Gottheimer's 'Road To Nowhere'
(snip)
Pelosi's delay is a clear defeat for moderate Democrats, who used their own leverage to force a vote on the bipartisan deal by the end of September. Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), the de facto leader of that bloc, predicted he'd be sipping champagne by Thursday night.
On Thursday afternoon, Gottheimer wasn't even willing to entertain the idea that Pelosi would delay the vote. Asked by The Daily Beast what it would signify if the Speaker delayed the vote, Gottheimer said on Thursday afternoon it'd "signify nothing. It's gonna happen." Later, he went as far to declare on CNN that he was "1,000 percent" sure the vote would happen that night. But Gottheimer's attempt at manifesting the outcome through positive thinking was unsuccessful, and as the hours ticked away the inevitable happened.
It's unclear how the delay will ultimately affect the passage of President Joe Biden's agenda. While the vote didn't happen Thursday, moderates seem to be holding out hope that the dynamic will change over the coming days and weeks. However, it's now clear that moderates won’t be able to just jam progressives by passing the infrastructure bill and leaving the broader bill in a filing cabinet.
(snip)
https://www.thedailybeast.com/highway-to-disarray-pelosi-delays-vote-amid-dem-chaos
~
Hey Gottheimer, you corporate shill, ya wanna know where you can stick that champagne bottle?
= new reply since forum marked as read
started protecting millionaires and billionaires and corporations that pay no taxes.
I'd say the 96% of Dems who are in agreement from both chambers, would beg to differ.
They accepted more than $150k from PACs opposing the reconciliation proposal because it raises taxes on the Rich & Corporate, then the Corporate Dems suddenly opposed the reconciliation proposal because it raises taxes on the Rich & Corporate.
I shouldn't have presumed you knew the difference between a political "bribe", and a technically illegal one.
Every politician receives donations from people working for corporations. 
Get Real.
Last edited Thu Oct 7, 2021, 08:37 PM - Edit history (1)
Their letter to the Speaker is prima facie evidence. Their corporate donors said JUMP and they asked HOW HIGH?
What "bill" are you talking about? There is no bill. There isn't even a framework for a bill.
March 31, 2021 at 8:42 p.m. EDT
President Biden pitched his $2 trillion jobs plan focused on infrastructure and the climate Wednesday in Pittsburgh as a chance to “rebuild the backbone of America.” The plan, which would be financed by raising taxes on corporations, faces challenges in Congress where Republicans have expressed opposition and liberals are pressing for more spending.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/31/joe-biden-live-updates/
By Jennifer Haberkorn, Nolan D. McCaskill
Oct. 1, 2021 Updated 6:26 PM PT
Congressional Democrats eager to make progress on President Biden’s “Build Back Better” plan are beginning to confront the harrowing challenge of squeezing their ambitious remodeling of the nation’s social safety net programs into the much smaller package needed to win over key centrists.
For a second day, Democratic leaders and White House officials gathered on Capitol Hill in hopes of reaching agreement on a framework for the social investment package, which has been expected to establish paid family leave and subsidies for child care, elder care and community college, as well as fortify existing health programs, among other progressive ambitions.
Biden met behind closed doors with rank-and-file House Democrats on Friday to rally their support. He urged them to find compromise around a $2-trillion price tag for the 10-year package, down from the $3.5 trillion Democrats have publicly considered for months.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-10-01/democrats-contend-with-scaling-down-biden-social-safety-net-plan
There seems to be a lot of confused folks out there.
Most of the Dem Caucus in both chambers, including the 96 member strong Progressive Caucus are fighting to keep as much as Biden's proposal in what will be the final bill. It is only a tiny group who are try to dramatically lower it: Manchin, Sinema + the 11 House Problem Solvers/centrist/moderate conservatives/Blue Dog types (was 9 then Stephanie Murphy joined them, plus Scott Peters voted against it in committee)
Here is the framework
https://www.investopedia.com/here-s-what-s-in-the-usd1-trillion-infrastructure-bill-passed-by-the-senate-5196817
$332 billion for the Banking Committee. Including investments in public housing, the Housing Trust Fund, housing affordability, and equity and community land trusts.
$198 billion for the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. This would develop clean energy. (and remember, almost all environmental spend and tax credits were already gutted from the bi-partisan bill, as I have already shown)
$67 billion for the Environment and Public Works Committee. These monies would fund low-income solar and other climate-friendly technologies.
$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. (this is prime funding here, and Manchinema want mass cuts here, which blows it up)
$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.
$37 billion for the HSGAC Committee. This would electrify the federal vehicle fleet, electrify and rehab federal buildings, improve cybersecurity infrastructure, reinforce border management, invest in green-materials procurement, and invest in resilience. (agin most all was guttend from the other bill already)
$107 billion for the Judiciary Committee. These funds address establishing "lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants."
$20.5 billion for the Indian Affairs Committee. This addresses Native American health programs and facilities, education programs and facilities, housing programs, energy programs, resilience and climate programs, BIA programs and facilities, Native language programs, and the Native Civilian Climate Corps.
$25 billion for the Small Business Committee. This provides for small business access to credit, investment, and markets.
$18 billion for the Veterans Affairs Committee. This funds upgrades to veteran facilities.
$83 billion for the Commerce Committee. This goes to investments in technology, transportation, research, manufacturing, and economic development. It provides funding for coastal resiliency, healthy oceans investments, including the National Oceans and Coastal Security Fund and the National Science Foundation research and technology directorate.
Say bye bye to around 60% of that if Manchin gets his way.
We already said bye bye to 80% of Biden's proposed new spend and tax credits in the bi-partisan bill. $2.6 trillion was shredded down to $550 billion. The other $650 billion is simply renewals of pre-existing programmes (mostly transportation related) that have been on the books for years.
The Infrastructure Plan: What’s In and What’s Out (it's brutal)
Biden's original plan:
What was left after they took a 2 trillion USD hatchet to it
The total new spending on Biden's original 2 bill proposals (hard and human) was $6.1 trillion, now you are looking at a total new spend for both bills of only $2.05 trillion. $4 trillion ripped out
That is a massive 2/3rds total reduction in new spending when both bills are tallied up, and the huge majority will be from the parts that the vast majority of ALL Dems, Biden included, all desperately want, campaigned on, and are running adverts for as we speak, especially things to address climate change and to help working class Americans.
IF that is all we end up with, ie. close to 70% of Biden's agenda in the bin, (and in the bin DESPITE our controlling all 3 parts, the Senate, the House, and POTUS), 2022 looms even more ominously.
There are two different components to the legislation. The progressive caucus is ready to vote for the Bipartisan Infrastructure bill (illustrated with the oddly gigantic pie charts), but will only vote for it in tandem with a separate social safety net "infrastructure" bill which doesn't yet exist.
It was the progressive caucus that threatened to vote against a Biden bill this week unless and until a bicameral second social safety net "infrastructure" bill that they approve of is written and passed in the senate.
progressive caucus bottom line number was his. That's why Representative Jayapal stopped making that inaccurate claim and instead began talking about compromise immediately after the meeting.
So to review:
- There is neither a Biden "bill" nor a framework for the Biden social safety net "infrastructure" plan.
- The $3.5 trillion price tag is not Biden's number.
- Last week the House progressive caucus actually blocked a vote on a bipartisan Biden infrastructure bill that already cleared the Senate, ostensibly leading some to jump to the erroneous conclusion that because President Biden endorsed a strategy, he also endorsed a bottom line price tag on a bill that doesn't yet even have a framework.
Biden met behind closed doors with rank-and-file House Democrats on Friday to rally their support. He urged them to find compromise around a $2-trillion price tag for the 10-year package, down from the $3.5 trillion Democrats have publicly considered for months.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-10-01/democrats-contend-with-scaling-down-biden-social-safety-net-plan
to use reconciliation. (see the articles below) You keep trying to pettifog about the nomenclature of the term 'bill'. That term is used by all the major press and the White House itself, despite it not being written in final form. See the articles/press conferences (from the White House itself) below to show this to be fact.
Also, why is a small group of other posters so invested in giving a huge chunk of real leverage on the reconciliation bill by passing a de-linked bi-partisan bill?
Very curious position, and it is going against Biden's stance. It opens up the reconciliation bill to truly massive cuts, and also puts it in jeopardy of not even being voted on until 2022, if at all.
I have see many try to use a false choice dilemma by false claiming that the bi-partisan bill is dead if not immediately passed. Biden himself said that is not so. (see below)
The progressives already dropped down from $6 trillion to Biden's initial proposal number of $3.5 trillion on the reconciliation bill months ago. Sanders himself (as I already posted) admitted that the $3.5 trillion is not going to happen. Biden said 2 days ago that the target range is $1.9 to $2.3 trillion now.
you continue to falsely claim:
You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
Senate moving forward on Biden's $3.5 trillion 'human infrastructure' plan
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/08/10/senate-starts-debate-bidens-3-5-trillion-infrastructure-plan/5416121001/
The Senate immediately voted to start formal debate on the $3.5 trillion budget plan that includes what the Biden administration has called "human infrastructure" – massive investments in areas like the environment, housing, education and health care.
Later this week, the Senate is expected to take a final vote on a resolution that would direct committees to finalize the legislation, but a final vote on the overall package may be months away.
Is it fair to call Biden’s $3.5 trillion plan another New Deal?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/10/02/joe-biden-new-deal-infrastructure/
Liberals are committed to the headline number, moderates like Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) are balking at the price tag, and conservatives are decrying what has been described as the biggest spending bill in American history. But has it all been greatly overstated?
President Biden’s $3.5 trillion reconciliation package would expand Medicare, combat climate change and offer free public prekindergarten and community college while boosting federal safety-net programs. At first glance, its price dwarfs era-defining social programs like Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, which cost around $324 billion in today’s dollars, and Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society, which cost around $520 billion in today’s dollars. Barack Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act cost around $943 billion while the Affordable Care Act was pegged at around $1.1 trillion through 2019, adjusted for inflation.
Democrats Roll Out $3.5 Trillion Budget to Fulfill Biden’s Broad Agenda
“We’re going to get a lot done,” President Biden said, as Senate Democrats began drafting the details on a social and environmental bill that could yield transformative change.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/14/us/politics/biden-social-spending-deal.html
The legislation is far from passage, but top Democrats have agreed on working to include several far-reaching details. They include universal prekindergarten for all 3- and 4-year-olds, two years of free community college, clean energy requirements for utilities and lower prescription drug prices. Medicare benefits would be expanded, and green cards would be extended to some undocumented immigrants.
At a closed-door luncheon in the Capitol, Mr. Biden rallied Democrats and the independents aligned with them to embrace the plan, which would require every single one of their votes to move forward over united Republican opposition. But several moderate lawmakers who are crucial to the plan’s success had yet to say whether they would accept the proposal.
House passes $3.5T Biden blueprint after deal with moderates
https://apnews.com/article/house-passes-budget-blueprint-0a1258e07b1a8b9aeddb69980093c838
The 220-212 vote Tuesday was a first move toward drafting Biden’s $3.5 trillion rebuilding plan this fall, and the narrow outcome, in the face of unanimous Republican opposition, signaled the power a few voices have to alter the debate and the challenges ahead still threatening to upend the president’s agenda.
From the White House, Biden praised the outcome as “a step closer to truly investing in the American people.” He said at a news conference that he had called to congratulate House leaders for the work.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/09/24/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-covid-19-response-and-the-vaccination-program-8/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/08/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-senate-passage-of-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-investment-and-jobs-act/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2021/07/30/press-briefing-by-principal-deputy-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-july-30-2021/
The total for both of Biden's two initial proposals, as I have meticulously detailed dozens of times on here was $6.1 trillion in new spend and tax incentives. $2.6 trillion for hard infrastructure ($2.2 trillion in new spend + $400 billion in tax credits) plus $3.5 trillion for human infrastructure in the reconciliation bill. The $2.6 trillion was chopped by almost 80% down to only $550 billion by Manchin and Sinema and the Rethugs.
IF Manchin gets his way, there will another $ 2 trillion chopped off the reconciliation bill (and he said THAT is a compromise as he wanted $2.5 trillion chopped, leaving it at only $1 trillion, down over 70% from the $3.5 trillion). He also has come out and said it should be put into a 'strategic pause, and not taken up until 2022 (if at all). Both of those things put the reconciliation bill in jeopardy, as well as being deleterious to our 2022 chances.
It was president Biden's 3.5T Build Back Better bill.
I bookmarked your post to have those links to the proof available because I am sure a few people will continue to try and re-write history in the days and weeks ahead.
He wasn't acting like a Repub then, now he is.
Gottheimer is not a bait-and-switch legislator.
As a matter of fact, Josh Gottheimer's voting record and public stances are on par with those of Cori Bush and to the left of those of Jamaal Bowman.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Gottheimer:
Josh Gottheimer is a Moderate Liberal
https://bit.ly/3uRPgb4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cori Bush:
Cori Bush is a Moderate Liberal
https://bit.ly/3lju22t
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jamaal Bowman:
Jamaal Bowman is a Moderate Liberal
https://bit.ly/3uSP0bC
William Lacy Clay:
William Lacy Clay is a Hard-Core Liberal
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cori Bush:
Cori Bush is a Moderate Liberal
-----------------------------------------------------
And Eliot Engel was replaced with Jamaal Bowman.
Eliot Engel
Eliot Engel is a Hard-Core Liberal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jamaal Bowman:
Jamaal Bowman is a Moderate Liberal
https://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm
