What’s going on with the two bills?

[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:

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.

Trying to tank? Trying to tank it would be tying an unpassable bill that hasn't even been completed to it. This is not Infrastructure that's in the wrong.

[Anonymous]

There you again. It's both unpassable and incomplete? Why not work to make it better? Instead it's just been vague no's without any specifics. Not very helpful.

There is no urgency to pass the infrastructure bill right this moment, it's already passed the Senate and wont be implemented until a year after passing. The only urgency is in locking it in and then killig the other.

[Anonymous]

Every passing year sharpens the fact that the GOP hates everyone and wants misery and the 1930s for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There you again. It's both unpassable and incomplete? Why not work to make it better? Instead it's just been vague no's without any specifics. Not very helpful.

There is no urgency to pass the infrastructure bill right this moment, it's already passed the Senate and wont be implemented until a year after passing. The only urgency is in locking it in and then killig the other.

Precisely. If there are specific objections to specific parts of the reconciliation bill, then the house dems will undoubtedly sit down with Manchin and other centrists to work those out. If that takes a couple months, then so be it. It is pretty obvious that the centrists want infrastructure passed so they don't have to negotiate anything. I have yet to hear any objection from a centrist to a specific spending portion of the bill. The objections are entirely to the revenue raising provisions (medicare price negotiation, estate and capital gains changes, etc.), and then they turn around and say the bill costs too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There you again. It's both unpassable and incomplete? Why not work to make it better? Instead it's just been vague no's without any specifics. Not very helpful.

There is no urgency to pass the infrastructure bill right this moment, it's already passed the Senate and wont be implemented until a year after passing. The only urgency is in locking it in and then killig the other.

Dude, isn't that the House Dems job? They had 8 months. The Senate Dems managed to craft a bill and pass it in that time. Crazy.

And yes -- there is urgency. Having the infrastructure projects started across the country in districts as far flung as (yes) New York City) and Tulsa, Okhaloma means that House Democrats up for re-elect can then go to community meetings and town halls touting a victory as they campaign from January 2022 - November 2022.

Democrats like Senator Raphael Warnock who just won his hard won seat and will be fighting to keep it. Duckworth and Kelly are also up for re-election.

None of which the Squad cares about because they won't be up for re-election until 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There you again. It's both unpassable and incomplete? Why not work to make it better? Instead it's just been vague no's without any specifics. Not very helpful.

There is no urgency to pass the infrastructure bill right this moment, it's already passed the Senate and wont be implemented until a year after passing. The only urgency is in locking it in and then killig the other.

Dude, isn't that the House Dems job? They had 8 months. The Senate Dems managed to craft a bill and pass it in that time. Crazy.

And yes -- there is urgency. Having the infrastructure projects started across the country in districts as far flung as (yes) New York City) and Tulsa, Okhaloma means that House Democrats up for re-elect can then go to community meetings and town halls touting a victory as they campaign from January 2022 - November 2022.

Democrats like Senator Raphael Warnock who just won his hard won seat and will be fighting to keep it. Duckworth and Kelly are also up for re-election.

None of which the Squad cares about because they won't be up for re-election until 2023.

?????

The entire House is up for re-election in 2022.

Then maybe those sacrosanct innocent Senators should get off their butts, cross the street, and get to work. As you say, it's in their own interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There you again. It's both unpassable and incomplete? Why not work to make it better? Instead it's just been vague no's without any specifics. Not very helpful.

There is no urgency to pass the infrastructure bill right this moment, it's already passed the Senate and wont be implemented until a year after passing. The only urgency is in locking it in and then killig the other.

Dude, isn't that the House Dems job? They had 8 months. The Senate Dems managed to craft a bill and pass it in that time. Crazy.

And yes -- there is urgency. Having the infrastructure projects started across the country in districts as far flung as (yes) New York City) and Tulsa, Okhaloma means that House Democrats up for re-elect can then go to community meetings and town halls touting a victory as they campaign from January 2022 - November 2022.

Democrats like Senator Raphael Warnock who just won his hard won seat and will be fighting to keep it. Duckworth and Kelly are also up for re-election.

None of which the Squad cares about because they won't be up for re-election until 2023.

?????

The entire House is up for re-election in 2022.

Then maybe those sacrosanct innocent Senators should get off their butts, cross the street, and get to work. As you say, it's in their own interest.

Warnock and Duckworth both support reconciliation. Indeed, the vast majority of congressional democrats support it, and so does Biden. The 9 house democrats, Manchin and Sinema are the outliers here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There you again. It's both unpassable and incomplete? Why not work to make it better? Instead it's just been vague no's without any specifics. Not very helpful.

There is no urgency to pass the infrastructure bill right this moment, it's already passed the Senate and wont be implemented until a year after passing. The only urgency is in locking it in and then killig the other.

Dude, isn't that the House Dems job? They had 8 months. The Senate Dems managed to craft a bill and pass it in that time. Crazy.

And yes -- there is urgency. Having the infrastructure projects started across the country in districts as far flung as (yes) New York City) and Tulsa, Okhaloma means that House Democrats up for re-elect can then go to community meetings and town halls touting a victory as they campaign from January 2022 - November 2022.

Democrats like Senator Raphael Warnock who just won his hard won seat and will be fighting to keep it. Duckworth and Kelly are also up for re-election.

None of which the Squad cares about because they won't be up for re-election until 2023.

?????

The entire House is up for re-election in 2022.

Then maybe those sacrosanct innocent Senators should get off their butts, cross the street, and get to work. As you say, it's in their own interest.

Warnock and Duckworth both support reconciliation. Indeed, the vast majority of congressional democrats support it, and so does Biden. The 9 house democrats, Manchin and Sinema are the outliers here.

9 house Dems, 2 Senate Dems, willing to tank Biden’s agenda for a few grand. 🤦🏽‍♀️

[Anonymous]

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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

[Anonymous]

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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

Then they arent paying attention to the looming crisis with childcare and childcare facilities. People are flocking from childcare positions because they are underpaid and overworked. Rural communities are hit even harder.

Tuition-free community college can be pulled back a little with emphasis put only on jobs that need a lot of workers - trade jobs, early education, nursing etc. Universal pre-K (3 and 4) is not something that should be given up.

[Anonymous]

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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

Then they arent paying attention to the looming crisis with childcare and childcare facilities. People are flocking from childcare positions because they are underpaid and overworked. Rural communities are hit even harder.

Tuition-free community college can be pulled back a little with emphasis put only on jobs that need a lot of workers - trade jobs, early education, nursing etc. Universal pre-K (3 and 4) is not something that should be given up.

That's a different situation entirely. Let the government fund the childcare system. Let them send out $25 million to every state to double the number of childcare institutions with angel investor grants that don't have to be paid back if the center stays open for 36 months or longer. Let them top up the pay of every childcare worker from $12/hr to $18-$22/hr.

But putting more money in the hands of the parents is not going to change the shortage of workers in the system. Pay the workers more and help the small business owners who want to start childcare centers.

[Anonymous]

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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

Then they arent paying attention to the looming crisis with childcare and childcare facilities. People are flocking from childcare positions because they are underpaid and overworked. Rural communities are hit even harder.

Tuition-free community college can be pulled back a little with emphasis put only on jobs that need a lot of workers - trade jobs, early education, nursing etc. Universal pre-K (3 and 4) is not something that should be given up.

Also if I see this blip one more time without someone addressing it I may just lose my mind. The 300/mo is moot. Its an advancement on a child tax credit that LITERALLY everyone who submits a tax return receives and has been going on for decades. If you have had children and they are under the age of 30 you have received this credit- maybe not the same amount but you received a credit just for having a child!
The difference is that it increased from 2k in 2020 to 3600 for 2021 for kids under 6. Half of that credit (=1800) is being disbursed as 300/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3600 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1800 credit with your 2021 taxes.
Kids aged 6-16 credit was 2k in 2020 and increased to 3k for 2021. Same logic applies. Half of that credit (=1600) is being disbursed as 250/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3000 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1500 credit with your 2021 taxes.

[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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

Then they arent paying attention to the looming crisis with childcare and childcare facilities. People are flocking from childcare positions because they are underpaid and overworked. Rural communities are hit even harder.

Tuition-free community college can be pulled back a little with emphasis put only on jobs that need a lot of workers - trade jobs, early education, nursing etc. Universal pre-K (3 and 4) is not something that should be given up.

Also if I see this blip one more time without someone addressing it I may just lose my mind. The 300/mo is moot. Its an advancement on a child tax credit that LITERALLY everyone who submits a tax return receives and has been going on for decades. If you have had children and they are under the age of 30 you have received this credit- maybe not the same amount but you received a credit just for having a child!
The difference is that it increased from 2k in 2020 to 3600 for 2021 for kids under 6. Half of that credit (=1800) is being disbursed as 300/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3600 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1800 credit with your 2021 taxes.
Kids aged 6-16 credit was 2k in 2020 and increased to 3k for 2021. Same logic applies. Half of that credit (=1600) is being disbursed as 250/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3000 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1500 credit with your 2021 taxes.

No, it is not. People who have never had and never will have jobs are getting child tax 'credits'. If you have 3 children and you haven't worked in 10 years you're still getting $10,800. If you have 4 children and you work 12 hours a week at Target you're still getting $14,400. If you have 5 children and your 'job' is watching one other kid off the books in the morning, you will still be getting $18,000. Most of them people would be getting NO REFUNDS or at most $1,000 back come tax time.

They are being paid to not work.

[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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

Then they arent paying attention to the looming crisis with childcare and childcare facilities. People are flocking from childcare positions because they are underpaid and overworked. Rural communities are hit even harder.

Tuition-free community college can be pulled back a little with emphasis put only on jobs that need a lot of workers - trade jobs, early education, nursing etc. Universal pre-K (3 and 4) is not something that should be given up.

Also if I see this blip one more time without someone addressing it I may just lose my mind. The 300/mo is moot. Its an advancement on a child tax credit that LITERALLY everyone who submits a tax return receives and has been going on for decades. If you have had children and they are under the age of 30 you have received this credit- maybe not the same amount but you received a credit just for having a child!
The difference is that it increased from 2k in 2020 to 3600 for 2021 for kids under 6. Half of that credit (=1800) is being disbursed as 300/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3600 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1800 credit with your 2021 taxes.
Kids aged 6-16 credit was 2k in 2020 and increased to 3k for 2021. Same logic applies. Half of that credit (=1600) is being disbursed as 250/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3000 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1500 credit with your 2021 taxes.

No, it is not. People who have never had and never will have jobs are getting child tax 'credits'. If you have 3 children and you haven't worked in 10 years you're still getting $10,800. If you have 4 children and you work 12 hours a week at Target you're still getting $14,400. If you have 5 children and your 'job' is watching one other kid off the books in the morning, you will still be getting $18,000. Most of them people would be getting NO REFUNDS or at most $1,000 back come tax time.


They are being paid to not work.

If they havent filed a tax return they cant get the funds UNLESS they file next year or file a separate paper. ("Given us your information in 2020 to receive the Economic Impact Payment with the Non-Filers: Enter Payment Info Here tool or Given us your information in 2021 with the Non-Filer: Submit Your Information tool")

HOH that makes less the 18k arent required to file unless they choose to. And no, a tax credit is a credit. In 2020:
If you have 3 children and you haven't worked in 10 years you're still getting $10,800. IF they filed 2020 taxes they would still have gotten 2k per kid credit if all under 6 (6k total) AND if they made less than 56k they also would have received a max EIC credit of 6600. So a 12600 credit. If they paid 4k in taxes then they would get a 8600 refund.

If you have 4 children and you work 12 hours a week at Target you're still getting $14,400. [/b]IF they filed 2020 taxes they would still have gotten 2k per kid credit if all under 6 (8k total) AND if they made less than 56k they also would have received a max EIC credit of 6600. So a 14600 credit. If they paid 4k in taxes then they would get a 10600 refund [/b]

You MUST NOT KNOW POOR PEOPLE.

[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.

What is bloated about it? It is $3.5T over 10 Years that is generally revenue neutral, so it is drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded 2017 tax cuts, which have ballooned our debt by $8T.

Too much shackled to actual Infrastructure that no one wants. Including $1.8 Trillion that they haven't even explained what they want to do with. They've had 8 months, stop hanging us up.

You cut these three things, its $2.6 trillion in expenditures gone, and a lean $900 billion 'Build Back Better' proposal which still tackles environmental concerns and clean energy. Which is INFRASTRUCTURE.

$1.8 trillion for the Finance Committee. This part of the bill is for investments in working families, the elderly, and the environment. It includes a tax cut for Americans making less than $400,000 a year, lowering the price of prescription drugs, and ensuring the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share of taxes.

$726 billion for the Health, Labor, Education, and Pensions Committee. This addresses universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds, childcare for working families, tuition-free community college, funding for historically black colleges and universities, and an expansion of the Pell Grant for higher education.

$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."

Finally, some common sense. We're already paying $300 per child every month to every family making $400,000 and under in this country. NO MORE.

Late last week Biden held marathon meetings with nearly two dozen progressive and moderate lawmakers to get his agenda passed.

He's now considering limits to tuition-free community college and universal childcare to cut down the massive, progressive-backed $3.5 trillion package in a bid to pacify moderates and spending hawks.

The White House and Democratic leaders are weighing attaching or strengthening income caps to a number of key agenda items, according to two officials familiar with the discussions.

Then they arent paying attention to the looming crisis with childcare and childcare facilities. People are flocking from childcare positions because they are underpaid and overworked. Rural communities are hit even harder.

Tuition-free community college can be pulled back a little with emphasis put only on jobs that need a lot of workers - trade jobs, early education, nursing etc. Universal pre-K (3 and 4) is not something that should be given up.

Also if I see this blip one more time without someone addressing it I may just lose my mind. The 300/mo is moot. Its an advancement on a child tax credit that LITERALLY everyone who submits a tax return receives and has been going on for decades. If you have had children and they are under the age of 30 you have received this credit- maybe not the same amount but you received a credit just for having a child!
The difference is that it increased from 2k in 2020 to 3600 for 2021 for kids under 6. Half of that credit (=1800) is being disbursed as 300/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3600 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1800 credit with your 2021 taxes.
Kids aged 6-16 credit was 2k in 2020 and increased to 3k for 2021. Same logic applies. Half of that credit (=1600) is being disbursed as 250/mo for 6 months to those who submitted their 2020 tax return. This can be opted out and if you do so, then you would file for the entire 3000 credit in your 2021 taxes. If you get the monthly disbursement then you will only be able to file for 1500 credit with your 2021 taxes.

No, it is not. People who have never had and never will have jobs are getting child tax 'credits'. If you have 3 children and you haven't worked in 10 years you're still getting $10,800. If you have 4 children and you work 12 hours a week at Target you're still getting $14,400. If you have 5 children and your 'job' is watching one other kid off the books in the morning, you will still be getting $18,000. Most of them people would be getting NO REFUNDS or at most $1,000 back come tax time.


They are being paid to not work.

If they havent filed a tax return they cant get the funds UNLESS they file next year or file a separate paper. ("Given us your information in 2020 to receive the Economic Impact Payment with the Non-Filers: Enter Payment Info Here tool or Given us your information in 2021 with the Non-Filer: Submit Your Information tool")

HOH that makes less the 18k arent required to file unless they choose to. And no, a tax credit is a credit. In 2020:
If you have 3 children and you haven't worked in 10 years you're still getting $10,800. IF they filed 2020 taxes they would still have gotten 2k per kid credit if all under 6 (6k total) AND if they made less than 56k they also would have received a max EIC credit of 6600. So a 12600 credit. If they paid 4k in taxes then they would get a 8600 refund.

If you have 4 children and you work 12 hours a week at Target you're still getting $14,400. [/b]IF they filed 2020 taxes they would still have gotten 2k per kid credit if all under 6 (8k total) AND if they made less than 56k they also would have received a max EIC credit of 6600. So a 14600 credit. If they paid 4k in taxes then they would get a 10600 refund [/b]

You MUST NOT KNOW POOR PEOPLE.

Where did I mention they weren't filing annual tax statements? I said they weren't making enough to get refunds of $14,000-$18,000 a year and they aren't. Neither is the HOH who they are filing jointly with. Therefore it is not a advancement of anything. Its a unearned payout.