Law Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Signed into law 11/15/21

That is not why the vote failed. Please tell me you don't actually believe that. Schumer did the right thing in bringing the vote to the floor to be the eternal negotiators on record. Republicans want nothing more than to do nothing. Especially when it's beneficial politically to Biden. Schumer learned from the mistakes of Obama in trying to negotiate in good faith with McConnell and the Republicans...who were in the end never really want a solution, just to drag things out until they can flip one of the chambers or the White House.

I don’t think you are necessarily countering anything I said. Yes, Schumer is pushing to keep a schedule for this bill to either move forward or see if it needs wrapped into the reconciliation bill. In order to do so, he’s pushing a timeline that the group wasn’t able to reach this week and it looks like now next week could he make or break since there is the recon bill that needs to be handled as well.
 
I don’t think you are necessarily countering anything I said. Yes, Schumer is pushing to keep a schedule for this bill to either move forward or see if it needs wrapped into the reconciliation bill. In order to do so, he’s pushing a timeline that the group wasn’t able to reach this week and it looks like now next week could he make or break since there is the recon bill that needs to be handled as well.
I directly contradicted your assertion that the Republicans voted this down because the bill wasn't in final form yet. Maybe you were just making note that that was the reasoning the Republicans put forward as to why they voted it down? In that case, it would be reasonable to point out, as a caveat to it, that the Republicans have objectively proven themselves to be bad faith negotiators. I'm not sure that's really a debatable issue at this point.
 
I directly contradicted your assertion that the Republicans voted this down because the bill wasn't in final form yet. Maybe you were just making note that that was the reasoning the Republicans put forward as to why they voted it down? In that case, it would be reasonable to point out, as a caveat to it, that the Republicans have objectively proven themselves to be bad faith negotiators. I'm not sure that's really a debatable issue at this point.

I mean, I don’t see reason to assume that wasn’t the reason if next week it proceeds. I think that would show a clearer picture about what might be going on behind the scenes. My guess is out of the 11 GOP members, there are a few that are still pushing for changes and they would make or break the 60 votes.

I suppose I shouldn’t have stated certainty as to why but at the same time, I’m not going to just write the whole thing off with the term bad faith in order to undermine the deal. Those on the GOP side of this deal are set to sink or swim next week from what it looks like. I don’t think Schumer is going to hold off on reconciliation long if they are delaying and have no qualms with him attempting to call bluffs if they are present. They did that with the original reconciliation/ relief bill where there were talks (less involved than this) and when it seemed clear there wasn’t enough really anything that was going to be agreed on, they moved forward pretty quick without them. It’s politically reasonable to do here too if next week fails.
 
@andnowweknow

Curious to know these two questions from you:
-What odds do you current have of the procedural vote going through next week?
-What odds do you have on the Senate bill, if it reaches the floor for a vote, passing in the senate?
 
I mean, I don’t see reason to assume that wasn’t the reason if next week it proceeds. I think that would show a clearer picture about what might be going on behind the scenes. My guess is out of the 11 GOP members, there are a few that are still pushing for changes and they would make or break the 60 votes.

I suppose I shouldn’t have stated certainty as to why but at the same time, I’m not going to just write the whole thing off with the term bad faith in order to undermine the deal. Those on the GOP side of this deal are set to sink or swim next week from what it looks like. I don’t think Schumer is going to hold off on reconciliation long if they are delaying and have no qualms with him attempting to call bluffs if they are present. They did that with the original reconciliation/ relief bill where there were talks (less involved than this) and when it seemed clear there wasn’t enough really anything that was going to be agreed on, they moved forward pretty quick without them. It’s politically reasonable to do here too if next week fails.
that's fair if you are not taking into account that my assumption is, like pretty much all other Democrat led legislation, that the Republicans, without this vote called yesterday by Schumer, would have CONTINUED to "negotiate" in perpetuity. Schumer applied the pressure because the history of Republicans since Obama has been to "negotiate"...with no real intention of anything actually getting done, just extending and extending until the next election cycle...at which point they say "can't do anything now, sorry, let the voters decide"...rinse, wash, repeat. Their whole agenda is to do nothing, I'm not suggesting this because they are lazy, it's built into their entire platform...IE, slow the train of progress if you can't stop it or regress it.
 
@andnowweknow

Curious to know these two questions from you:
-What odds do you current have of the procedural vote going through next week?
-What odds do you have on the Senate bill, if it reaches the floor for a vote, passing in the senate?
Both of those things will occur because Republicans can't be ON RECORD as simply being obstructionists. I would posit that in part, they will occur directly because of the pressure being applied by Schumer through the vote yesterday. Schumer can put them on record over and over again as saying "No" to everything if that is the way they want to keep voting, which will have consequences for Republicans come 2022.

Republicans in the Senate have been protected from having to make any votes under McConnell. Not so easy to go run for re-election when you actually have to run on the votes you make, something McConnell never made his caucus do for obvious reasons.
 
that's fair if you are not taking into account that my assumption is, like pretty much all other Democrat led legislation, that the Republicans, without this vote called yesterday by Schumer, would have CONTINUED to "negotiate" in perpetuity. Schumer applied the pressure because the history of Republicans since Obama has been to "negotiate"...with no real intention of anything actually getting done, just extending and extending until the next election cycle...at which point they say "can't do anything now, sorry, let the voters decide"...rinse, wash, repeat. Their whole agenda is to do nothing, I'm not suggesting this because they are lazy, it's built into their entire platform...IE, slow the train of progress if you can't stop it or regress it.

Both of those things will occur because Republicans can't be ON RECORD as simply being obstructionists. I would posit that in part, they will occur directly because of the pressure being applied by Schumer through the vote yesterday. Schumer can put them on record over and over again as saying "No" to everything if that is the way they want to keep voting, which will have consequences for Republicans come 2022.

Republicans in the Senate have been protected from having to make any votes under McConnell. Not so easy to go run for re-election when you actually have to run on the votes you make, something McConnell never made his caucus do for obvious reasons.

Okay. I think we mainly agree. I just think it’s possible that the deadlines are necessary to nudge things to eventually happening. I completely agree it could dredge on for months if that didn’t occur but that also doesn’t solely mean they don’t want a deal on it. There are other bills that go through with Democrat and GOP support, they just aren’t as high profile as this infrastructure deal and yes, the GOP does default to less spending and in general, change than the democrats. I think that is important to note but not reasoning to say they can’t be worked with. You just have to establish the right guardrails which seem to be happening.

As to whether it passes the senate, I’m not as certain since the vote margin could be close so a few flips kills it fast. Most of the closer GOP members to the deal aren’t even reseeking their seat so the interests in that group of 11 can vary a lot of ways.
 
Agreement still not finalized on Sunday. Portman says it's at 90% with the last sticking point being how much funding goes to the transportation piece. The IRS enforcement ramp up has been removed as one of the sources of funding. The estimate for it was likely off by 400B anyways from what the IRS expected but the items taking it's place was a provision with Medicare:
The Medicare rule, promulgated under President Donald Trump, eliminates rebates drug companies give benefit managers in Medicare Part D and was aimed at reducing out-of-pocket costs for patients outside Medicare. Delaying the rule reduces expenditures by the Medicare program, producing a budgetary windfall the negotiators want to use to help pay for roads, bridges and other projects.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that repealing the rule would cut federal Medicare spending by about $177 billion over a decade. Negotiators are delaying it for less than 10 years, but have not revealed how long.


Senators Try to Finalize Deal on Infrastructure Package
Wall Street Journal
Lawmakers pushed to finalize an infrastructure agreement Sunday, but said they were still struggling to resolve a dispute over how much to increase public-transit funding, a snag that could delay their goal of advancing the bill in a Senate vote early this week.

GOP senators had blocked efforts by Democrats to begin consideration of the roughly $1 trillion infrastructure bill on Wednesday, saying too much of the package remained unresolved. Lawmakers in a bipartisan group crafting the legislation said late last week that they hoped to finish in time to reverse that outcome in a second vote in the next few days.

Sen. Rob Portman (R., Ohio), the lead GOP negotiator of the bipartisan group, said Sunday on ABC that negotiators were “about 90% of the way there” in reaching an agreement, but were still battling over how much money to direct to public transit. Democrats have pushed to include a larger share of transit funding.
 
No time to link but the bill is starting to hit a standstill at this point. Pressure from a few people that it all could be thrown out if an agreement isn’t reached, Manchin included.
 
Agreement reached so a second procedural vote went through, passing this time 67-32. 17 of those votes were Republicans which could possibly mean there more room than the original 11 that will vote in favor of the bill. Mitch also backed it.

Senate Advances Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal
NPR
Hours after bipartisan Senate negotiators reached a deal on an infrastructure package, the chamber voted to advance it, setting in motion a final vote on the bill in the coming days.

The procedural motion was approved 67-32, with 17 Republicans joining all Democrats to begin legislative action. The top Senate GOP leader, Kentucky's Mitch McConnell, was among those voting to move ahead with the proposal.
 
Bout time America did something big that makes sense all around.

There should be optimism in the Senate but so far the Senate hasn’t passed it, the house hasn’t and also has their own bill they passed which doesn’t align with the senate bill, and Pelosi has sworn there won’t be a vote on this bill unless the reconciliation bill also makes it to the House. A bunch more still has to play out but I think it’s passing Senate is pretty likely now.
 
There should be optimism in the Senate but so far the Senate hasn’t passed it, the house hasn’t and also has their own bill they passed which doesn’t align with the senate bill, and Pelosi has sworn there won’t be a vote on this bill unless the reconciliation bill also makes it to the House. A bunch more still has to play out but I think it’s passing Senate is pretty likely now.
I think it will pass, in the end the Republicans can't run on saying no to something as globally popular as infrastructure. Still surprised Trump to go all in on this...probably a bit too much work lol.
 
I don’t have much time to update during the weekdays but here’s some cliffs:
-The bill has been released and is not longer a draft/ board agreement
-This week is the process of proposed amendments but the timeline is still being pushed fast, causing Senators to scramble to get a chance for their amendment to have a chance at a vote. Not all amendments will likely get a vote but it’s always a good sign when this process has a decent amount of opportunity for senators to improve it
-Cornyn has proposed an amendment that would allow state and local governments to spend unused pandemic relief funds on infrastructure (I believe it’s a match process close to 1:1).
-The Cornyn amendment is popular with most of the senate and likely could get the 60+ votes needed for it to be added. What’s interesting is the White House doesn’t want this, showing a divide between some senate democrats and the White House.
-The amendment process will likely wrap up by the end of the week with a voting approaching shortly after.

I wish I could track the amendments coming through more this week but caught up with work. What I can say is this despite the rushed schedule that I’m not a fan of, this is what you should normally be seeing in a functioning senate. A bill coming to the floor, senators from either party being able to propose amendments, debate and vote on the revisions and then a final vote to see if it passes.
 
Again, it’s important to stress the timetable is messed up. It’s a 2,000+ page bill and there’s about a week of deliberation, with most senators scrambling to get their amendment added and likely not looking at the entire original text. Generally, you’d want this to be a month I’d say but most of this has been months of the group of twenty coming to an agreement because the thinking is that’s enough for 60 votes so the other 40 don’t matter...
 
U.S. infrastructure bill doesn't pay for itself, Congressional Budget Office says
Reuters
WASHINGTON, Aug 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate's $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill does not pay for itself and would increase federal budget deficits by $256 billion over 10 years, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said on Thursday.

The CBO "score" arrived as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was steering the measure, which includes $550 billion in new spending and $450 billion in previously approved spending, toward passage. It was not immediately clear whether the CBO's analysis of the bill would prompt any Republicans who have been supportive of the measure to abandon it.

The sweeping package of funding for roads, bridges and broadband internet is one of Democratic President Joe Biden's top legislative priorities.

CNN reported that Republican Senator John Cornyn said the CBO's findings were a "real problem," requiring "credible payfors," or ways to finance the costs of the bill.
 
This is Marjorie Taylor Greene level stupidy

I cant believe she tweeted this herself

Also the irony of her post, there is no Iowa taxpayer money here. Most of the bill is coming from NY, NJ, CT, CA.

 
Today is expected to be wrapping up the bill with a Senate vote. Schumer wants to move on to the reconciliation bill before the next recess. I think there might be a few more amendment votes but then the final one on passage.


Here's also some of the debate on the bill Wednesday
 
An update with the Cornyn amendment is the WH said they'd support allowing 30% of the unused COVID funding for states who wanted to use it towards infrastructure.

Cornyn cuts a deal with White House on COVID-19 money for infrastructure
The Hill
John Cornyn (R-Texas) on Thursday announced a deal with the White House on an amendment to allow state and local governments to use up to 30 percent of their unspent COVID-19 relief funds on infrastructure, paving the way for the proposal to be adopted by the Senate.

Cornyn’s leverage with the White House was strengthened by the support of at least six Senate Democrats, including Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), who joined Cornyn as a lead sponsor.

“Sen. Padilla and I have worked with the White House and I believe we have come up with a good-faith resolution of their concerns and our interest in getting this money to be available,” Cornyn announced on the Senate floor.

Cornyn explained that his amendment will allow up to 30 percent — or $10 million, whichever amount is greater — of a state or locality’s unspent COVID-19 funds would be available for infrastructure projects.

He noted that state and local governments will not be required to spend any of their pandemic-relief money on infrastructure but could if they so choose.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top