4371

Well, he is a dick, so maybe he really means he’s for nothing. I think the message right now is that there isn’t going to be a deal tomorrow, and the House will have to vote on the BIP without a deal on the rest.

4372

Time for Pelosi to do some Pelosi-ing.

4373

We’re all MMTers now.

4374

the House will have to vote on the BIP without a deal on the rest.

You bet your sweet Bippy.

4375

Or they don’t vote on anything because the Progressives can see they’ll be thrown under the bus and the whole Biden agenda goes down the toilet, the Republicans win in 2022, Trump (or a clone thereof, but slightly smarter and less lazy) gets elected in 2024, and the whole American Experiment is a failure because the GOP will fix it so they can never lose those pesky “elections” again.

4376

This is what happens when a large portion of your political base is now made of crypto currency crackpots who don’t understand how money works.

4377

This is the part nobody seems to understand, and I am not sure why Manchin seems so hell bent on pressing this fallacy. The Infrastructure Act isn’t adding $3.5 trillion in new spending without any provision for revenue to offset that spending like Manchin claims.

Unlike the Tax Cut and Jobs Act the GOP and Trump were so proud of (which literally was a deficit only bill as the supposed “tax base increase” that cutting corporate taxes by a third was supposed to generate never materialized, and now COVID has likely killed even the seedlings of any such economic growth, resulting in nothing but massive lost tax revenue…i.e. DEFICIT), the Infrastructure Bill has provisions for increasing tax rates (rolling back a lot of the aforementioned TC&J Act cuts) and realizing additional revenue to help offset the cost. These provisions are part of why the GOP is so adamantly opposed to the bill (“oh nos, actually taxing corporations and the rich?! How will the economy ever survive?!”) along with the fact that it would be a massive win for Biden and the Democrats because the majority of the country actually wants the bill to happen.

Manchin acting like this is reckless spending is bullshit, and he is smart enough to know that. He’s angling for concessions. Or maybe he really is dumb enough to kill a bill that would benefit his own constituency as much or more than nearly everyone else in the country.

4378

What Manchin, and others have been complaining about is that’s not means tested. Some Democrats was saying something like 94% of American families were eligible for it. If we want to start raising taxes on the wealthy that stop giving them tax credits. If you are making 200K+ you don’t need a child tax credit.

Which means that some DINKs making 100K in addition to paying for schools via property tax are sending the 200K per year couple $5k/kid. Why?

4379

A critical, election-winning part of that West Virginia constituency is more concerned about sticking it to “AOC and Nancy Pelosi” than benefiting from federal programs, in Manchin’s mind, anyway. After all, Trump, Idiot Extraordinaire, won the state by thirty points or something.

4380

You don’t have to exclude the tax credits, just tax nearly every penny back at the top marginal rate. Just like social security. Everyone gets it, and the idea is to tax most of it back from the wealthy.

Broad based programs are durable because they’re broad based.

4381

I can see this, although I suspect that in the end, the amount of money going to the rich folks for tax credits for kids would be fairly low.

I don’t really mind giving a tax cut to a family making 200k for kids, of we jack up the taxes of the people making over 400k.

4382

Reading Manchin’s statement in its entirety, he’s pretty clearly saying that he is for tax increases on the wealthy and that he is for some new social spending provided it is means tested and it isn’t too much. He’s signaling that there’s a bill he will sign on to. So there is a deal to be made with him, still, though probably not by tomorrow. Sinema is the problem.

4383

Thanks for posting this. He really should have some specifics by now, and maybe he’s communicating those in private, but it would be nice to hear what he’s for. Hell, if I were him, I’d get a list out just to let people know I wasn’t mindlessly stonewalling.

4384

I think the progessives will vote down the BIP this time.

They’re determined to make a stand I think. They’ll accept a compromise, but not nothing.

The best way to stick it to SInema (and a much lesser extent Manchin) is to get more Dems in the Senate willing to nuke the filibuster. Fetterman in PA, and either Jackson or Beasley in NC (though I think Jackson has the better general chances)

4385

Somebody help me with my civics. If the BIP gets voted down, it’ll need to go through both chambers again, right?

4386

Seeing folks vote against a huge bill containing only things they want, is going to be crazy.

4387

I know anything can happen, and maybe this is the time for them to make a stand like this, but if the progressive caucus votes down an infrastructure bill, I will print out and eat these words.

4388

There’s a desperation and anger right now from the more moderate progressives I’ve not seen before.

I’m not sure I agree with it TBH, but they feel that not getting anything done means fascism will win, and that they can vote this down and get better later. Most likely Pelosi doesn’t go to the floor if they do say no, they’ll let Pelosi save face , which is a good move.

I doubt SInema would do the same for Manchin, she tries to be the Dem version of McCain without any intelligence enough to understand McCain (and without any of character or bravery McCain had, and that’s a very low bar for character)

4389

Seconded.

4390

Thanks, Bern.