Infrastructure, Infrastructure, Infrastructure

Regardless of what was made clear from day one, why did the party not hold Manchin/Sinema hostage while they were undergoing their bipartisan negotiations for the infrastructure bill? It could have been made very clear, "we are following your lead on the infrastructure bill, but in return, you will support our $3.5T reconciliation bill." I mean it seems to me that it would have been wise to make that incredibly clear to those two individuals rather than allowing them the chance to pass the bipartisan $1T bill.

It's politics, this is what it is. You can be sick of it as much as you want, but this is what politics comes down to, the ability to negotiate. If the progressive wing of the party can win a majority of the seats where they don't have to count on moderates to provide legislative victories, then more power to them.

I'm sick of progressives always placing blame on moderates when progressives wouldn't even be in a position to have a shot at these kind of bills without the support of the moderates. Isn't that what compromise is? Why does it have to be bad faith? Aren't they serving their constituents how they best see fit. Personally, I like a lot of the programs that are offered in the $3.5T and I wish more can be done, but also understand that we have a slim majority. You can call me being complacent, but I'm just realistic about the current cards our party has. Sinema/Manchin are not going to support doing away with the filibuster, so let's stop talking about it. I wish they would do it for situational things (such as the voting rights act), but you know, it is what is is.

Powerful post from @DonnyMost

https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/election-day-2020.308180/page-74#post-13199913

 

It doesn't matter if it's a "Real thing", your opposition is making it one.

No, you are still wrong and I still don't support Manchin and Sinema. You just have unrealistic expectations plus some ignorance about how legislation works, and so you are blaming me (moderates) instead of looking at your own shortcomings.

Again.... win in Congress...... Please. Yall are becoming the left wing version of the Tea Party.

The Dems under-performed in 2020 compared to 2018. Turns out "Defend the Police" was music to the GOP's ears.....

You just don't care about reality. The reality is that Manchin and Sinema are the gatekeepers due to the nature of Congress and that was clear the moment we got the results for 2020.

 

All of this was made clear to Sinema and Manchin. Biden said it himself.

To be fair here, it's not all moderates acting as hurdles here. It's two of them, and polls show very clearly that neither Sinema nor Manchin's constituents support their intransigency. Unfortunately, they're in the pocket of donors (big pharm for Sinema and big coal for Manchin) who truly oppose anything that improves the lives of average Americans.

 

Is it possible they just don't support continuing to tack on more to the national debt? Seems like they are willing to compromise, but not go the full length. Sucks to be held hostage, but hope Schumer/Biden/Pelosi can talk to them and get a good reconciliation bill.

From what I read in the news, and this was months ago, it seemed that it was made clear to Sinema/Manchin, but they NEVER committed to voting on it (which tells me they were skeptical). Once again, I hate they are playing politics on some really great programs, but I rather get a good amount of what is proposed than end up with 0.

 

Check this out

Sen. Joe Manchin calls for up to $4 trillion in infrastructure spending as Democrats are poised to control Congress

Manchin at least has changed his tune several times, and I think the fact that the proposed bill was set at $3.5T shows his concerns were taken into account. But then he moved the goalposts.

I'd rather have something rather than nothing as well, but Manchin's real goal here is to torpedo both bills. He and Sinema have very clearly been paid off and are now completing their sabotage.

Edit - I realize this isn't completely apples to apples but the idea that he's concerned about the debt is not supported by his past positions. He isn't looking to compromise but just move the goalposts every time we get close to a vote.

 

Manchin cannot torpedo the bipartisan infrastructure bill, it has already passed the Senate. It is the progressive members of the House that are threatening to torpedo that one. Manchin is saying he won't pass the massive party line "infrastructure" bill in its current state. The left has tied the fate of the two bills together after saying they would not do so (as I said many pages ago and was told it wasn't happening). I hope neither side blinks, both bills fail to pass and the new congress can stop explosive spending, but I don't expect it will happen. They will give in to Manchin, maybe tick him up to 2 trillion dollars on the "infrastructure" bill.

 

It's funny that someone like Machin believes in taking on debt as an investment in private business because he understands return on investment. So when it comes to private wealth opportunities he is all for taking on debt for future return on investment.

That's the problem with "fiscal conservativism". They account for the upfront cost and not the long term return on investment that occurs when you invest in regular folks in things like making it easier to raise children with affordable healthcare and free early childhood education.

I can make a case that progressivism is fiscally conservative as the stuff progressives want have a large return on investment in the long run and future health of the nation overall.

You help rise up more people by investing to go from lower middle class to upper middle class, that can significantly increase tax revenue and that's how it's paid for. But the fruits of these efforts takes years to decades since it's mostly investment in children and children take a long time to become adults and contribute hence why the modern political rhetoric is so toxic because voters vote by literally seeing what GDP growth numbers and unemployment numbers are month to month. That's not how to run a god damn country.

Treatment of government like a capitalist entity where we only care about quarterly returns and upfront costs and don't give a **** about 10 or 20 years from now isn't sustainable.

And if politicians like Machin cared about lost tax revenue he can also advocate for substantially increasing the resources of the IRS so they don't only audit us normal folks as our tax filings are simple and can easily be automated. Hence why the wealthy get away with tax evasion so often as there just isn't the resources available to hold detailed comprehensive audits on them in a consistent manner. Hence why we lose an estimated half a trillion dollars in tax revenue to evasion per year. I'm sure properly resourcing the IRS would help the sovereign debt. I'm sure rising the lower middle class and poor to higher income and wealth brackets will also help the sovereign debt.

 

I'll up you to 2.5 trillion lol

Either way, Dems already had one reconciliation this year. Bit greedy to front load another one, but why not...

 

Reading over the article, it would seem that Manchin is more concerned about actual infrastructure than anything else that is being included in the reconciliation bill as infrastructure (i.e. childcare). Child care is super expensive, I wish he would re-think his position on that (just guessing what he is balking at). I wouldn't consider that moving the goal posts if he actually did support a pure infrastructure bill. He did suggest to raise the capital tax rate which is a good thing and raising taxes for the top income earners which seems to be in line with progressives. Surely there are ways to amend the needs of the progressive wing versus the moderate wing and arrive at a good compromise. I think Manchin has one idea of what infrastructure is versus what progressives believe infrastructure entails. I'm with the latter of course, since I do believe this world is really expensive, and it sucks for those at the bottom.

 

I'm cool with compromising on the total amount. Take the win, show benefits, and see what needs additional work down the road.

 

I’m beginning to think that Joe Manchin isn’t the brightest crayon in the box the more he talks, but he is who he is. It’s Sinema here that is just bizarre. It’s clear that Pelosi and Schumer are going to have to dig into their bag of corruption themselves to get her onboard. Given how weird she is, maybe there’s a way to stroke her ego by getting her a co producer gig in Hollywood or something. Maybe a guaranteed spot on the View when she’s inevitably primaried? I dunno… something to combat the obvious corruption she is taking part in to try and tank the bill on behalf of billionaires who have her number.

 

Joe Biden and Harris specially calling out their conflict of interest and corruption publicly could do a lot.

 

I think there is a real fear within the top brass that at least Sinema could move to caucus with the Republicans or at least move to Independent. This is one of the downsides to our base of voters not being in a brainwashed cult. Trump had the power to go public with threats and intimidation because those Senator and House members knew that if Trump bashed them publicly... they were Antifa, and need to be destroy and sometimes hung (see Mike Pence).

Sinema knows that if she defies Biden and the Dem agenda then yes she'll be unpopular as hell, but her life won't be threatened, and she knows that there is an entire safety net of right wing billionaires & corporate interests who will enrich her and her family for generations. For personal financial interests alone it makes all the sense in the world to work to tank the Build Back Better agenda, and put Republicans back in power. And politically if she switched parties... holy sh$t... you think Tulsi Gabbard is popular with MAGA... wait until they get an embrace from Sinema. I would not be shocked at all if in the case that Sinema was to switch parties that Sinema would maybe even be a candidate to run as Trump's VP. That cult of a party is that kind of party.

The one question here is what does Kyrsten Sinema actually believe in? What motivates her as a person? If she truly is in it for herself, and to make money... we are all in trouble, and going public to attack her corruption would be a horrible move that could throw the majority of the Senate to Mitch McConnell overnight.

I think an LBJ approach of doing that behind the scenes and candidly getting real with her behind the scenes makes more sense. If they have to make a deal with a left leaning billionaire to get her a cushiony job if she loses her re-election then so be it. That's the unfortunate reality when you have corruption sanctioned by the Supreme Court. With a 50-50 majority, there is just no way to protect ever single senator from the massive amounts of corrupt entanglements lobbyists will throw their way to get them to avoid taxing the rich which is necessary in order to legislate.

 

One problem that's getting overlooked in all this is that Sinema and Manchin are not really on the same page. Maybe on toplines, but Manchin really wants to gut Trump tax cuts as the pay-for, which most Dems are likely fully on board with. Sinema seems very opposed to tax hikes in general. I actually think Sinema is a much bigger issue than Manchin in the end.

 

Sinema is highly replaceable...