What’s going on with the two bills?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

Good thing AOC only = 1 vote. Lets test it out. They aren't democrats. They are their own party. Let them see how far their crazy ideas go on their own without the backing of the democratic party name.

And who knows maybe that would encourage brave centrist republicans to ditch their elected crazies too.

[Anonymous]

Lets not forget that many (all?) of the candidates AOC backed in the primaries lost recently. She isn't all that persuasive outside of her district. Why do we keep giving her attention? I don't care if she raises a billion dollars. If she is blocking progress for the entire country, cut her loose. She is blocking progress.

She is the female version of Trump in almost every way. ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost out on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

Uh, her constituents were strongly opposed to the Amazon HQ deal because it would mean huge rent increases for local residents + Amazon was getting a massive break on property taxes. AOC did what he constituents wanted. Rich landlords who live in Manhattan, Westchester, and Long Island who own property in Queens? They didn't like AOC's position. Then again, they don't live in her district.

They were opposed to the Amazon HQ deal until they lost everything. They thought they could bluff Bezos and he just said 'Okay. Bye'.

Queens biz owners haunted by Amazon loss amid pandemic
https://nypost.com/2020/12/13/queens-biz-owners-haunted-by-amazon-loss-amid-pandemic/

Amazon had New York City in the bag. Then left-wing activists got fired up.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/14/how-amazons-big-plans-new-york-city-were-thwarted-by-citys-resurgent-left-wing/

[Anonymous]

Amazon is a client of Ian Bremmer's Eurasia Group, so I probably wouldn't expect him to be a neutral arbiter on this.

The fact of the matter is that rents in Queens would skyrocket if Amazon built an HQ there. Or does one disagree with me on this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lets not forget that many (all?) of the candidates AOC backed in the primaries lost recently. She isn't all that persuasive outside of her district. Why do we keep giving her attention? I don't care if she raises a billion dollars. If she is blocking progress for the entire country, cut her loose. She is blocking progress.

She is the female version of Trump in almost every way. ugh.

She’s nowhere near the female version of Trump, good grief. She’s not blocking progress for the entire country.

And the reason people focus on her so much is because the right wingers are OBSESSED with her. They take every opportunity to talk about her. They perseverate over her. They’re sick in the head and this is but one manifestation of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious to see how this all shakes out. Manchin is talking a good game, but in he end he needs some kind of infrastructure bull to pass. For all his grandstanding in 2018 about that being his last Senate campaign, he’s been quietly fundraising for 2024 and is going to run again. He barely eked out a win last time and his approval numbers in WV are shaky, so he needs something to solidify support at home. Not delivering something for his state on infrastructure will hurt him a lot.

Sure but he would do better in WV if he opposed and killed both bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

Are you kidding? Her constituents live in a city with one of the busiest ports, railways, and airport infrastructure in the country. Infrastructure that they as citizens use or benefit from every time they step outside, decide to leave or enter their borough, or gasp - look for groceries on the shelves because you need ships to bring the food in. Blocking this when we, and New York City, desperately needs it as much as anyone else is callous.

Is New York not a city? Does it not have bridges?
$110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helps pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.

New York City has the top two busiest railway stations in the country - New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.
$66 billion for railroads. Funding includes upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety, but nothing for high-speed rail.

JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark are three of the busiest airports on the Eastern seaboard.
$25 billion for airports. This allocation provides funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion of the total for upgrades.

New York also has one of the biggest and busiest deep-harbor ports on the Eastern seaboard. Its sort of famous for hosting the U.S.S. Comfort during the pandemic.
$17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lets not forget that many (all?) of the candidates AOC backed in the primaries lost recently. She isn't all that persuasive outside of her district. Why do we keep giving her attention? I don't care if she raises a billion dollars. If she is blocking progress for the entire country, cut her loose. She is blocking progress.

She is the female version of Trump in almost every way. ugh.

She’s nowhere near the female version of Trump, good grief. She’s not blocking progress for the entire country.

And the reason people focus on her so much is because the right wingers are OBSESSED with her. They take every opportunity to talk about her. They perseverate over her. They’re sick in the head and this is but one manifestation of it.

She absolutely is the other side of the Trump coin.

But anyway, the previous post was about cutting loose progressives (all of them that would vote against infrastructure) and the next reply focused solely on AOC not needing funding. It isn't just conservatives obsessed with her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Why would the Democrats vote against it? It's their freaking bill.

Not, it's not their bill. It's a bill produced by Manchin, Sinema, Collins, Portman, etc.. Not a single house liberal had a seat at the table when it was being negotiated.

The Senate Democrats did their job and came up with an Infrastructure bill that they were successfully able to pass. The House was supposed to come up with a Build Back Better Plan. They failed. Its not done and it has every wish list known to man.

Pass the bipartisan act and stop playing around.

Again, that's just not true. Under the house budget resolution, the house committees had until Sept. 15 to produce their drafts. They all met the deadline. The house doesn't answer to arbitrary deadlines that you make up.

Its September 21st and their version of meeting a deadline is including language to pass $1.8 trillion with no explanation of where it was going to go.

If your kid asked you for $1.8K with no detailed breakdown of what the money was for, you'd ask them if they were on drugs.

They didn't do their job. Move on. The government shutdown is in 10 days. The infrastructure bill expires in 7 days. They are not going to get a new BBB bill passed in less than a week within the House and the Senate.

We need trains. We need bridges. We need roads.

I can't believe they're holding this up on a junior Rep's word who shafted her own district out of a billion-dollar investment before she even took the oath of office.

The infrastructure bill has nothing to do with the government shutdown, and it does not "expire" in 7 days. The infrastructure spending is over 5 years. Projects take years to plan and build. It's makes absolutely no difference if this vote happens today or in two months.

That is not what the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives said.

Where does that say it will "expire." He's saying that's the day they're voting on it. They agreed to that date back in August. If they don't vote on it then, they can vote later. If they do vote on it and it goes down, they can vote again later. Nothing is expiring.

Oh, what's this? They're keeping to the deadline? Fascinating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

Are you kidding? Her constituents live in a city with one of the busiest ports, railways, and airport infrastructure in the country. Infrastructure that they as citizens use or benefit from every time they step outside, decide to leave or enter their borough, or gasp - look for groceries on the shelves because you need ships to bring the food in. Blocking this when we, and New York City, desperately needs it as much as anyone else is callous.

Is New York not a city? Does it not have bridges?
$110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helps pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.

New York City has the top two busiest railway stations in the country - New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.
$66 billion for railroads. Funding includes upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety, but nothing for high-speed rail.

JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark are three of the busiest airports on the Eastern seaboard.
$25 billion for airports. This allocation provides funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion of the total for upgrades.

New York also has one of the biggest and busiest deep-harbor ports on the Eastern seaboard. Its sort of famous for hosting the U.S.S. Comfort during the pandemic.
$17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.

Yes, what part of that goes to her district or NYC in particular? Those are all broad bullet points without details. It is likely that the urban oriented stuff will primarily flow to second tier cities and urban areas when all is said and done. Most of it goes to rural areas and suburbs. You cannot demand that they look at the national interest while not demanding the same of Manchin/Sinema. Her district needs what's in the reconcilliation bill. Their states need what's in the infrastructure bill. Seems to me like they need each other to help all of their constituents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

Are you kidding? Her constituents live in a city with one of the busiest ports, railways, and airport infrastructure in the country. Infrastructure that they as citizens use or benefit from every time they step outside, decide to leave or enter their borough, or gasp - look for groceries on the shelves because you need ships to bring the food in. Blocking this when we, and New York City, desperately needs it as much as anyone else is callous.

Is New York not a city? Does it not have bridges?
$110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helps pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.

New York City has the top two busiest railway stations in the country - New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.
$66 billion for railroads. Funding includes upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety, but nothing for high-speed rail.

JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark are three of the busiest airports on the Eastern seaboard.
$25 billion for airports. This allocation provides funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion of the total for upgrades.

New York also has one of the biggest and busiest deep-harbor ports on the Eastern seaboard. Its sort of famous for hosting the U.S.S. Comfort during the pandemic.
$17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.

Yes, what part of that goes to her district or NYC in particular? Those are all broad bullet points without details. It is likely that the urban oriented stuff will primarily flow to second tier cities and urban areas when all is said and done. Most of it goes to rural areas and suburbs. You cannot demand that they look at the national interest while not demanding the same of Manchin/Sinema. Her district needs what's in the reconcilliation bill. Their states need what's in the infrastructure bill. Seems to me like they need each other to help all of their constituents.

Why does AOC's district need what's in the reconciliation bill more than anyone else? I wasn't aware NYC was dealing with forest fires and droughts.

$135 billion for the Committee on Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry. Funding to be used to address forest fires, reduce carbon emissions, and address drought concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

Are you kidding? Her constituents live in a city with one of the busiest ports, railways, and airport infrastructure in the country. Infrastructure that they as citizens use or benefit from every time they step outside, decide to leave or enter their borough, or gasp - look for groceries on the shelves because you need ships to bring the food in. Blocking this when we, and New York City, desperately needs it as much as anyone else is callous.

Is New York not a city? Does it not have bridges?
$110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helps pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.

New York City has the top two busiest railway stations in the country - New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.
$66 billion for railroads. Funding includes upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety, but nothing for high-speed rail.

JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark are three of the busiest airports on the Eastern seaboard.
$25 billion for airports. This allocation provides funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion of the total for upgrades.

New York also has one of the biggest and busiest deep-harbor ports on the Eastern seaboard. Its sort of famous for hosting the U.S.S. Comfort during the pandemic.
$17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.

Yes, what part of that goes to her district or NYC in particular? Those are all broad bullet points without details. It is likely that the urban oriented stuff will primarily flow to second tier cities and urban areas when all is said and done. Most of it goes to rural areas and suburbs. You cannot demand that they look at the national interest while not demanding the same of Manchin/Sinema. Her district needs what's in the reconcilliation bill. Their states need what's in the infrastructure bill. Seems to me like they need each other to help all of their constituents.

Why does AOC's district need what's in the reconciliation bill more than anyone else? I wasn't aware NYC was dealing with forest fires and droughts.

$135 billion for the Committee on Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry. Funding to be used to address forest fires, reduce carbon emissions, and address drought concerns.

Childcare, preK, community college, SALT (which she's against but whatever), tax cuts for those under $400k.

Btw: i gave you a gimme. The Amtrak funding is in the infrastructure bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

Are you kidding? Her constituents live in a city with one of the busiest ports, railways, and airport infrastructure in the country. Infrastructure that they as citizens use or benefit from every time they step outside, decide to leave or enter their borough, or gasp - look for groceries on the shelves because you need ships to bring the food in. Blocking this when we, and New York City, desperately needs it as much as anyone else is callous.

Is New York not a city? Does it not have bridges?
$110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helps pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.

New York City has the top two busiest railway stations in the country - New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.
$66 billion for railroads. Funding includes upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety, but nothing for high-speed rail.

JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark are three of the busiest airports on the Eastern seaboard.
$25 billion for airports. This allocation provides funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion of the total for upgrades.

New York also has one of the biggest and busiest deep-harbor ports on the Eastern seaboard. Its sort of famous for hosting the U.S.S. Comfort during the pandemic.
$17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.

Yes, what part of that goes to her district or NYC in particular? Those are all broad bullet points without details. It is likely that the urban oriented stuff will primarily flow to second tier cities and urban areas when all is said and done. Most of it goes to rural areas and suburbs. You cannot demand that they look at the national interest while not demanding the same of Manchin/Sinema. Her district needs what's in the reconcilliation bill. Their states need what's in the infrastructure bill. Seems to me like they need each other to help all of their constituents.

Why does AOC's district need what's in the reconciliation bill more than anyone else? I wasn't aware NYC was dealing with forest fires and droughts.

$135 billion for the Committee on Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry. Funding to be used to address forest fires, reduce carbon emissions, and address drought concerns.

Childcare, preK, community college, SALT (which she's against but whatever), tax cuts for those under $400k.

Btw: i gave you a gimme. The Amtrak funding is in the infrastructure bill.

Again why does AOC's district need what's in the reconciliation bill more than anyone else?

There are no children in Idaho? No community colleges in Missouri? They are certainly more people under the $400K limit outside of New York City which has the highest concentration of billionaires in the world outside of Beijing.

The answer is both bills could be of use to constituents nationwide. However the bloated $3.5 trillion bill wasn't even finished and therefore cannot be passed. Actually do her/your job of completing a passable bill and come back. In the meantime - pass Infrastructure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like neither bill will survive.

Infrastructure would if they would unshackle it from that bloated Build Back Better bill.

Its already done the hard part of passing the Senate. The House is a rubber-stamp and they already have GOP support anyway.

Well no, it's not going to pass the house. If it goes to vote on Sept. 27 as planned, almost all republicans will vote against it (it will get maybe 5 GOP votes), and 50-70 democrats will vote against it.

Any democrat on record voting against a badly needed infrastructure bill should be primaried. They literally have one job - and here they are mucking it up.

None of the progressive house dems are scared of a primary from the right attacking them for voting against more money for highways in west virginia. These members all come from very blue progressive districts. They are concerned about primaries from the left if they fail to get priorities like paid leave, expanded child tax credit, pre-K, etc.

We should test out how they fare without democratic party money and resources behind them. Let them whither away in the wind if this is the best they can offer. Sick of them.

AOC doesn't need the party's cash. She outraises any member of the party, including Pelosi. The centrists, on the other hand, very much do need it. The DCCC has given some soft hints to the 9 house centrists that their party funding could be taken away if they kill reconciliation.

She can't afford to be the face of a blocked Infrastructure bill either. Not after being the sole reason her district lost on the Amazon HQ. Her constituents would benefit from the jobs and the better transportation improvements as much as anyone else.

What transportation improvements does the bill provide to her district or her constituents?

Are you kidding? Her constituents live in a city with one of the busiest ports, railways, and airport infrastructure in the country. Infrastructure that they as citizens use or benefit from every time they step outside, decide to leave or enter their borough, or gasp - look for groceries on the shelves because you need ships to bring the food in. Blocking this when we, and New York City, desperately needs it as much as anyone else is callous.

Is New York not a city? Does it not have bridges?
$110 billion for roads and bridges. In addition to construction and repair, the funding also helps pay for transportation research at universities, funding for Puerto Rico’s highways, and “congestion relief” in American cities.

New York City has the top two busiest railway stations in the country - New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal.
$66 billion for railroads. Funding includes upgrades and maintenance of America’s passenger rail system and freight rail safety, but nothing for high-speed rail.

JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark are three of the busiest airports on the Eastern seaboard.
$25 billion for airports. This allocation provides funding for major upgrades and expansions at U.S. airports. Air traffic control towers and systems would receive $5 billion of the total for upgrades.

New York also has one of the biggest and busiest deep-harbor ports on the Eastern seaboard. Its sort of famous for hosting the U.S.S. Comfort during the pandemic.
$17 billion for ports. Half of the funds in this category would go to the Army Corps of Engineers for port infrastructure. Additional funds would go to the Coast Guard, ferry terminals, and reduction of truck emissions at ports.

Yes, what part of that goes to her district or NYC in particular? Those are all broad bullet points without details. It is likely that the urban oriented stuff will primarily flow to second tier cities and urban areas when all is said and done. Most of it goes to rural areas and suburbs. You cannot demand that they look at the national interest while not demanding the same of Manchin/Sinema. Her district needs what's in the reconcilliation bill. Their states need what's in the infrastructure bill. Seems to me like they need each other to help all of their constituents.

Why does AOC's district need what's in the reconciliation bill more than anyone else? I wasn't aware NYC was dealing with forest fires and droughts.

$135 billion for the Committee on Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry. Funding to be used to address forest fires, reduce carbon emissions, and address drought concerns.

Childcare, preK, community college, SALT (which she's against but whatever), tax cuts for those under $400k.

Btw: i gave you a gimme. The Amtrak funding is in the infrastructure bill.

Again why does AOC's district need what's in the reconciliation bill more than anyone else?

There are no children in Idaho? No community colleges in Missouri? They are certainly more people under the $400K limit outside of New York City which has the highest concentration of billionaires in the world outside of Beijing.

The answer is both bills could be of use to constituents nationwide. However the bloated $3.5 trillion bill wasn't even finished and therefore cannot be passed. Actually do her/your job of completing a passable bill and come back. In the meantime - pass Infrastructure.

She doesn't need the reconcilliation bill more than anyone else. But, she needs the infrastructure much less than anyone else. If you want them to pass the infrastructure bill then stop actively trying to tank the reconciliation bill. It's pretty simple.