What’s going on with the two bills?

[Anonymous]

$2 trillion sounds better. Separate the wheat from the chaff.

[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.

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.

They are not moving it. Why would they? Pelosi has already confirmed the bill doesn't need to be amended to pass the House. And they're read to pass it to give Biden his first big legislative victory.

Unless you really think we should enter into the 2022 midterms with NOTHING accomplished? That would be fatalistic.

Hallelujah - no more bloat

[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.

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.

They are not moving it. Why would they? Pelosi has already confirmed the bill doesn't need to be amended to pass the House. And they're read to pass it to give Biden his first big legislative victory.

Unless you really think we should enter into the 2022 midterms with NOTHING accomplished? That would be fatalistic.

Hallelujah - no more bloat

At least he is a team player. How much money did the republicans “raise” for him in Texas? Trump must be proud to have this guy on the payroll.

[Anonymous]

GOOD. How about you start with putting limits on those $300/month payments only to households that prove 1 or both of the guardians/parents have jobs and end it at a total household income of $200,000 (single or two parents - it doesn't matter).

This $300 per child per month with no upper limit to all households under $400,000 has got to stop.

Sanders on the $1.5 Trillion proposal on the table

[Anonymous]

Ifwe had been told in January that there would be a ~2T reconcillation bill, we would all have been estatic. Biden, as usual, started with a high number that will end up around that figure, but the more important component than the money, is the framework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ifwe had been told in January that there would be a ~2T reconcillation bill, we would all have been estatic. Biden, as usual, started with a high number that will end up around that figure, but the more important component than the money, is the framework.

I agree but I think all the progressives’ hopes have been raised so they’re going to have a tantrum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ifwe had been told in January that there would be a ~2T reconcillation bill, we would all have been estatic. Biden, as usual, started with a high number that will end up around that figure, but the more important component than the money, is the framework.

I agree but I think all the progressives’ hopes have been raised so they’re going to have a tantrum.

Hopefully they'll get ot out of their system after tonight. As long as they don't cross the line and say stuff that can't be taken back. The path forward is clear. $2T in revenue, $2T in spending and let the dynamic scoring count as deficit reduction. Time to get to work. Pick the strongest, most defensible options and remember to have something that can be sacrificed. Everyone saves face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ifwe had been told in January that there would be a ~2T reconcillation bill, we would all have been estatic. Biden, as usual, started with a high number that will end up around that figure, but the more important component than the money, is the framework.

I agree but I think all the progressives’ hopes have been raised so they’re going to have a tantrum.

Hopefully they'll get ot out of their system after tonight. As long as they don't cross the line and say stuff that can't be taken back. The path forward is clear. $2T in revenue, $2T in spending and let the dynamic scoring count as deficit reduction. Time to get to work. Pick the strongest, most defensible options and remember to have something that can be sacrificed. Everyone saves face.

If by $2T + $2T you mean a $1.5T total BBB plan cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ifwe had been told in January that there would be a ~2T reconcillation bill, we would all have been estatic. Biden, as usual, started with a high number that will end up around that figure, but the more important component than the money, is the framework.

I agree but I think all the progressives’ hopes have been raised so they’re going to have a tantrum.

Hopefully they'll get ot out of their system after tonight. As long as they don't cross the line and say stuff that can't be taken back. The path forward is clear. $2T in revenue, $2T in spending and let the dynamic scoring count as deficit reduction. Time to get to work. Pick the strongest, most defensible options and remember to have something that can be sacrificed. Everyone saves face.

That is way too much money to spend ….now if it was Afghanistan sign me up! Got to put a few more natural gas refueling stations in…not that there is any demand for natural gas refueling stations in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — U.S. taxpayers footed the bill for a $43 million natural-gas filling station in Afghanistan, a boondoggle that should have cost $500,000 and has virtually no value to average Afghans, the government watchdog for reconstruction in Afghanistan announced Monday.

A Pentagon task force awarded a $3 million contract to build the station in Sheberghan, Afghanistan, but ended up spending $12 million in construction costs and $30 million in "overhead" between 2011 and 2014, the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR) found. Meanwhile, a similar gas station built in neighboring Pakistan cost $500,000.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/11/02/pentagon-afghanistan-gas-station-boondoggle/75037032/

Where is old Joe Manchin?

[Anonymous]

Hmm finally circling back to Covid and Climate Change after they realized no one asked them for their kitchen sink welfare bills?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ifwe had been told in January that there would be a ~2T reconcillation bill, we would all have been estatic. Biden, as usual, started with a high number that will end up around that figure, but the more important component than the money, is the framework.

I agree but I think all the progressives’ hopes have been raised so they’re going to have a tantrum.

Hopefully they'll get ot out of their system after tonight. As long as they don't cross the line and say stuff that can't be taken back. The path forward is clear. $2T in revenue, $2T in spending and let the dynamic scoring count as deficit reduction. Time to get to work. Pick the strongest, most defensible options and remember to have something that can be sacrificed. Everyone saves face.

That is way too much money to spend ….now if it was Afghanistan sign me up! Got to put a few more natural gas refueling stations in…not that there is any demand for natural gas refueling stations in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — U.S. taxpayers footed the bill for a $43 million natural-gas filling station in Afghanistan, a boondoggle that should have cost $500,000 and has virtually no value to average Afghans, the government watchdog for reconstruction in Afghanistan announced Monday.

A Pentagon task force awarded a $3 million contract to build the station in Sheberghan, Afghanistan, but ended up spending $12 million in construction costs and $30 million in "overhead" between 2011 and 2014, the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR) found. Meanwhile, a similar gas station built in neighboring Pakistan cost $500,000.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/11/02/pentagon-afghanistan-gas-station-boondoggle/75037032/

Where is old Joe Manchin?

Voting for every defense budget over the last ten years, totaling $9 trillion.

[Anonymous]

All hail King Manchin!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Cuts, cuts, cuts! Let's go.

[Anonymous]

It's amazing to see Democrats President and congress members actually willing to compromise to make things work. Seems like we are heading towards normal governance.

When will GOP learn to be adultlike?