In theory, the leverage and Biden’s dealing get Manchin to some point the progressive caucuses in the House and Senate can live with. At that point, the Senate passes a reconciliation budget bill. It goes to the House, and then both bills get passed by the House, in tandem in some way. Could even be a single vote, where passing one deems the other passed as well.
On the other hand, if Manchin digs in his heels and offers nothing more — or Sinema goes her own way — there is no big reconciliation bill. At that point, the progressives in the House have to make a hard decision.
My guess is still that there will be a reconciliation bill with good stuff in it, enough good stuff that the progressives can live with it. But it really all depends on Manchin and Sinema, as it has all along.
138
4575
I’m just curious if anything below the 3.5 trillion would be considered acceptable since they started out with such a ridiculously high number. What was it, 8 trillion?
EDIT: Sorry, it was 6 trillion proposed by Sanders.
Alstein
4576
This is blatantly untrue- they’ve done just about all of the compromising so far.
$8 trillion was the projected total increase in expenditures over the next ten years. I don’t have any idea how much of that was increases in existing program spending vs new program spending, and how much of the latter was this stuff.
Either there is a reconciliation bill the progressives can stomach and pass, or there isn’t. If the latter, they’ll hold their nose and pass the BIP or they won’t. But they can’t do anything but say they won’t pass it now; if they say anything else, or actually pass it, Manchin can safely tell them to go fuck themselves.
Alstein
4578
the BIP isn’t something they are holding their nose for, once they agree on a reconciliation bill, they’ll pass it happily.
What they are trying to avoid is passing that, then the centrists just say you get nothing la la la. THat’s what they can’t stomach and Manchin/Sinema keep moving the goalposts. They won’t vote for BIP until the reconciliation bill passes. They do not trust the right of the party to keep their word (with Sinema that is 100% justified, Manchin has a baseline of trust that he’ll be honest in his dealings with them)
Do you know what “if the latter” means?
Alstein
4580
Was trying to point out that they wouldn’t be holding their nose for it. They’re just withholding their vote for now to push the right-wing Dems into doing what they feel is good for the American people.
Also remember that the bases in their districts will crucify the House members who don’t fight- they are also vulnerable to getting primaried out. It’s actually possible AOC gets a serious challenger on her left in 2022.
I thought you were firmly in the camp that said the progressives were serious; that if there was no satisfactory reconciliation bill, they would refuse to vote for the BIP. I must have misunderstood.
Alstein
4582
They don’t want to say no deal, but they’re willing to if a message has to be delivered that they no longer can be completely walked on by the Manchins and Sinemas. THe fact that no vote was held shows the left held, and that they weren’t out to embarass Pelosi. if they wanted to embarass Pelosi, they would have had her hold the vote then said no, and maybe pulled that stunt Sinema did on the minimum wage months ago.
Biden seems to support this position, he’s not been putting pressure on the left. Obama would have used full might against the left (Biden has learned from Obama’s mistakes)
The question now is whether Manchin and Sinema will risk torpedoing the president’s entire agenda over it. If they do, then they’re pretty much useless and shouldn’t be supported outside of the bare minimum.
America and the Democratic party has changed, the left is no longer the total pushover it was in the Clinton-Obama era that led to Trump.
Biden is saying something between 1.9 and 2.3 is likely, which the progressives will take once they are sure they won’t be stabbed in the back.
Timex
4583
But they, unlike the progressives in the house, have already voted for and passed part of that agenda.
You won’t be able to say that Manchin torpedoed the entire deal, when he already passed half of the deal and the progressives are the ones who stopped it.
They will be the ones who torpedoed the entire deal.
Alstein
4584
Nope, there is a deal in place, supported by the president, it requires all sides to negotiate in good faith.
Are you going to argue seriously that Sinema in particular, and Manchin to a lesser extent, have done things in good faith? You just don’t want the government to help people out this way- you want trickle-down economics and bootstraps.
Timex
4585
Seriously dude, they passed a bill that contributes to solving the problem.
If at the end of the day, the progressives don’t accept that and walk away from getting anything, then that’s on the progressives.
That’s the position that the progrssives are negotiating from. They are threatening to burn everything down if they don’t get what they want.
Half a loaf is better than no bread.
FYI, have seen whispers loud and quiet that we actually do kind of know the final parameters of the two bills.
The first bipartisan bill is $1.2 trillion
The second that will be submitted for reconciliation is probably in the $2 - 2.5 trillion range, probably with a promise to revisit in 2022’s reconciliation if needed.
That’s about 3.2 - 3.7 trillion in needed domestic spending. I know there are very good arguments from progressives for why that’s not enough. There are also good-faith arguments from the center on why that might be too much. But I think that’s where this is going to land.
And it’s not nothing.
Timex
4587
It would be the biggest increase in domestic social spending ever, wouldn’t it?
Alstein
4588
It’s not nothing. The progressives holding the line, and Biden, just as importantly, supporting or at least accepting that strategy is why the number is in that 3.2-3.7 total, instead of the 1.2 the order above justice Dems want.
Sometimes you gotta be tough to make deals, and show that you have a seat at the table as well. That will make folks like the never-Trumpers here weep tears of trickle-down, but that 3.2=3.7 value is a good first down payment on what needs to be done. There was 40 years of damage done to America by the Reagan-Clinton-Obama era. It’s not going to be solved in one blow.
Still plenty of work left to do, but I’d call it a small victory. (the folks to the left of me might not feel that way, but some of them have gone into accelerationist terrirory)
If that’s the outcome, and if Manchin and Sinema are on board, the progressives in the Senate and House will take it. It will be a good deal. And it will also mean that the hardball the progressives have played — and that Biden has helped them play — will have worked.
Manchin’s been in on the record for supporting the BBB off 1.5 trillion for some time. So they’re arguing over 500 billion to 1 trillion, more. If they get the extra trillion, then I suppose their negotiation tactics are worth delaying the infrastructure bill for months and causing all this turmoil. If it ends up $500 billion (over 10 years) I question if it is a good tactic.
I was wrong about them missing a window, although the reason is entertaining. On the Newshour last night I learned that there is a difference between a legislative day and a calendar day. As far as the House is concerned it is still Sept 30th. The Speaker and Senate Majority leader actually decide when a legislative day ends. Evidently, Senator Byrd extended a Senate legislative day for 100 days.
Pretty cool that you get Time Stop as a super power as Speaker and Senate Majority leader!
Alstein
4591
If the progressives can budge off their figures, and they have, originally this was going to be 6-10 Trillion, Manchin can budge from his 1.5.
Both sides have a veto, both sides have to compromise. You’re just used to getting your way all the tme, a
Timex
4592
This was never a reasonable amount in the mind of anyone other than crackpots.
Pelosi has moved the deadline for the BIP to the end of October.
