Cont: The Biden Presidency Part II

[bruto]

Odd... enough progressives voted against it that the Democrats wouldn't have been able to pass it alone, but it passed because some Republicans voted for it... after other Republicans had gone on rants about how bad it had suddenly become...

That's a pleasant surprise, and I hope it bodes better for the future.

 

[Delvo]

Passage of a DP-sponsored bill that progressive Democrats tended to be against and some Republicans were for only bodes well for the future to somebody in one of two categories:
1. Favoring Republican ideas over progressive ideas
2. Liking bipartisanship as a feature of the process (without specifying which way the results point)

I am not in either of those groups. Republican ideas almost always make almost everything worse, progressive ideas almost always would make almost everything better, and bipartisanship just means Republicans getting everything they want while non-progressive Democrats join them on it treat their own party's progressives as The Real Enemy along the way (all while pretending to be progressive because they know that's what the public wants).

 

[Tero]

Bipartisanship always gives a whittled down benefit to citizens. Dental implants? Sure, but you only get one. You will have to go to Tijuana for the second one.

 

[gnome]

There is one inherent benefit on a "half-a-loaf", bipartisan result. It begins to normalize cooperation instead of pure obstruction. Congressional R's are in too much of a habit of voting no on general principle. Breaking that can have many positive results.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

There is one inherent benefit on a "half-a-loaf", bipartisan result. It begins to normalize cooperation instead of pure obstruction. Congressional R's are in too much of a habit of voting no on general principle. Breaking that can have many positive results.

"half a loaf" bartering, in this instance, refers to haggling within the Democratic party itself between the austerity hawks and the more progressive side of the party. Republicans really don't factor into it much as it's a given that they will gleefully obstruct any good legislation during a Democratic presidency.

 

[gnome]

"half a loaf" bartering, in this instance, refers to haggling within the Democratic party itself between the austerity hawks and the more progressive side of the party. Republicans really don't factor into it much as it's a given that they will gleefully obstruct any good legislation during a Democratic presidency.

That's what I mean about it being something positive when a few of them don't.

 

[Delvo]

Bipartisan cooperation on what the rich want has never been in short supply.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

There is one inherent benefit on a "half-a-loaf", bipartisan result.

This isn't half a loaf. This is no loaf. Exactly which bill is where and who thinks what about it and how much it will cost is damn Byzantine by now, but as I understand it this is the infrastructure bill, not the one referred to as the social spending bill. Both were originally part of the same bill, Biden's Build Back Better plan, but it was split into the half that could garner bipartisan support and the half which Democrats would need to pass on their own, with the assurance that this was just for negotiation purposes and that both halves would be advanced at the same time. The latter is what Manchinema has been continually objecting to despite the support of every other Democratic senator. The former bill, the one which was passed, was effectively being used as a hostage by House progressives to keep the latter bill from being dropped entirely. The cooperation from the GOP is not a sudden burst of bipartisan goodwill, but a likely successful move to kill the social spending bill outright.

[ETA] Let me check the news and see where things lie... it appears Ted Cruz is upset at Big Bird. I'm sure progress on the social spending bill is just around the corner.

 

[gabeygoat]

No loaf would be four years of Trump era Infrastructure Weeks that produced nothing. It's not the best for politics, but it was a needed bill.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

No loaf would be four years of Trump era Infrastructure Weeks that produced nothing. It's not the best for politics, but it was a needed bill.

It was a different bill entirely, the passage of which was never in jeopardy, only the timing thereof. Nothing was accomplished other than killing the sister bill by removing progressive leverage to get it passed.

 

[gabeygoat]

It was a different bill entirely, the passage of which was never in jeopardy, only the timing thereof. Nothing was accomplished other than killing the sister bill by removing progressive leverage to get it passed.

I don't know all of the rules, but it always seems to me that splitting up bills would help more pass, and be politically more successful. If you poll individual parts of the big bill, they do well. When they encompass anything and everything it makes it easier to majust call it a massive socialist commie bill and scare people that otherwise would like and benefit from the parts

 

[Horatius]

If you poll individual parts of the big bill, they do well. When they encompass anything and everything it makes it easier to majust call it a massive socialist commie bill and scare people that otherwise would like and benefit from the parts

Yeah, this is definitely a problem. I saw a news story the other day that highlighted how certain Congresscritters were sufficiently opposed to one part of the bill that they'd vote against the whole thing. Like, there are a few who are entirely opposed to letting Medicare negotiate drug prices. There were three or four such items, each opposed by a different group. So they all end up voting against it, even though they would otherwise support everything else in the bill.

But the passing of any bills has become so convoluted, no one wants to go through all that crap dozens of times. So we end up with these omnibus bills, which, although "efficient", hardly ever seem to actually pass.

 

[Random]

Yeah, this is definitely a problem. I saw a news story the other day that highlighted how certain Congresscritters were sufficiently opposed to one part of the bill that they'd vote against the whole thing. Like, there are a few who are entirely opposed to letting Medicare negotiate drug prices. There were three or four such items, each opposed by a different group. So they all end up voting against it, even though they would otherwise support everything else in the bill.

But the passing of any bills has become so convoluted, no one wants to go through all that crap dozens of times. So we end up with these omnibus bills, which, although "efficient", hardly ever seem to actually pass.

It's not that people are not willing to debate dozens of bills, it's that they can't. The Reconciliation process can only be used three times a year. Once to change Federal outlays, once to change Federal revenue, and once to adjust the Debt Ceiling. They can combine two or more of them into one bill, but each can only go through the process once a year.

Since the GOP can block anything they want with the filibuster, the Dems effectively only get one bill a year to enact any of their policies. So everything gets put in the same bill. This is what Manchin is blocking.

 

[Tero]

Manchin is opposed to the gov't giving people stuff. They should just build stuff, contract stuff and so on. Family leave? Unfair. Corporations are people too.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Manchin is opposed to the gov't giving people stuff. They should just build stuff, contract stuff and so on. Family leave? Unfair. Corporations are people too.

Maybe it just needs a change of context. If corporations can be people, people can be corporations. "Family leave?" Don't be silly, we're not socialists, it's a short-term childcare subsidy.

 

[Horatius]

Manchin is opposed to the gov't giving people stuff. They should just build stuff, contract stuff and so on. Family leave? Unfair. Corporations are people too.

I think you're on to something here. If Corporations are people, then the whole corporation can take a week off for family leave. After all, isn't buying another company essentially the same as adopting a child? Everyone needs a week off to get used to their new family situation!

 

[Tero]

I think you're on to something here. If Corporations are people, then the whole corporation can take a week off for family leave. After all, isn't buying another company essentially the same as adopting a child? Everyone needs a week off to get used to their new family situation!

LOL

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I'll be convinced that Corporations are People when a bunch of them get gunned down in a mass-shooting incident.

 

[bruto]

There's cute little kerfuffle going in in our corner of Vermont. It seems the local Republican party decided to host a big "Let's Go Brandon" rally, in Rutland, and to prove how homey and wholesome it all is, they said they'll make a donation to the Brandon Food Shelf (Brandon being a couple of towns up the road).

Unfortunately, combining their classic class with their ongoing ignorance, they forgot to talk to the Food Shelf folks first. Oddly enough, the Food Shelf, reluctant to participate in a rally not only honoring an offensive euphemism, but held by the party at least partly responsible for its needs through its cutting of food assistance to the poor, they refused, and rather publicly too.

Looks like a little addition to the charity list this year.

 

[Armitage72]

There's cute little kerfuffle going in in our corner of Vermont. It seems the local Republican party decided to host a big "Let's Go Brandon" rally, in Rutland, and to prove how homey and wholesome it all is, they said they'll make a donation to the Brandon Food Shelf (Brandon being a couple of towns up the road).

Unfortunately, combining their classic class with their ongoing ignorance, they forgot to talk to the Food Shelf folks first. Oddly enough, the Food Shelf, reluctant to participate in a rally not only honoring an offensive euphemism, but held by the party at least partly responsible for its needs through its cutting of food assistance to the poor, they refused, and rather publicly too.

Looks like a little addition to the charity list this year.

News story here. The promotional material for the rally even intentionally took a shot at President Biden when talking about the donation.

The Brandon Area Food Shelf has rejected accepting a portion of the proceeds generated by the “Let’s Go Brandon!” rally on Saturday.

“I had no knowledge of it, nobody said a word to me, nobody asked me about it, nobody made any suggestions or, I had no knowledge,” said Kathy Mathis, director of the Brandon Area Food Shelf, on Wednesday.

The “Let’s Go Brandon!” rally will is scheduled from 3 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Saturday at Central Park. It’s being put on by the Vermont GOP. Fliers for the event, shared earlier this week on the state Republican party’s social media channels, said a portion of merchandise sales would benefit the Brandon Area Food Shelf, “Because this Thanksgiving under #Biden could be the most expensive EVER!”