4189

It’s gotta be something, right? It’s $3.5 TRILLION in spending. Is there really nothing in that giant mountain of money that they are into? How could that be possible?

And even beyond that, even if you didn’t pass the reconciliation bill at all, the bipartisan bill is STILL a huge win for progressives, right?

But really, you honestly think you can’t even get all the democrats to support ANY of the stuff in the reconciliation bill, without holding them hostage? That seems like that bill must be fucking awful then… how you could possibly have 3.5 trillion dollars in new spending that you can’t even get the democrats themselves to support?

I don’t think that’s an accurate description of that bill.

4190

I’ll admit that I don’t know what Manchin or Sinema would or would not vote for. The only thing I’ve read recently is Manchin grumbling about the total cost, not what’s contained within.

4191

Mancoal is “very, very disturbed” about the global warming provisions.

4193

Awwww jeez, that’s like the most important thing in the whole bill! The one thing that I absolutely don’t want them to remove.

4194

Mitch is profoundly grateful for your support, he thinks it’s a pretty good plan too.

4195

Yes, you would think so, but what is it? If you are unable to guess what would satisfy Manchin and Sinema, why should anyone else be able to guess that?

This is from CNN’s recap of yesterday’s meeting with Biden:

White House officials have acknowledged for more than a week that the size of the package would have to be scaled back in order to secure the votes of moderate Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. To what degree, however, and through which programs or priorities, has remained an open question.

There was a discussion in the moderate meeting on Wednesday about whether $2 trillion, or around that level, would be acceptable. But no commitments were made, people involved said.

Biden had an explicit ask for moderates, who have frustrated all involved by not laying out what exactly they would accept on the topline: tell the White House what would work.

The progressives have been quite clear about what they want, but with Manchin and Sinema, it’s a mystery what they want. This is not a problem with ‘the Dems’, or even with ‘the progressives’. You can’t negotiate with yourself. If Manchin and Sinema point to what they can accept, then you’ve got the basis of a negotiation, and you’ll see the progressives engaging in one.

4196

Manchin walks into a Best Buy.

“I’d like to buy some electronics”.
“Certainly, sir, what are you looking for?”
“I’d like to spend about $1000”.
“Ok, but what is it exactly you want to buy?”
“Well, I might be willing to spend $1100, but no more than that”
“But… what is it you actually want?”
“Look, if you’re not willing to negotiate, I don’t know what to tell you”

Outcome: It’s Best Buy’s fault.

4197

I mean, it’s worse. Manchin is saying “I won’t spend $3,500,” and when you ask him what he will spend, he just keeps saying “not $3,500.”

Sinema is saying “talk to the hand.”

4198

The progressives have asked for specifics, they’re willing to negotiate. Sinema - well she probably is too busy looking for another unpaid internship at a winery.

Manchin I think is negotiating.

Another issue, the more the blue dogs attack their own party’s positions, they make their compromises more unpopular, as they make it seem more extreme.

4199

From today’s NYT (boldface is mine):

At the crux of the stalemate is a leadership commitment to a group of moderate Democrats that the House would take up the Senate-passed bipartisan infrastructure bill by Monday. Liberal House Democrats say they will vote down the measure until their priority legislation first clears both the House and Senate.

Those Democrats say the infrastructure bill, which omitted most of their top priorities including major provisions to combat climate change, cannot be separated from the $3.5 trillion package, which contains many of those elements, such as a shift to electric power. Beyond the climate portions, the social policy measure would, among many other things, extend child care and child tax credits, expand free prekindergarten and community college and fortify Medicare.

But key centrists in the Senate have balked at that package, which Democrats plan to push through using a fast-track budget process known as reconciliation that shields it from a filibuster. Senators Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona both voted to begin work on a $3.5 trillion measure, but have since warned they will not support spending that much.

On Wednesday, Mr. Biden urged the holdouts to specify exactly what they would support, so Democrats could coalesce behind a plan that could pass.

“Find a number you’re comfortable with, based on what you believe the needs that we still have, and how we deliver to the American people,” Mr. Manchin said, describing the president’s request. “He was very straightforward in what he asked us to do.”

I feel like I need that “Why not both?” gif in here. Vote on the infrastructure bill, then write, negotiate, haggle through the Reconciliation Bill and get that passed. I understand all of the points that have been made about leverage, but we’ve got one part of this ready to go and another part just at the starting line. Let’s move on what we have.

Also from the NYT article (boldface mine):

On Wednesday, John D. Podesta, who held key White House roles under Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, sent a memo to every Democrat on Capitol Hill imploring them to scale back the $3.5 trillion plan in the interest of compromise, warning that doing otherwise would risk sinking both bills and costing the party control of Congress in next year’s midterm elections.

“You are either getting both bills or neither — and the prospect of neither is unconscionable,” he wrote. “It would signal a complete and utter failure of our democratic duty, and a reckless abdication of our responsibility. It would define our generation’s history and show that, when our time came, we failed, both for Americans now and in the years to come.”

4200

I dunno, because the Democrats in government actually talk directly to them?

It seems like you’ve got a logical fallacy going if you’re trying to draw equivalence between “guy on internet forum doesn’t know the answer” to “no one in the universe knows the answer.”

4201

Sorry, I don’t think you do understand that part about leverage. If the House passes the bipartisan bill, any reconciliation bill will be entirely dictated by Manchin and Sinema. It will be all coal subsidies and, just maybe, an increase in the debt ceiling. Or it will be nothing.

4202

If your position is I don’t have any fucking idea how to make Joe Manchin behave sensibly, I don’t really grasp the basis of your criticism of what some people are trying to do to make him behave sensibly, sorry.

I mean, I’ve just posted the comments of people involved, all of whom are expressing their frustration because Manchin won’t say what he wants. So saying he must want something, give him that is a pretty pointless argument.

4203

Manchin is behaving rationally, but not in a good way. However, he can be negotiated with- if you have leverage.

Sinema I truly worry about, but I doubt she’s totally insane.

4204

You seem to believe that Manchin is in fact a Republican, and doesn’t believe in any Democrat policy positions, but this belief does not match up with his long history in politics.

4205

Correct me, then. What does he want?

He’s a guy who has to get elected in the most Republican state in the union. I’m guessing that, whatever he wants, it doesn’t look much like what progressives want.

4206

I mean that’s what everyone is asking. How do you solve a problem like Joe Manchin? How do you get this clod not to vote it down?

4207

I appreciated that, at least.

4208

By making it too harmful to him not to vote it down, which requires leverage.

also, the folks on the left if they don’t get most of that 3.5T, they’re going to be at risk in their primaries.

4209

In lyrical form please.