, if you open your eyes a little wider, you will see them CCP pulling those strings behind the Dems to accelerate the demise of your country (if you’re American).
I see a Chinese troll farm. If you’re good maybe you can move up from a rockets message board to YouTube comments.
No it isn't the same side of the same coin. His concern is with the cost and only the cost. He shows no concern whatsoever about the effects once the various programs/benefits run out.
There are plenty of Chinese troll farms on this board man. It takes some intelligence to weed them out.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...230f40-665f-11ec-9702-843352f51d70_story.html How the left’s rage at Joe Manchin crystallizes the Democrats’ 2022 dilemma By Tyler Pager Today at 1:07 a.m. EST From the moment Sen. Joe Manchin III started raising concerns about President Biden’s social spending bill, the outrage hurled at him from some fellow Democrats was pointed and personal. Rep. Cori Bush of Missouri said Manchin’s position was “anti-Black, anti-child, anti-woman and anti-immigrant.” Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota dismissed his reasoning as “bulls--t,” and Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York called Manchin “Exhibit A” of the Democratic Party’s “true problems.” Manchin, for his part, has publicly questioned whether there is still room for his “fiscally responsible and socially compassionate” views in today’s Democratic Party, where the far-left Congressional Progressive Caucus has emerged as a dominant force in the House and the senator from West Virginia is often the party’s lone conservative voice on Capitol Hill. “I would like to hope that there are still Democrats that feel like I do,” Manchin said in an interview with a West Virginia radio station. “Now, if there’s no Democrats like that, then they’ll have to push me wherever they want me.” The intensifying anger directed at Manchin in recent weeks has brought renewed attention to a fundamental divide roiling the Democratic Party over its ideological identity. While Manchin represents an exception among Democrats in Congress — a right-of-center senator from a state that voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump — some in the party fear the bitter feelings toward him mirror Democrats’ broader disconnect with voters outside of liberal urban and suburban enclaves. At stake is whether the Democratic Party in 2022, with control of Congress on the line, has morphed into a far-left force energized by its push for a progressive agenda, or a center-left coalition with a broader appeal in rural and small-town America and other communities with centrist or swing voters. “There are some members in the Democratic Party that don’t understand some of the issues that affect more of the moderate areas in the country,” said former congresswoman Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, who points to far-left rhetoric such as calls to “defund the police” as a factor in her 2020 loss to a Republican challenger in a South Florida district. “It’s easy to take a stance on a far-left progressive issue when you don’t have to talk or reach out to constituents that are just not where you’re at.” Former Michigan governor James Blanchard (D) called the attacks on Manchin evidence of a “classic struggle in our party between the protest wing and the practical wing.” “And in terms of almost every national election, our practical wing wins,” said Blanchard, who was governor from 1983 to 1991. “The protest wing does not, but I think in the House of Representatives, the protest wing has a lot more clout than they‘ve had historically.” Another former Democratic governor, Jim Hodges of South Carolina, attributed the left’s vitriol toward Manchin to the “wide gulf between the sort of MSNBC wing of the party and the average Democratic voter who got Joe Biden elected.” “If we want to embrace strategies where we can actually get moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats and independents, we’ve got a chance of building a strong majority,” Hodges added, “but the language of the left has not been very inclusive of those points of view.” The dissension comes at a crossroads for the Democratic Party, which holds a narrow trifecta in Washington with lawmakers and activists eager to use the window to pass an expansive liberal agenda. But the slim majorities in Congress have forced Biden to find agreement across the ideological spectrum from Manchin to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a self-described democratic socialist. Biden won the Democratic primary as a moderate in a historically crowded field, but some Democrats fear he has been pushed too far to the left by his staff and lawmakers — a development that has elevated Manchin as a key holdout on various pieces of legislation. The president found early success in passing two major bills, but he now needs to trim down his ambitions for the Build Back Better legislation, and even if he gains Manchin’s support in the coming weeks, more skirmishes lie ahead. Liberals are anxious to scrap the Senate filibuster to pass voting rights legislation next year, and Biden has recently endorsed a carveout for that purpose. But Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) remain vehemently opposed to any changes to the procedure, which requires 60 votes to pass most legislation. The larger questions about the Democratic Party also come as Trump continues to have an iron grasp on the Republican Party while pushing it further to the right. Some Democrats see Trump’s dominance as another opening to broaden the party’s big tent by consolidating and expanding on the gains they have made with independent and disaffected Republican voters since 2016. But the ire directed at Manchin has rankled lawmakers and party officials who argue ostracizing the conservative senator from West Virginia is harmful to the party’s tent-building efforts. Moreover, some Democrats argue, the focus on Manchin diverts attention from the fact that Republicans are opposing a plan that would bolster a range of programs to address health issues and climate change without offering any of their own policy solutions. While Manchin has pushed Democrats to pare back the legislation, he has nonetheless indicated a willingness to vote for $1.75 trillion in spending. “It‘s hugely counterproductive,” former senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) said about the attacks on Manchin. “We have to convince people that we’re competent, and no one looks at inner party squabbles as competency on the outside.” She added: “Every time you criticize Joe Manchin, you’re not criticizing Ron Johnson for not wanting to do something about insulin prices.” Not all members of the party’s left flank are ready to lambaste Manchin. Some point to the necessity for the party to include lawmakers like him to hold majorities in Congress. “There’s absolutely room for Joe Manchin in our party, and we ought to be dialoguing with him and understanding his views of rural communities in his state and of Appalachia,” said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who served as a national co-chair of Bernie Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign. But many liberal lawmakers have grown exasperated for being blamed for their party’s struggles, arguing that the party fails to pass policies that polls show are popular, including Medicare for All, a $15 minimum wage and free tuition at public colleges. To that point, after Manchin said he could not support the Build Back Better Act, Democrats circulated polling from a liberal group that showed the bill’s policies were popular in West Virginia. “If we are a big tent as Democrats, which we are, like the country, every voice is as important as the next voice,” said Bowman, the New York representative who was elected to Congress in 2020 after defeating a longtime Democratic incumbent in a primary by running to his left. “And we need to stop blaming progressives in the Squad for all of the problems of the Democratic Party because that is not true.” In her blistering statement accusing Manchin’s position of being “anti-Black,” Bush, who was elected in 2020 after gaining attention as a Black Lives Matter organizer in Ferguson, Mo., said she did not trust his “assessment of what our communities need most.” “When we talk about transformative change, we are talking about a bill that will benefit Black, brown and Indigenous communities,” she said. “Those same communities are overwhelmingly excluded from the bipartisan infrastructure bill. We cannot leave anyone behind.” For decades, moderate and liberal Democrats have squabbled over policy and political strategy, and the debate over the Build Back Better legislation has resurfaced many of the questions the party sparred over in last year’s Democratic primary: Is the party moving too far to the left? Or has it not moved enough? How can the party make inroads with moderate voters? Or should the party focus on boosting turnout in urban areas and building new coalitions with younger, more diverse voters? “The progressives would always say you have to excite people,” said former congressman Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), who retired from Congress in 2011 after serving for 26 years. “We have to take a more progressive position. The moderates would always say you have to win the middle, and nobody was convinced to change their position. But that same discussion would go on every time and with the same people, and that‘s what’s happening now.” Center-left Democrats argue that Biden’s victory in the primary settled those questions and created a model for success. Black voters powered Biden to win the Democratic primary, and moderate and suburban voters helped him overcome Trump’s strength in rural areas. New York Mayor-elect Eric Adams, who defeated several more-liberal candidates in his own primary, further validated their argument that the base of the Democratic Party is much closer to Biden and Adams’s moderate politics than the democratic socialist vision espoused by Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). But Biden’s presidency has amplified the party’s fault lines, and Manchin, in particular, has become the center of much of the agitation. more at the link
Hillary Clinton warns Democrats against far-left turn before 2022 midterms https://nypost.com/2021/12/30/hillary-clinton-warns-progressives-could-cost-dems-at-midterms/ excerpt Former secretary of state and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton appeared to single out progressive lawmakers for criticism in a recent interview, warning that an inability to “get things done” could cost Democrats the House and Senate in next year’s midterm elections. “I think that it is a time for some careful thinking about what wins elections, and not just in deep-blue districts where a Democrat and a liberal Democrat, or so-called progressive Democrat, is going to win,” Clinton told MSNBC’s Willie Geist. “I understand why people want to argue for their priorities. That’s what they believe they were elected to do.” Clinton’s interview with Geist was recorded earlier this month, but parts of it aired Thursday. The former senator from New York added that she was “all about having vigorous debate. I think it’s good, and it gives people a chance to be part of the process. “But at the end of the day it means nothing if we don’t have a Congress that will get things done, and we don’t have a White House that we can count on to be sane and sober and stable and productive.”
It's amazing how willing you are to handwave away what Manchin has actually said since the summer and then act like his concern with the cost is somehow misleading, yes he is concerned with the cost and he has been since last spring. Duh? You also ignore the fact that he wants to actually make certain programs permanent and is the one railing against having the programs run out. "Mr. Manchin found fault not only with the overall price tag, but the way the bill is structured. Its authors have phased in some policies over time and abruptly ended most of the programs — some of them after a single year — in hopes of showing that over 10 years, the plan would not raise the deficit."
He never said that publicly - your quote is being attributed to him by other sources. It’s amazing how so many of you will forgive this piece of **** while demonizing the ones who are actually fighting to make things better for the American people. I keep saying this, but there’s a reason why MLK had so much contempt for moderates like you. You’ll throw every progressive under the bus just so long as your heartbeat doesn’t go up a few ticks and your stock portfolios don’t suffer for a quarter. In the meantime, I’m not going to suffer any distress from your accusations that I’m hand waving here.
Hard not to take advice on how to win from a winner If we'd just listen to this winner, we'd win That a win-win
Is Eric Adams the Democrats’ Next National Star? Spurned by prominent progressives during the campaign, the incoming mayor of New York City is a centrist who could have national appeal. https://www.thebulwark.com/is-eric-adams-the-democrats-next-national-star/ excerpt As a teenager, Adams joined a gang, the 7-Crowns. At fifteen, he agreed to run errands for a dancer and prostitute named Micki when she got injured. But she refused to pay him, so Adams, with the help of his brother, stole her television and a money order. Micki reported the crime to the police, and the brothers were arrested for criminal trespassing. While in custody, the Adams boys were severely beaten by police, an attack that ended only when a black officer intervened. The assault left a lasting impression on Adams. “My brother and I were . . . abused together,” he later told NPR, “and the police officers who arrested us did not hit us all over our body. They just kicked us in our groin repeatedly. . . . [M]y brother left there hating cops. . . . I left there with the belief that it was behind me.” Adams graduated Bayside High School in 1978, “but as life went on, I realized that every time I saw a police vehicle, every time I watched a police show, every time I heard a siren, I relived that [assault]. . . . I understood that there was a demon inside me. And the only way I can get it out is for me to go in, and going in meant becoming a police officer.” To pursue that goal, Adams entered the New York Police Academy from which he graduated in 1984 as the top student in his class. A tenure at the New York Transit Police culminated with a transfer to the New York City Police Department where he enjoyed assignments in Brooklyn’s Greenpoint, Clinton Hill, and Fort Green and Manhattan’s Greenwich Village. Along the way, he earned an associate in arts from New York City College of Technology, a bachelor of arts from John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and a master of public administration from Marist College. In 1995, in reaction to the election of Rudolph Giuliani as mayor, Adams cofounded 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care, an advocacy group meant to address the relationship between the NYPD and the African-American community. He also became active in the Grand Council of Guardians, an organization of African-American law enforcement officers throughout the state. Then, in 2006, when Adams went on television and criticized Mayor Michael Bloomberg, he was investigated by the NYPD. No doubt, opinion of him was affected by his continued involvement in 100 Blacks, which one publication described as “an organization that called out racist policing by the NYPD during the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations.” That same year, Adams retired after 22 years on the police force with a final rank of captain. *** “Eric Adams is what New York City needs right now,” says George Shipley, a veteran Texas-based Democratic operative who helped Ann Richards rise to political stardom. He continues: In the wake of de Blasio, New Yorkers have a preference for someone who has problem-solving expertise. Some members of the New York delegation are long on vision and short on mechanics, but Democrats need to look past the glittery headlines and the save-the-world mentality and get down to brass tacks. Voters want someone who can make the trains run on time—literally. Adams can absolutely do that. And if he does, he will have a very bright future. Kandy Stroud agrees. “Eric Adams has got to be Mr. Nice Guy but at the same time clean up the homeless problem, clean up crime, and bring business back. That’s a tall order. But he has a lot going for him. He’s got personality. He’s got style. He’s a rock star.” To many observers, that description seems right. After all, Adams responded to a diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes—he suffered nerve damage in his feet and hands and lost vision in one eye—by shifting to a plant-based diet, reversing his diabetes in three months and becoming an outspoken advocate for veganism. (He has proposed Meatless Mondays for public school lunches.) He has unapologetically proclaimed his love of hitting New York’s nightspots and vowed to bring back the city’s nightlife, which was all but destroyed by Bloomberg and ignored by de Blasio. He’s a natty dresser with his own personal fashion sense. In short, Adams has created a larger-than-life image for himself all while embracing a pro-business, anti-crime agenda. The Adams example, should he prove to be effective once he settles into office and implements the policies on which he campaigned, can resonate on the national level. At a time when it feels quaint to look back on Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton as models of centrist Democrats who could win, Eric Adams is a reminder that with the right candidate the formula can still work. more at the link
This is simply not true, no matter how many times you say it. He has stated it - you just don't want to listen to it. https://www.axios.com/manchin-child-tax-credit-a743799b-333a-4028-8c04-1b4e54311f85.html Driving the news: Ahead of a phone call with Biden on Monday afternoon, Manchin publicly laid down some of his markers for how big the bill can get — and how to calculate its true costs. “Whatever Congress is considering, we should do it within the limits of what we can afford,” he told CNN’s Manu Raju. “Whatever plan it would be, pre-K, child care and home care, then it should be [over] 10 years, it shouldn't just be one year here, three years here, five years here.” He has openly said he's amenable to something around $1.75T. He's openly said he supports a child tax credit. He's openly said he wants the actual cost to be covered for 10 years. Biden's plan had a 1-yr cost of $185B for the child tax credit. You can do the math and see that was not going to work. Manchin was negotiating to cut other programs and add benefits limits to the tax credit. They couldn't get to agreement. If you put some benefit limits to get the cost down and remove a bunch of other programs, Manchin would support it. But he's not going to support a bill that's funded with 10 years of revenues but does 1 year of benefits. He's made that crystal clear to anyone who listens.
