President Biden's Infrastructure Plans

[Swammerdami]

I give KS a very wide understanding here. She's in a difficult spot. She represents an area that is to the right of the party that she is in. Furthermore, she (and Joe) are taking the blame for the difficulty in passing democratic policies. But the real problem for the dems is the razer thin margins that we have to deal with. If democrats want to pass democratic legislation that the right hates, then bust your ass and increase the democratic majority congress and the senate. The real problem here is that our tent isn't big enough. And to try to exclude people at the edge of the tent, is crazy!

Yes, But ... If the R's had a majority this razor-thin do you think they'd have any problem coming together and passing an agenda that their leaders wanted? You don't have to wonder: you can look at the record. Betsy DoVos was confirmed as Secretary to Destroy Public Schools despite that many Rs understood she was an incompetent criminal who wanted to use that post to serve her friends' agenda of greed and brainwashing kids. This was even formalized into the "Hastert Rule": Every GOPster must vote for a motion that a majority of GOPsters support.

I'll guess that there are two GOP Senators who would vote in favor of democratic elections or in favor of a path to citizenship if they could vote secretly. But they can't, so they vote as instructed by their party leaders. To counter this, wouldn't it be nice if DINOs like JM or KS had similar party loyalty?

 

[Swammerdami]

Hear here! Mostly that bolded part. It's going to be a LOT more difficult on average for a Democrat to vote in 2022 than for a Republican.

How do you figure that? Laws like the one recently enacted in Georgia apply to everyone. Do you think Dems are particularly susceptible to dehydration or something?

Here's a simple test to see if you have the slightest clue.

I. Which group of voters is more likely to want to drink water while they wait?
. . . A. Those waiting in short lines.
. . . B. Those waiting in long lines.

II. Which party, when in power, likes to under-equip voting stations in precincts likely to vote for the other Party?
. . . A. QAnon.
. . . B. Other ____
. . . C. Don't know. Don't care.

This is an "open-book" exam. You may ask other TFTers for help.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Maybe they should focus on convincing the rest of America of the virtues of fighting climate change and not just one Senator.

I wonder what subsidizing people to have more children has to do with fighting climate change? Because majority of the $3.5T Spendapalooza is about that. Only a small part has to do with climate, and some of that is silly stuff like the "civilian climate corps".

I would definitely prefer they dump the child subsidy in favor of keeping the climate change parts of the bill. If only Joe Manchin were getting funded by the right industry for that.

 

[Elixir]

Hear here! Mostly that bolded part. It's going to be a LOT more difficult on average for a Democrat to vote in 2022 than for a Republican.

How do you figure that? Laws like the one recently enacted in Georgia apply to everyone. Do you think Dems are particularly susceptible to dehydration or something?

Here's a simple test to see if you have the slightest clue.

I. Which group of voters is more likely to want to drink water while they wait?
. . . A. Those waiting in short lines.
. . . B. Those waiting in long lines.

II. Which party, when in power, likes to under-equip voting stations in precincts likely to vote for the other Party?
. . . A. QAnon.
. . . B. Other ____
. . . C. Don't know. Don't care.

This is an "open-book" exam. You may ask other TFTers for help.

I think you can assign the presumptive "F".

No need to dive into questions like

III. Why do you suppose Republicans rushed to enact all those voter suppression laws?
. . . A. Because they wanted to prevent the kind of fraud that didn't exist in 2020
. . . B. Because they wanted to help people vote
. . . C. Because they thought it would help Republicans gain or retain power by suppressing the Democrat vote

***EXTRA CREDIT IF YOU PICKED "C", Derec!

 

[southernhybrid]

I give KS a very wide understanding here. She's in a difficult spot. She represents an area that is to the right of the party that she is in. Furthermore, she (and Joe) are taking the blame for the difficulty in passing democratic policies. But the real problem for the dems is the razer thin margins that we have to deal with. If democrats want to pass democratic legislation that the right hates, then bust your ass and increase the democratic majority congress and the senate. The real problem here is that our tent isn't big enough. And to try to exclude people at the edge of the tent, is crazy!

Yes, But ... If the R's had a majority this razor-thin do you think they'd have any problem coming together and passing an agenda that their leaders wanted? You don't have to wonder: you can look at the record. Betsy DoVos was confirmed as Secretary to Destroy Public Schools despite that many Rs understood she was an incompetent criminal who wanted to use that post to serve her friends' agenda of greed and brainwashing kids. This was even formalized into the "Hastert Rule": Every GOPster must vote for a motion that a majority of GOPsters support.

I'll guess that there are two GOP Senators who would vote in favor of democratic elections or in favor of a path to citizenship if they could vote secretly. But they can't, so they vote as instructed by their party leaders. To counter this, wouldn't it be nice if DINOs like JM or KS had similar party loyalty?

Republicans are like sheep. They will almost always vote in group, regardless of how they may personally feel about a bill.

Democrats are like cats. It's much harder to herd cats than it is to herd sheep.

LBJ got a lot done because he had a large majority of Dems in Congress. It's much more difficult these days, unless every lazy liberal leaning voter actually makes an effort to vote. Even with the new, unneccesary restrictions, it's not that difficult to vote in Georgia. Anyone can ask for an absentee ballot without having a reason. Almost everyone has a voter ID because you can't even see a doctor in Georgia without a state ID or driver's license. People just don't pay attention. I once asked a young coworker if she had voted. She said she had to work that day, so she couldn't. I told her that we had 3 full weeks of early voting and if she would start paying attention a little, she would know that. That is the problem. Voter apathy is a bigger problem than voter suppression, imo.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Hear here! Mostly that bolded part. It's going to be a LOT more difficult on average for a Democrat to vote in 2022 than for a Republican.

How do you figure that? Laws like the one recently enacted in Georgia apply to everyone. Do you think Dems are particularly susceptible to dehydration or something?

They're more likely to be in precincts with long lines.

 

[lpetrich]

Congresswoman Cori Bush on Twitter: "Why means testing is bad — in 3 simple steps:
1) It costs a ton to set up and administer, which
2) Takes money from the program itself, which
3) Leads to many who need the program the most — often Black and brown folks — to be excluded.
No means testing in Build Back Better." / Twitter

Nomad on Twitter: "@RepCori Or to put it another way why means test if it's going to cost a lot of money? Isn't the whole point of means to save taxpayer money? Instead it's just a way 4 upper-class people to act on their prejudices what they think poor people do with money they are given" / Twitter

Just like Charles Babbage and flat-rate postage.

Ԍεοϝϝ on Twitter: ""I didn't come to Congress to continue to give crumbs to my community" @CoriBush (vid link)" / Twitter
then
Nina Turner on Twitter: "Say. That. @CoriBush" / Twitter


Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on Instagram: “We can't negotiate the reconciliation bill down to nothing. …”

We can't negotiate the reconciliation bill down to nothing.

With 8 NYC Members, we wrote to @speakerpelosi and @senschumer to ask them to keep the current level of funding for immigration, public and affordable housing, and transportation in low-income areas.

That means:

$107B to create a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, residents with TPS, essential workers and farm workers.
$80B for public housing and $37B for the National Housing Trust Fund.
$90B to expand rental assistance to 1 million additional households.
$10B for transportation to assist low-income areas.
$4B to reconnect communities like those in The Bronx that have been separated by highways & other old-school infrastructure projects.

How might that reconnection be done? Build lots of pedestrian bridges? Build tunnels through embankments? Build park decks above freeways in trenches? Demolish them outright?

Philadelphia has a bit of park deck over I-95 a few blocks south of Market St., and Boston has a long stretch of it as part of its "Big Dig", its Central Artery project.

As to demolishing freeways, that's been done in some places, like downtown San Francisco.

As to $80B for public housing, will that go for repairing existing housing? Will the Faircloth Amendment be repealed in this bill? That prohibits the construction of new Federally-owned public housing.

 

[lpetrich]

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on Instagram: “We CAN afford the Build Back Better Act. …”

We CAN afford the Build Back Better Act.

We CAN’T afford to continue underinvesting in the American people — from childcare to healthcare, pre-K to college, and more.

To those who are so eager to spend less for the American people — which one of the popular programs in the Build Back Better Act do YOU think we should cut?

That's a good question to pose.

In those Instagram pictures, she mentions a deadline of October 31. That's for HOME - UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) at the SEC – Glasgow 2021

"The UK will host the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow on 31 October – 12 November 2021"

It would be very embarrassing to have nothing to show at that conference.

The next pictures have

• Two free years of community college for all students, regardless of family income
• An increase in Pell Grants awarded to college students to match the rising cost of tuition
• Two years of free universal pre-K for 3 and 4-year-olds
• 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave
• An entrepreneurial program for formerly incarcerated individuals
• Grants to support intervention strategies to reduce community violence
• Expand Medicare to cover vision and dental for seniors
• Make the Child Tax Credit permanent
• Cut prescription drug prices
• Invest in fighting climate change

 

[lpetrich]

AOC prefers (1) all the programs for less time to (2) some of the programs for more time. She expects that if they are successful enough, then that will provoke a lot of pressure to continue them. Like how the Republicans failed to repeal Obamacare.

Why is it important that we don't cut any programs in the Build Back Better Act?

Democrats need to seize the opportunity to show that we keep our promises. We can't fail to deliver on fighting climate change and lowering drug prices after promising for decades on Election Day that we would do just that.

We also know that these programs will be successful and will quickly establish a track record of success that will pave the way for a long-term extension in the future.

Finally, if we only pick some of these programs, then some of our constituents will get nothing. We can't keep pitting seniors against children, rural communities against urban communities, and students against working families.

Very good points. After promising stuff like this, then one ought to at least try to deliver, rather than wimping out and wringing one's hands about how hard it is. I saw Bill Clinton do it, and I saw Barack Obama do it.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I give KS a very wide understanding here. She's in a difficult spot. She represents an area that is to the right of the party that she is in. Furthermore, she (and Joe) are taking the blame for the difficulty in passing democratic policies. But the real problem for the dems is the razer thin margins that we have to deal with. If democrats want to pass democratic legislation that the right hates, then bust your ass and increase the democratic majority congress and the senate. The real problem here is that our tent isn't big enough. And to try to exclude people at the edge of the tent, is crazy!

Yes, But ... If the R's had a majority this razor-thin do you think they'd have any problem coming together and passing an agenda that their leaders wanted? You don't have to wonder: you can look at the record. Betsy DoVos was confirmed as Secretary to Destroy Public Schools despite that many Rs understood she was an incompetent criminal who wanted to use that post to serve her friends' agenda of greed and brainwashing kids. This was even formalized into the "Hastert Rule": Every GOPster must vote for a motion that a majority of GOPsters support.

I'll guess that there are two GOP Senators who would vote in favor of democratic elections or in favor of a path to citizenship if they could vote secretly. But they can't, so they vote as instructed by their party leaders. To counter this, wouldn't it be nice if DINOs like JM or KS had similar party loyalty?

Republicans are like sheep. They will almost always vote in group, regardless of how they may personally feel about a bill.

Democrats are like cats. It's much harder to herd cats than it is to herd sheep.

LBJ got a lot done because he had a large majority of Dems in Congress. It's much more difficult these days, unless every lazy liberal leaning voter actually makes an effort to vote. Even with the new, unneccesary restrictions, it's not that difficult to vote in Georgia. Anyone can ask for an absentee ballot without having a reason. Almost everyone has a voter ID because you can't even see a doctor in Georgia without a state ID or driver's license. People just don't pay attention. I once asked a young coworker if she had voted. She said she had to work that day, so she couldn't. I told her that we had 3 full weeks of early voting and if she would start paying attention a little, she would know that. That is the problem. Voter apathy is a bigger problem than voter suppression, imo.

Yea, the above is correct. Republicans are just far more united because they aren't really separated on most issues. Dems are more nuanced. All republicans are against taxes. They all want to cut it. Not all Dems want to raise taxes. Some due and get very upset with Dems who don't. All republicans are very pro-business. Dems are mixed here. It's shocking to me, but republicans mostly rallied around Trump (some don't agree with him, but keep their mouths shut). I really don't think that a democratic "trump" would last long in the democratic party. I damn sure wouldn't support a democratic trump who wanted to overthrow the system, overthrow the election and etc. Prior to Trump, republicans just didn't criticize each other. Very common for Dems to. I'm not saying that dems should become more like the republicans. But I do think that we need a larger tent. They can win with fewer votes. Our side can't. Dems should be more tolerant of politicians who have conservative voters. AOC would not get elected in Arizona!

 

[lpetrich]

Lots of rumors, and not much more.

Manu Raju on Twitter: "Jayapal says that $1.9T-$2.2T is the number Biden floated again today. "It's not the number that we want ... But at the end of the day, the idea that we can do these programs" is what we're focused on." / Twitter
then
Manu Raju on Twitter: "Means testing didn't come up, she said. "Paid family and medical leave is a priority of ours," she said, adding they are trying to get that in the bill. She said that they didn't see any paper or an outline of an offer "We don't have all the details on the climate pieces yet."" / Twitter

Seung Min Kim on Twitter: "Asked Manchin about this topline just now as he headed into a one-on-one meeting with Sanders (!)
“I’m at 1.5!” Manchin shouts." / Twitter

Ilhan Omar on Twitter: "He is going to lower the number every time a reporter asks *
It’s all a joke to him.
He isn’t negotiating, he is killing the bill and it’s time we all recognized it.
Sadly, his shameful tactics will cost his constituents much needed investments for themselves and families." / Twitter

 

[Derec]

Yes, But ... If the R's had a majority this razor-thin do you think they'd have any problem coming together and passing an agenda that their leaders wanted?

GOP had significantly bigger majorities in Congress under Trump and yet Trump's agenda hardly cruised through. The only major legislative accomplishment of the Trump administration was the tax cut bill.
Trump tried hard to get rid of Obamacare and failed - and the stumbling block was that time also a mavericky Senator from Arizona.

You don't have to wonder: you can look at the record. Betsy DoVos was confirmed as Secretary to Destroy Public Schools

Nominees are not legislation. And Biden got his share of controversial nominees, like a black supremacist at DOJ or an ecoterrorist at Interior.

Btw, the restoration of due process for college men accused of sexual assault (often without any evidence) is one good thing she did at Education.

This was even formalized into the "Hastert Rule": Every GOPster must vote for a motion that a majority of GOPsters support.

You are either misrepresenting or misunderstanding the Hastert Rule. If a House Speaker invokes this informal rule, it simply means that he or she will not bring a bill to vote unless there is majority support for it in his own conference even if there would be a majority for the bill in the full House. It has nothing to do with forcing members to vote a certain way.

I'll guess that there are two GOP Senators who would vote in favor of democratic elections or in favor of a path to citizenship if they could vote secretly. But they can't, so they vote as instructed by their party leaders. To counter this, wouldn't it be nice if DINOs like JM or KS had similar party loyalty?

Even if the Hastert rule meant what you wrote it meant, it's a House thing, not a Senate thing. And Senators frequently break rank. Again, remember John McCain?

 

[Derec]

Here's a simple test to see if you have the slightest clue.

I have a clue. Do you?

I. Which group of voters is more likely to want to drink water while they wait?
. . . A. Those waiting in short lines.
. . . B. Those waiting in long lines.

There is like a month of early voting. One can find a time slot with decent lines.
And counties determine how many polling places there are. The state law merely gives a minimum. Guess who runs the counties with long lines like Fulton?

II. Which party, when in power, likes to under-equip voting stations in precincts likely to vote for the other Party?

Who runs the counties with under-equipped voting stations?

That said, things in Georgia in 2020 were especially bad because the voting switched from pure touchscreen to touchscreen that prints out your ballot that you then feed through a scanner. That switch led to some statewide delays.

 

[Derec]

I would definitely prefer they dump the child subsidy in favor of keeping the climate change parts of the bill. If only Joe Manchin were getting funded by the right industry for that.

The condom lobby and big sponge?

 

[Derec]

III. Why do you suppose Republicans rushed to enact all those voter suppression laws?

I think both parties like to push election laws that they think will benefit them. That's also the reason why Dems oppose having to show id to prove who you are. That is also why they push laws to allow felons to vote or to hand out citizenships to illegals like they're Halloween candy.

 

[Derec]

They're more likely to be in precincts with long lines.

And who runs the counties that those precincts are in?
Note though that in 2020 there was a switch to touchscreen that prints out a paper ballot that you then feed through a scanner. That threw a spanner into the works so to speak.
I am in one of the busy counties that had long lines. I found 2nd week of early voting was ok though. First week the lines were snaking out of that library through the parking lot and out into the street. I drove on. Second week, I was in and out in 15 minutes. Combination of avoiding the early rush and workers getting a handle on the new system. A lot of the media coverage of Georgia voting chaos was from the first few days of early voting. Combine new system with "new iPhone" like early rush and of course you get chaos.

 

[Swammerdami]

... a mavericky Senator from Arizona.
... And Senators frequently break rank. Again, remember John McCain?

To come up with an example of a contemporary Republican Senator with more integrity than that of a festering maggot you had no alternative but to nominate a ... dead man?

There is a House Republican with a bit of integrity: The "daughter of Darth Vader"!

(That the obvious example of GOP Congressperson-who-doesn't-make-us-want-to-puke is the ultra right-wing Liz Cheney is a very sad commentary on American downfall.)

 

[Derec]

Congresswoman Cori Bush on Twitter: "Why means testing is bad — in 3 simple steps:
1) It costs a ton to set up and administer, which

Not necessarily. It is already done for programs such as SNAP or EITC. It would be trivial to add it to another program.

3) Leads to many who need the program the most — often Black and brown folks — to be excluded.

How so? How do people making more "need the program the most". And why does
I think she is just using buzz words that she knows will play in the base. I also think she is not very bright, probably one of the dimmer bulbs in the chandelier that is the Squad.

No means testing in Build Back Better." / Twitter

Jeff Bezos really needs those $12,000 per year for this four kids. #Justice4Jeff

Just like Charles Babbage and flat-rate postage.

Postage is not quite the same trillions of dollars of new entitlements (many thousands per capita) and we are much better at processing information than they were 200 years ago. Everybody has a computer in their pocket quintillions of times more powerful than Babbage's mechanical machine.

I didn't come to Congress to continue to give crumbs to my community" @CoriBush (vid link)

Easy to be generous with somebody else's money. Note that the proposed tax increases are for those above the Congresscritters' tax brackets.
Also, only somebody in Congress would think of $2,000,000,000,000.00 as "crumbs" ...

 

[Derec]

To come up with an example of a contemporary Republican Senator with more integrity than that of a festering maggot you had no alternative but to nominate a ... dead man?

That vote was in 2017. Hardly ancient history. Besides, I was referring to your statement about Reps supposedly being able to push their agenda through easily. So of course my counterexamples was from a time when GOP had the presidency and Congressional majorities.

There is a House Republican with a bit of integrity: The "daughter of Darth Vader"!

But this one does not look half as good in a metal bikini ...

There is also a few House Democrats with a bit of integrity to resist the Fauxgressive Caucus - Josh Gottheimer et al. I hope they hold firm.

P.S.: No comment on the Hastert Rule or any other part of my post?

 

[Derec]

To those who are so eager to spend less for the American people — which one of the popular programs in the Build Back Better Act do YOU think we should cut?

That's an easy one. The expanded child tax credit should be first on the chopping block.


More people means more CO₂ emissions. So why should we increase subsidies for having more babies? It is quite hypocritical for AOC et al to demand $1.6T in new subsidies for having more children while whinging about the climate and the environment.