Government is back: The first 50 days of the Biden-Harris administration
March 8, 2021 10:18 PM Subscribe
The administration is putting Congress to work: confirmations, COVID relief, and voting rights take shape halfway through the first 100 days.
Highs and lows of the first 50 days of the Biden-Harris administration:
The American Rescue Plan is set to be signed this week. Minimum wage
Senate Majority Leader Schumer moved to cloture on Fudge and Garland’s nominations after a 28-hour session and the Republicans had gone home. Merrick Garland’s confirmation as head of Department of Justice will be consequential in how we deal with the January 6th insurrection and white supremacist violence going forward.
31.3 million have been fully vaccinated and 60 million have received at least one dose.
The House passed H.R. 1 last week. This past Sunday was the 56th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. The For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act will determine whether government is for the people, or not.
Highs and lows of the first 50 days of the Biden-Harris administration:
The American Rescue Plan is set to be signed this week. Minimum wage
Senate Majority Leader Schumer moved to cloture on Fudge and Garland’s nominations after a 28-hour session and the Republicans had gone home. Merrick Garland’s confirmation as head of Department of Justice will be consequential in how we deal with the January 6th insurrection and white supremacist violence going forward.
31.3 million have been fully vaccinated and 60 million have received at least one dose.
The House passed H.R. 1 last week. This past Sunday was the 56th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. The For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act will determine whether government is for the people, or not.
It's been absolutely incredible to now be able to think, "Oh yeah, there's a President, and he's doing is job - Oh OK" and then just move on with my life. I forgot what it was like to not have to plan some sort of defense against the actions of, well: you all know the story.
I'm not sure what's going to define Biden. I sort of hope it's just boring, conventional governing at a sort-of efficient pace. Sounds plausible until Senate and House elections happen.
posted by alex_skazat at 10:39 PM on March 8, 2021 [32 favorites]
I'm not sure what's going to define Biden. I sort of hope it's just boring, conventional governing at a sort-of efficient pace. Sounds plausible until Senate and House elections happen.
posted by alex_skazat at 10:39 PM on March 8, 2021 [32 favorites]
I hope the filibuster is ended, so that Biden can do the job he was given a wide mandate to perform. It is not just that Republicans can still game the democracy, especially after their treason on January 6, 2021.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:43 PM on March 8, 2021 [27 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:43 PM on March 8, 2021 [27 favorites]
I'm waiting to see any of that vaunted skill he said he'd possess in getting republicans in the senate to work with him. A straight party line vote on the COVID relief bill doesn't bode well, nor does having 8 democratic senators vote down the minimum wage. Still, in the hands of someone willing and able to push a message, pointing out that not a single republican voted for the relief bill should be all the ammunition you'd need until the mid-terms. Somehow (years of experience watching the exact opposite happen), I doubt they'll take the opportunity.
I'm interested/terrified to see what happens to H.R.1 in the Senate. The GOP will fight it tooth and nail, and too many Dem senators seem to be unconcerned about the massive voting suppression push happening at the state and local level.
posted by Ghidorah at 10:53 PM on March 8, 2021 [29 favorites]
I'm interested/terrified to see what happens to H.R.1 in the Senate. The GOP will fight it tooth and nail, and too many Dem senators seem to be unconcerned about the massive voting suppression push happening at the state and local level.
posted by Ghidorah at 10:53 PM on March 8, 2021 [29 favorites]
I didn’t complete the sentence about minimum wage:
Raising the minimum wage to $15 did not make it into the American Rescue Plan, with much drama by way of Senator Sinema, 7 other Democrats, and all 50 Republicans, so the #Fightfor15 continues.
I'm not sure what's going to define Biden.
I hope he raises our expectations of the president — the knowledge and skills he or she is required to have, and their behavior and competency in office.
It is not just that Republicans can still game the democracy, especially after their treason on January 6, 2021.
Agreed. If people don’t punish Republicans for their treason, I don’t even know what it means for our country.
posted by ichomp at 10:54 PM on March 8, 2021 [18 favorites]
Raising the minimum wage to $15 did not make it into the American Rescue Plan, with much drama by way of Senator Sinema, 7 other Democrats, and all 50 Republicans, so the #Fightfor15 continues.
I'm not sure what's going to define Biden.
I hope he raises our expectations of the president — the knowledge and skills he or she is required to have, and their behavior and competency in office.
It is not just that Republicans can still game the democracy, especially after their treason on January 6, 2021.
Agreed. If people don’t punish Republicans for their treason, I don’t even know what it means for our country.
posted by ichomp at 10:54 PM on March 8, 2021 [18 favorites]
The contrast with Trump is huge and expected. But Biden is significantly to the left of Obama and Obama Era Biden, which is a pleasant surprise. His endorsement of the active Amazon union drive in Alabama is I think unprecedented for a sitting president. We don't get the bailout if he engages in performative hand-wringing about the deficit.
Basic competence too--we're up near 3 million vaccinations some days! And the White House negotiated a Merck / J&J manufacturing deal to boost supply further.
Not that every individual act is pleasant. We get a 1.9 trillion bailout but some arbitrary (congressional) stinginess and not the minimum wage. Openness to repealing the post-9/11 military authorization, but also airstrikes. But we're dealing with Biden, not one of the progressive candidates, and I'm much less angry/frustrated then I thought.
IMHO this is closely related to the staff. It's a sign of how important the non-presidential people are in establishing what a party can do, and why despite legitimate frustrations with a specific candidate there is more than dime's worth of difference.
posted by mark k at 10:56 PM on March 8, 2021 [28 favorites]
Basic competence too--we're up near 3 million vaccinations some days! And the White House negotiated a Merck / J&J manufacturing deal to boost supply further.
Not that every individual act is pleasant. We get a 1.9 trillion bailout but some arbitrary (congressional) stinginess and not the minimum wage. Openness to repealing the post-9/11 military authorization, but also airstrikes. But we're dealing with Biden, not one of the progressive candidates, and I'm much less angry/frustrated then I thought.
IMHO this is closely related to the staff. It's a sign of how important the non-presidential people are in establishing what a party can do, and why despite legitimate frustrations with a specific candidate there is more than dime's worth of difference.
posted by mark k at 10:56 PM on March 8, 2021 [28 favorites]
I know that if Mitch was in this position the filibuster would be ash. But we don't want dems asking themselves, what would Mitch do?
The minimum wage thing, it's just appalling. Change the definition! The minimum wage is what it costs to shelter and nourish a human life with dignity so they are able to work. Not some arbitrary and cruel number, let it have some basis in reality. Find out what people need, how much that costs, and make sure they get paid at least that much. Isn't it funny how a country that struggles to reconcile with it's history of slavery also doesn't know how to pay people what they're worth.
Where I live we have an age pension, I did the math and found that it's about a hundred bucks more than a 40 hour week at your minimum wage. You don't have to do anything for this money, you just have to be over 65yo. Our economy isn't in a death spiral, we actually argue that the aged should be getting more. Our minimum wage is a little more than 15usd and the skies aren't ruled by fire-breathing pterodactyls. We're not alone in this, many countries pay people fairly and the cheeseburgers still cost the same.
I dunno, anyone arguing against a reality-based minimum wage is just as asshole.
posted by adept256 at 11:18 PM on March 8, 2021 [44 favorites]
The minimum wage thing, it's just appalling. Change the definition! The minimum wage is what it costs to shelter and nourish a human life with dignity so they are able to work. Not some arbitrary and cruel number, let it have some basis in reality. Find out what people need, how much that costs, and make sure they get paid at least that much. Isn't it funny how a country that struggles to reconcile with it's history of slavery also doesn't know how to pay people what they're worth.
Where I live we have an age pension, I did the math and found that it's about a hundred bucks more than a 40 hour week at your minimum wage. You don't have to do anything for this money, you just have to be over 65yo. Our economy isn't in a death spiral, we actually argue that the aged should be getting more. Our minimum wage is a little more than 15usd and the skies aren't ruled by fire-breathing pterodactyls. We're not alone in this, many countries pay people fairly and the cheeseburgers still cost the same.
I dunno, anyone arguing against a reality-based minimum wage is just as asshole.
posted by adept256 at 11:18 PM on March 8, 2021 [44 favorites]
Are we going to ignore airstrikes as too hard to fit into the narrative?
posted by Nerd of the North at 1:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [30 favorites]
posted by Nerd of the North at 1:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [30 favorites]
I sort of hope it's just boring, conventional governing at a sort-of efficient pace
For now, it's enough. It's actually required. For me at least, it's the defining characteristic of a government whose existence allows me to navigate the the PTSD (post-Trump stress disorder) waters. But over time, that will likely level-set back to something approaching the mentality and expectations from the beforetimes. But how much time will that take? Who knows. The damage is deep and the reactions are strong. It's very comforting (even healing?) to just rest in the Biden-ness of it all, and say, "Well, at least he's better than the last guy, that should be enough" and write off the things that feel discomfiting. Any major survivor with half a heart surely will tell you, my friend, when the demon is at your door, all you want is for him to go away. And for a long time, that is very much enough. Does this mean I'll be giving Biden a pass for longer than I should? Maybe.
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 3:25 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
For now, it's enough. It's actually required. For me at least, it's the defining characteristic of a government whose existence allows me to navigate the the PTSD (post-Trump stress disorder) waters. But over time, that will likely level-set back to something approaching the mentality and expectations from the beforetimes. But how much time will that take? Who knows. The damage is deep and the reactions are strong. It's very comforting (even healing?) to just rest in the Biden-ness of it all, and say, "Well, at least he's better than the last guy, that should be enough" and write off the things that feel discomfiting. Any major survivor with half a heart surely will tell you, my friend, when the demon is at your door, all you want is for him to go away. And for a long time, that is very much enough. Does this mean I'll be giving Biden a pass for longer than I should? Maybe.
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 3:25 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
A straight party line vote on the COVID relief bill doesn't bode well, nor does having 8 democratic senators vote down the minimum wage.
The former was inevitable, the latter is probably more of a worry.
posted by atoxyl at 4:07 AM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
The former was inevitable, the latter is probably more of a worry.
posted by atoxyl at 4:07 AM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
Raising the minimum wage to $15 did not make it into the American Rescue Plan, with much drama by way of Senator Sinema, 7 other Democrats, and all 50 Republicans, so the #Fightfor15 continues
I don't really understand Sinema's motivations at all. Arizona seems to be trending left and I don't know what she gains by being so contrarian. Manchin is a little more understandable given that he's basically the last Democrat in West Virginia and there's no scenario where he doesn't get replaced by a republican.
posted by octothorpe at 4:10 AM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
I don't really understand Sinema's motivations at all. Arizona seems to be trending left and I don't know what she gains by being so contrarian. Manchin is a little more understandable given that he's basically the last Democrat in West Virginia and there's no scenario where he doesn't get replaced by a republican.
posted by octothorpe at 4:10 AM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
Would Manchin really lose his job to a republican after doubling the salary for minimum wage workers in his state where over 60% of the population supports $15? I'm legitimately curious as to what leads people to believe this is some kind of unpopular policy that would get Manchin or Sinema booted out for supporting the party line and one of the most popular policies. Even Red Florida voted for a $15 minimum wage. That is to say, it sounds like he won't support the increase because he is philosophically against it and not because he is at risk of " losing his job "
posted by windbox at 4:52 AM on March 9, 2021 [15 favorites]
posted by windbox at 4:52 AM on March 9, 2021 [15 favorites]
Are we going to ignore airstrikes as too hard to fit into the narrative?
Yep. Let's ignore the airstrikes and the inability to remember the name of his defense secretary and record breaking numbers of kids in cages.
posted by Foosnark at 5:03 AM on March 9, 2021 [13 favorites]
Yep. Let's ignore the airstrikes and the inability to remember the name of his defense secretary and record breaking numbers of kids in cages.
posted by Foosnark at 5:03 AM on March 9, 2021 [13 favorites]
Lol, "ignore the airstrikes" is basically democratic party canon at this point
posted by windbox at 5:07 AM on March 9, 2021 [17 favorites]
posted by windbox at 5:07 AM on March 9, 2021 [17 favorites]
I don't really understand Sinema's motivations at all. Arizona seems to be trending left and I don't know what she gains by being so contrarian.
She's trying to pull the McCain voters. She can't lean right enough to run as a Republican in AZ but she can make it easier for the non-MAGA types to hold their noses and vote for her. AZ might be trending left but MAGA-ites are still deeply entrenched for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, she's almost been censured once by the AZ Democrats. I wouldn't be surprised if she gets primaried the next time around if they can find someone strong enough to run against her.
posted by fuse theorem at 5:08 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
She's trying to pull the McCain voters. She can't lean right enough to run as a Republican in AZ but she can make it easier for the non-MAGA types to hold their noses and vote for her. AZ might be trending left but MAGA-ites are still deeply entrenched for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, she's almost been censured once by the AZ Democrats. I wouldn't be surprised if she gets primaried the next time around if they can find someone strong enough to run against her.
posted by fuse theorem at 5:08 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Biden fought harder for neera tanden than for raising the minimum wage, unemployment benefits or the explicitly promised $2000 checks so I'm not feeling a lot of optimism about the way this presidency will go.
Also Joe Manchin will be punished in the afterlife.
posted by dis_integration at 5:57 AM on March 9, 2021 [20 favorites]
Also Joe Manchin will be punished in the afterlife.
posted by dis_integration at 5:57 AM on March 9, 2021 [20 favorites]
When Biden was selected as the Democratic nominee, I was definitely in the, “Seriously?? If I have to, but I don’t like it” camp. I still am. We need to implement Progressive ideas, whether or not they come from Progressive candidates, and it will take another 4 years to get there.
If Biden can institute broad voter rights legislation and campaign finance laws, we have a fighting chance.
But I think, for me, it’s too late. Simple basics like universal health care and a living wage... this country does not take care of its own, and I am still considering becoming an ex-pat.
posted by Silvery Fish at 6:02 AM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
If Biden can institute broad voter rights legislation and campaign finance laws, we have a fighting chance.
But I think, for me, it’s too late. Simple basics like universal health care and a living wage... this country does not take care of its own, and I am still considering becoming an ex-pat.
posted by Silvery Fish at 6:02 AM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
It's been absolutely incredible to now be able to think, "Oh yeah, there's a President, and he's doing is job - Oh OK" and then just move on with my life.
Not to call anyone out, but this is precisely why we lose midterm elections. It's why Congress can get away with not passing the minimum wage hike and other progressive policies that the vast majority of Americans want. Call your rep and your senators. Call them every week to tell them what's important to you. (Assuming they're not active Nazis like Cawthorn or Boebert or MTG.) We all have to take responsibility for the health of the republic. This is too important a job to leave to the politicians.
posted by rikschell at 6:15 AM on March 9, 2021 [34 favorites]
Not to call anyone out, but this is precisely why we lose midterm elections. It's why Congress can get away with not passing the minimum wage hike and other progressive policies that the vast majority of Americans want. Call your rep and your senators. Call them every week to tell them what's important to you. (Assuming they're not active Nazis like Cawthorn or Boebert or MTG.) We all have to take responsibility for the health of the republic. This is too important a job to leave to the politicians.
posted by rikschell at 6:15 AM on March 9, 2021 [34 favorites]
"The latest stimulus will reduce poverty by a third... Black Americans, Hispanic Americans and poor families with children are set to benefit the most. Child poverty would be reduced by more than half...."
"...the bill is in stark contrast to the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. In 2021, low- and moderate-income households (those making $91,000 or less) would receive nearly 70 percent of the tax benefits from the Senate measure. Among families with children, those low- and middle-income households would get nearly three-quarters of the benefit. By contrast, nearly half of the TCJA’s 2018 tax cuts went to households in the top 5 percent of the income distribution (who made about $308,000 that year)." (More details and a chart here.)
Elections have consequences.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 7:03 AM on March 9, 2021 [19 favorites]
"...the bill is in stark contrast to the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. In 2021, low- and moderate-income households (those making $91,000 or less) would receive nearly 70 percent of the tax benefits from the Senate measure. Among families with children, those low- and middle-income households would get nearly three-quarters of the benefit. By contrast, nearly half of the TCJA’s 2018 tax cuts went to households in the top 5 percent of the income distribution (who made about $308,000 that year)." (More details and a chart here.)
Elections have consequences.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 7:03 AM on March 9, 2021 [19 favorites]
Lol, "ignore the airstrikes" is basically democratic party canon at this point
Because the electorate doesn't give a shit. I mean, you know that, right? The average person doesn't give a shit of a bunch of random people get blown up, and nearly half actually like it and will mobilize to encourage it.
They should care, they don't, that's all.
It doesn't matter what you think, it matters what everyone else thinks, so until you can convince 'em they're wrong you're farting into the wind. Just another discarded philosophy paper being blown around the Quad.
Now, on the plus side, folks once didn't give a shit about slavery either, but you've got some work ahead of you.
posted by aramaic at 7:14 AM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
Because the electorate doesn't give a shit. I mean, you know that, right? The average person doesn't give a shit of a bunch of random people get blown up, and nearly half actually like it and will mobilize to encourage it.
They should care, they don't, that's all.
It doesn't matter what you think, it matters what everyone else thinks, so until you can convince 'em they're wrong you're farting into the wind. Just another discarded philosophy paper being blown around the Quad.
Now, on the plus side, folks once didn't give a shit about slavery either, but you've got some work ahead of you.
posted by aramaic at 7:14 AM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
Now, on the plus side, folks once didn't give a shit about slavery either, but you've got some work ahead of you.
When half of your leaders just voted against paying people enough for their work It would seem a lot of those folks are still around.
posted by adept256 at 7:29 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
When half of your leaders just voted against paying people enough for their work It would seem a lot of those folks are still around.
posted by adept256 at 7:29 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Isn't it funny how a country that struggles to reconcile with it's history of slavery also doesn't know how to pay people what they're worth
This is really on point and I can't believe I never made this connection before.
posted by swift at 7:35 AM on March 9, 2021 [14 favorites]
This is really on point and I can't believe I never made this connection before.
posted by swift at 7:35 AM on March 9, 2021 [14 favorites]
Not to call anyone out, but this is precisely why we lose midterm elections.
I would argue that democrats lose midterm elections by campaigning on $2000 and then coming to the negotiation table with $1400 and trying to claim that was the plan all along.
Or, y'know, making a meme out of voting against a minimum wage increase.
posted by graventy at 7:37 AM on March 9, 2021 [22 favorites]
I would argue that democrats lose midterm elections by campaigning on $2000 and then coming to the negotiation table with $1400 and trying to claim that was the plan all along.
Or, y'know, making a meme out of voting against a minimum wage increase.
posted by graventy at 7:37 AM on March 9, 2021 [22 favorites]
I find it odd that so many people are expressing a sense of relief and calm. I'm experienceing so much the opposite that for my mental health I've had to mostly stop my consumption of political news and online discussions of politics for the first time since I was 16. I've dropped my Twitter entirely, I've unsubscribed from every single politics related subreddit I was on, MeFi and it's less frequent posts is about all I allow myself these days.
Far from feeling relief or calm, I'm feeling a toxic mix of rage, despair, anxiety, and enervation.
So am I just totally wrong and do other people genuinely think we're going to enter the 2022 midterms facing anything other than massively increased Republican gerrymandering, voter suppression at a level unseen since the 1950's, and a Democratic electorate that is utterly dispirited and sees no reason to bother voting?
Here's why I think that seems like the most likely scenario:
1) A "Rescue Plan" that includes a single, one off, payment of $1,400 which exactly no one outside the wonkiest of Democratic Party devotees will see as anything but a betrayal of his $2,000 check promise.
2) A Democratic Party that resoundingly voted to keep everyone poor and told Americns that they don't deserve a raise. Great optics people!
3) An escalation of the endless, unwinnable, undefined, infinite war.
4) More kids in cages.
5) And nothing else passing. We have achieved the absolute maximum that Manchin will permit us to achieve and it seems absurd to imagine that anything else will pass.
I fail utterly to see how anyone sees that and thinks "yup, we're good to go, time to relax".
To me that seems like a recipe for total disaster and the utter annihalation of the Democratic Party in the midterms. Just the part where 7 Democratic Senators told working class Americans to fuck off and die is bad enough, but combined with everything else?
"We're doomed" seems to me to be the optimistic assessment of how badly the Democrats have fucked up. Just as Obama proved in 2008, when you give the Democrats power they will do absolutely everything they possibly can to guarantee they can't use it and then the Repubicans win.
I'm genuinely asking: how am I wrong? Can someone please, seriously please, point me to links or something that can give me a tiny shred of hope? How do we win when Manchin is so devoted to giving McConnell the ability to veto any bill?
posted by sotonohito at 8:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [36 favorites]
Far from feeling relief or calm, I'm feeling a toxic mix of rage, despair, anxiety, and enervation.
So am I just totally wrong and do other people genuinely think we're going to enter the 2022 midterms facing anything other than massively increased Republican gerrymandering, voter suppression at a level unseen since the 1950's, and a Democratic electorate that is utterly dispirited and sees no reason to bother voting?
Here's why I think that seems like the most likely scenario:
1) A "Rescue Plan" that includes a single, one off, payment of $1,400 which exactly no one outside the wonkiest of Democratic Party devotees will see as anything but a betrayal of his $2,000 check promise.
2) A Democratic Party that resoundingly voted to keep everyone poor and told Americns that they don't deserve a raise. Great optics people!
3) An escalation of the endless, unwinnable, undefined, infinite war.
4) More kids in cages.
5) And nothing else passing. We have achieved the absolute maximum that Manchin will permit us to achieve and it seems absurd to imagine that anything else will pass.
I fail utterly to see how anyone sees that and thinks "yup, we're good to go, time to relax".
To me that seems like a recipe for total disaster and the utter annihalation of the Democratic Party in the midterms. Just the part where 7 Democratic Senators told working class Americans to fuck off and die is bad enough, but combined with everything else?
"We're doomed" seems to me to be the optimistic assessment of how badly the Democrats have fucked up. Just as Obama proved in 2008, when you give the Democrats power they will do absolutely everything they possibly can to guarantee they can't use it and then the Repubicans win.
I'm genuinely asking: how am I wrong? Can someone please, seriously please, point me to links or something that can give me a tiny shred of hope? How do we win when Manchin is so devoted to giving McConnell the ability to veto any bill?
posted by sotonohito at 8:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [36 favorites]
50 days and he hasn't even played golf once held a press conference. Does he even take this job seriously?
posted by achrise at 9:22 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by achrise at 9:22 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Sotonohito, I'm taking hope in the link Teegeeack AV Club Secretary. If I'm understanding this correctly, it's actually huge. On my $20k income, the maximum I would have to pay for healthcare premiums is $140 a month. But most likely I'd be on the Zero Premium plan and not pay anything. It covers the gap from "don't qualify for Medicaid" and "don't have $400 extra a month to shell out on health insurance."
No minimum wage increase is terrible but this will both 1) put money back in people's pockets, and 2) give a lot more people access to healthcare.
posted by brook horse at 9:28 AM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
No minimum wage increase is terrible but this will both 1) put money back in people's pockets, and 2) give a lot more people access to healthcare.
posted by brook horse at 9:28 AM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
1) A "Rescue Plan" that includes a single, one off, payment of $1,400 which exactly no one outside the wonkiest of Democratic Party devotees will see as anything but a betrayal of his $2,000 check promise.
I strongly disagree, but we don't have to relitigate this question.
2) A Democratic Party that resoundingly voted to keep everyone poor and told Americns that they don't deserve a raise. Great optics people!
Every single Democrat voted for the bill. I encourage you to read and understand what's in the bill. The child tax credits alone will have dramatic impacts on poverty, and if those changes can be made permanent it will be a generational result. It also makes dramatic changes to Obamacare, which will have real impacts on people's income.
I also encourage you to wait until we see the results of a separate vote on the minimum wage before giving up on that. A few Democrats (including both of my Senators, bleh) voted against adding the $15 minimum wage to the larger bill, but that's hardly the Democratic Party writ large.
4) More kids in cages.
I've yet to see anyone give a clear answer on what we are supposed to do with the record number of unaccompanied minors arriving at the border. Like, they're arriving today, what do we do today? Not structural changes to immigration, what do we do today?
5) And nothing else passing. We have achieved the absolute maximum that Manchin will permit us to achieve and it seems absurd to imagine that anything else will pass.
They just finished passing a massive bill within the first 50 days, and you're complaining of "nothing else passing"? Can you give them another minute?
posted by schoolgirl report at 9:38 AM on March 9, 2021 [54 favorites]
I strongly disagree, but we don't have to relitigate this question.
2) A Democratic Party that resoundingly voted to keep everyone poor and told Americns that they don't deserve a raise. Great optics people!
Every single Democrat voted for the bill. I encourage you to read and understand what's in the bill. The child tax credits alone will have dramatic impacts on poverty, and if those changes can be made permanent it will be a generational result. It also makes dramatic changes to Obamacare, which will have real impacts on people's income.
I also encourage you to wait until we see the results of a separate vote on the minimum wage before giving up on that. A few Democrats (including both of my Senators, bleh) voted against adding the $15 minimum wage to the larger bill, but that's hardly the Democratic Party writ large.
4) More kids in cages.
I've yet to see anyone give a clear answer on what we are supposed to do with the record number of unaccompanied minors arriving at the border. Like, they're arriving today, what do we do today? Not structural changes to immigration, what do we do today?
5) And nothing else passing. We have achieved the absolute maximum that Manchin will permit us to achieve and it seems absurd to imagine that anything else will pass.
They just finished passing a massive bill within the first 50 days, and you're complaining of "nothing else passing"? Can you give them another minute?
posted by schoolgirl report at 9:38 AM on March 9, 2021 [54 favorites]
sotonohito, you could listen to the most recent Pod Save America podcast ("The Era of Big Government is Back"), which does a big picture overview of the vast number of progressive programs included in this bill that will have an immediate positive impact on people's lives, and the potential for a sea change in the role of government it represents. Also some positive indications on the potential to adjust the filibuster and pass other bills.
There is also this: Relief bill is most significant legislation for Black farmers since Civil Rights Act, experts say
And this: In the Stimulus Bill, a Policy Revolution in Aid for Children /
With One Move, Congress Could Lift Millions Of Children Out Of Poverty
And this: Pandemic Aid Package Includes Some Relief From High Health Plan Premiums
I think there are so many good programs included in the relief bill that they haven't all been able to get coverage. The direct payments are really the tip of the iceberg. For families, the child credits are a much bigger game changer in the big picture. It is actually huge, and hugely positive. It includes progressive causes that groups have been working on for years and years, and that seemed completely unlikely before this year. I am surprised there isn't more excitement about this!
posted by ialwayscryatendings at 9:51 AM on March 9, 2021 [24 favorites]
There is also this: Relief bill is most significant legislation for Black farmers since Civil Rights Act, experts say
And this: In the Stimulus Bill, a Policy Revolution in Aid for Children /
With One Move, Congress Could Lift Millions Of Children Out Of Poverty
And this: Pandemic Aid Package Includes Some Relief From High Health Plan Premiums
I think there are so many good programs included in the relief bill that they haven't all been able to get coverage. The direct payments are really the tip of the iceberg. For families, the child credits are a much bigger game changer in the big picture. It is actually huge, and hugely positive. It includes progressive causes that groups have been working on for years and years, and that seemed completely unlikely before this year. I am surprised there isn't more excitement about this!
posted by ialwayscryatendings at 9:51 AM on March 9, 2021 [24 favorites]
No, Biden’s new border move isn’t like Trump’s ‘kids in cages’
I'm disappointed to see this really shitty talking point echoed here. Biden isn't pulling kids from their parents and not even bothering to try and get the families back together. This is the administration trying to figure out what to do with an influx of actually unaccompanied minors (and unlike Trump the solution is not to just send them back). They are trying to spend money to keep the kids as best they can, and are simultaneously trying to reform ICE and the immigration policy. Still in the middle of an epidemic.
So of course this get's boiled down to "see Biden puts kids in cages too" and people eat it up.
Yes there are problems. No the Democrats aren't doing everything right. But they are trying.
While I feel for the people who can't see any good but there is progress being made. The tendency of the left to immediately start deciding defeat the second Democrats are in power (and hell before the term even started) is really depressing and needs to stop. The right loves to 'both sides' issues... we don't need to help them out.
posted by cirhosis at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [46 favorites]
I'm disappointed to see this really shitty talking point echoed here. Biden isn't pulling kids from their parents and not even bothering to try and get the families back together. This is the administration trying to figure out what to do with an influx of actually unaccompanied minors (and unlike Trump the solution is not to just send them back). They are trying to spend money to keep the kids as best they can, and are simultaneously trying to reform ICE and the immigration policy. Still in the middle of an epidemic.
So of course this get's boiled down to "see Biden puts kids in cages too" and people eat it up.
Yes there are problems. No the Democrats aren't doing everything right. But they are trying.
While I feel for the people who can't see any good but there is progress being made. The tendency of the left to immediately start deciding defeat the second Democrats are in power (and hell before the term even started) is really depressing and needs to stop. The right loves to 'both sides' issues... we don't need to help them out.
posted by cirhosis at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [46 favorites]
I don't really understand Sinema's motivations at all. Arizona seems to be trending left and I don't know what she gains by being so contrarian.
That's bad but what is the excuse for Coons and Carper of Delaware? And Shaheen and Hassan of New Hampshire? Both states that went strongly for Biden? Who are they pandering to?
posted by JackFlash at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
That's bad but what is the excuse for Coons and Carper of Delaware? And Shaheen and Hassan of New Hampshire? Both states that went strongly for Biden? Who are they pandering to?
posted by JackFlash at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Maybe they're not pandering. Maybe they're just assholes?
posted by Scattercat at 10:00 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by Scattercat at 10:00 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Has there ever been a one-off budget / support / rescue plan in the history of the US as large and progressive as what was just passed?
I mean this literally. It's not just three times the size of Republican counterproposal. It's twice the size of the bailout at the start of the great recession, and not distributing so much of the money as trickle down 'tax incentives.' And in noted contrast to ARRA and the various Great Depression attempts to boost the economy is bigger than the estimated spending gap we're facing--there's not this naive faith we'll do more in six months so we should start small.
I don't know what could possibly compare. Some of the post civil war pension/spoils plans? Probably not, and certainly not progressive. The Homesteading Act? Maybe in size, definitely *not* in terms of justice.
It's not social security or medicare/medicaid, as it's not ongoing. We need to find a way to do more, and it's hard to see a path. So that's frustrating. But this unprecedented bill is taking less than two months and passing with 'majorities' so slender that it took three weeks for the Senate to pass an organizing resolution that let the majority actually take over.
I'm not a blind booster of Biden or the Democrats. I should point out that I brought up airstrikes on this thread before people started complaining that no one was talking about airstrikes. But I see people complain about "learned helplessness," this thread is demonstrating a lot of projected helplessness. I don't know how having my preferred candidate in the White House would have gotten us more by this point; it's even questionable whether they could have done as much.
Keep pressure on for the more that needs to be done, but be realistic about what is being accomplished.
posted by mark k at 10:01 AM on March 9, 2021 [40 favorites]
I mean this literally. It's not just three times the size of Republican counterproposal. It's twice the size of the bailout at the start of the great recession, and not distributing so much of the money as trickle down 'tax incentives.' And in noted contrast to ARRA and the various Great Depression attempts to boost the economy is bigger than the estimated spending gap we're facing--there's not this naive faith we'll do more in six months so we should start small.
I don't know what could possibly compare. Some of the post civil war pension/spoils plans? Probably not, and certainly not progressive. The Homesteading Act? Maybe in size, definitely *not* in terms of justice.
It's not social security or medicare/medicaid, as it's not ongoing. We need to find a way to do more, and it's hard to see a path. So that's frustrating. But this unprecedented bill is taking less than two months and passing with 'majorities' so slender that it took three weeks for the Senate to pass an organizing resolution that let the majority actually take over.
I'm not a blind booster of Biden or the Democrats. I should point out that I brought up airstrikes on this thread before people started complaining that no one was talking about airstrikes. But I see people complain about "learned helplessness," this thread is demonstrating a lot of projected helplessness. I don't know how having my preferred candidate in the White House would have gotten us more by this point; it's even questionable whether they could have done as much.
Keep pressure on for the more that needs to be done, but be realistic about what is being accomplished.
posted by mark k at 10:01 AM on March 9, 2021 [40 favorites]
Remember that we’re here with this big omnibus bill because of the filibuster. All the stuff that’s going in on this is here because it’s classified as a filibuster-proof must-pass bill, which I believe there are only three of in each year’s business, each for a different ostensible purpose. The parliamentary objection to the minimum wage provision was founded in that particular provision not passing muster as a legitimate aspect of the ostensible classification of the bill.
If the filibuster gets blown up, then individual bills can start to be brought up and passed, without the parliamentary baggage. And then every R will have to go on record as them, themselves, individually, voting against, say, a bill that does minimum wage and nothing else. Nothing to hide behind. A constant barrage of such bills, many of which have public support, and many of which WILL PASS, will be an endless PR disaster for the Republican Party.
I think the Dems are spinning up to do just that, once they have this utterly necessary bill signed into law, to stem the bleeding.
posted by notoriety public at 10:04 AM on March 9, 2021 [10 favorites]
If the filibuster gets blown up, then individual bills can start to be brought up and passed, without the parliamentary baggage. And then every R will have to go on record as them, themselves, individually, voting against, say, a bill that does minimum wage and nothing else. Nothing to hide behind. A constant barrage of such bills, many of which have public support, and many of which WILL PASS, will be an endless PR disaster for the Republican Party.
I think the Dems are spinning up to do just that, once they have this utterly necessary bill signed into law, to stem the bleeding.
posted by notoriety public at 10:04 AM on March 9, 2021 [10 favorites]
I went to a state school and took only federal loans and have paid over $180 a month for a decade and still owe almost as much as I started with. I just got a new job that barely pays more than unemployment and today I signed up for health coverage which will take an extra $50 a week out of that.
I am 33 and I have given up on the idea of ever having what I once thought of as a normal life. I will be working poor until the day I die if this country does not RADICALLY change in ways it has become increasingly clear no one wants to bother with.
I can be pleased at the good stuff in the plan without pretending for the benefit of “messaging” that my life isn’t still going to be fucked.
posted by showbiz_liz at 10:05 AM on March 9, 2021 [19 favorites]
I am 33 and I have given up on the idea of ever having what I once thought of as a normal life. I will be working poor until the day I die if this country does not RADICALLY change in ways it has become increasingly clear no one wants to bother with.
I can be pleased at the good stuff in the plan without pretending for the benefit of “messaging” that my life isn’t still going to be fucked.
posted by showbiz_liz at 10:05 AM on March 9, 2021 [19 favorites]
It also makes dramatic changes to Obamacare, which will have real impacts on people's income.
Lmao this shit's temporary?
The subsidy changes run through 2022, yes. But once they’re there, it will be very hard to unwind them. The messaging on that will be rough for Republicans.
posted by schoolgirl report at 10:19 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Lmao this shit's temporary?
The subsidy changes run through 2022, yes. But once they’re there, it will be very hard to unwind them. The messaging on that will be rough for Republicans.
posted by schoolgirl report at 10:19 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
The important thing is that everyone admit defeat as early as possible, as often as possible, and as loudly as possible, so that I can go back to planning my various Golden Visa investments in peace and quiet as God intended. Have you no refuge or resource? Are there no McDonalds? Are there no warehouses?
posted by aramaic at 10:23 AM on March 9, 2021 [13 favorites]
posted by aramaic at 10:23 AM on March 9, 2021 [13 favorites]
Democrats have also gotten smart on the child tax credit. The child tax credit is usually buried at the end of the year when you file your income taxes. But with this Rescue Act, every parent will get a check or direct deposit every month of $300 (age 5 or under) or $250 (17 or under) for each child.
One of the mistakes Democrats have made in the past is doing nice things but getting no credit for it. For example when Obama reduced payroll taxes, it was so obscure that most people thought he had raised taxes. Getting a check or deposit every month is much more visible.
posted by JackFlash at 10:27 AM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
One of the mistakes Democrats have made in the past is doing nice things but getting no credit for it. For example when Obama reduced payroll taxes, it was so obscure that most people thought he had raised taxes. Getting a check or deposit every month is much more visible.
posted by JackFlash at 10:27 AM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
Lmao this shit's temporary?
Maybe temporary and maybe not, but quite popular and visible. The one year limit was necessary for unavoidable political reasons. But going into the 2022 elections it gives Democrats very popular issues to run on -- Republicans want to take away these really nice things you have gotten a taste of and Democrats want to extend them. Getting your shoe in the door is the first step to long term social programs.
posted by JackFlash at 10:33 AM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]
Maybe temporary and maybe not, but quite popular and visible. The one year limit was necessary for unavoidable political reasons. But going into the 2022 elections it gives Democrats very popular issues to run on -- Republicans want to take away these really nice things you have gotten a taste of and Democrats want to extend them. Getting your shoe in the door is the first step to long term social programs.
posted by JackFlash at 10:33 AM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]
Amazing how quickly we've moved from "Listen to RAICES, they know the situation at the border" to "Hold on, I don't appreciate the insinuation of 'kids in cages'".
If the organizations we were collectively rallying around to stand up to the previous administration are still saying the current administration's policies are an issue in their topic of focus, I don't see why I should suddenly know better than them.
posted by CrystalDave at 10:35 AM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
If the organizations we were collectively rallying around to stand up to the previous administration are still saying the current administration's policies are an issue in their topic of focus, I don't see why I should suddenly know better than them.
posted by CrystalDave at 10:35 AM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
> I've yet to see anyone give a clear answer on what we are supposed to do with the record number of unaccompanied minors arriving at the border.
The same thing we do if the lost child was mine or yours. Try as hard as possible to connect them to their families; if none can be found, find foster homes or group homes for them. Treat it as a matter for Child Protective Services, not Customs and Border Protection.
The notion that the only possible solution is concentration camps patrolled by militarized cops is ridiculous - and bullshit. We're not incarcerating these kids to protect them, we're incarcerating them because we think we need to protect ourselves from these kids. This must stop.
posted by splitpeasoup at 10:38 AM on March 9, 2021 [12 favorites]
The same thing we do if the lost child was mine or yours. Try as hard as possible to connect them to their families; if none can be found, find foster homes or group homes for them. Treat it as a matter for Child Protective Services, not Customs and Border Protection.
The notion that the only possible solution is concentration camps patrolled by militarized cops is ridiculous - and bullshit. We're not incarcerating these kids to protect them, we're incarcerating them because we think we need to protect ourselves from these kids. This must stop.
posted by splitpeasoup at 10:38 AM on March 9, 2021 [12 favorites]
Republicans want to take away these really nice things you have gotten a taste of and Democrats want to extend them
Get rid of the filibuster and pass everything: healthcare, childcare, family leave, minimum wage, etc. Pass it all. Make Republicans have to try to take those things away from people instead of letting Republicans stop those things from ever happening. You’ll win every time.posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:39 AM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
I believe in my attempt to bullet point things I gave the false impression I thought the entire American Rescue Plan was 100% awful. That is not what I'm arguing or worried about at all. I don't disagree in the slightest that there were good and necessary things in that bill, and it was a success by many measures.
I can talk about how much PR damage I think Sen Sinema literally dancing up and giving a huge happy thumbs down to us getting a raise did, but that's not really core to my worries.
Yes, it was a very nice bill.
But that's it. We're done now. This single bill is going to be the grand total of all bills passed by the Biden Administration becuase Manchin and Sinema are going to assure that McConnell has veto power over everything else.
That's what really worries me. Let me scrap all the rest of the list and just focus on that one single thing because all my concern about optics and so on is secondary to that.
Mitch McConnell remains unofficial Second President with the power to veto any non-budgetary bill he wants and Senator Manchin had a blunt answer when asked if there was ever a circumstance under which he would take away McConnell's position as Supreme Leader:
"Jesus Christ, what don't you understand about 'never'?"
That's the TL;DR on my terror, worry, and rage. We're fucked, we're going to lose in 2022, because from now until 2022 nothing but budgetary bills will pass and the voters will (rightly) blame the Democrats for doing nothing for two years.
posted by sotonohito at 10:42 AM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
I can talk about how much PR damage I think Sen Sinema literally dancing up and giving a huge happy thumbs down to us getting a raise did, but that's not really core to my worries.
Yes, it was a very nice bill.
But that's it. We're done now. This single bill is going to be the grand total of all bills passed by the Biden Administration becuase Manchin and Sinema are going to assure that McConnell has veto power over everything else.
That's what really worries me. Let me scrap all the rest of the list and just focus on that one single thing because all my concern about optics and so on is secondary to that.
Mitch McConnell remains unofficial Second President with the power to veto any non-budgetary bill he wants and Senator Manchin had a blunt answer when asked if there was ever a circumstance under which he would take away McConnell's position as Supreme Leader:
"Jesus Christ, what don't you understand about 'never'?"
That's the TL;DR on my terror, worry, and rage. We're fucked, we're going to lose in 2022, because from now until 2022 nothing but budgetary bills will pass and the voters will (rightly) blame the Democrats for doing nothing for two years.
posted by sotonohito at 10:42 AM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
That's bad but what is the excuse for Coons and Carper of Delaware? And Shaheen and Hassan of New Hampshire? Both states that went strongly for Biden? Who are they pandering to?
Corporations and health insurance companies, respectively, because they stand to benefit from both lower wages and handouts via the bill.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 10:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Corporations and health insurance companies, respectively, because they stand to benefit from both lower wages and handouts via the bill.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 10:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
I do hope that Biden/the Democratic Party takes a page from Trump with respect to checks sent directly to people from the federal government. If Trump could sign the checks and claim credit, so should they. I don't know what the best pithy message would be, but something like "Delivered by votes for Democrats"
posted by another_20_year_lurker at 10:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by another_20_year_lurker at 10:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
When I read the despair and anger over "not enough and not fast enough" from MeFites, I'm never completely sure how to process it. Am I wrong and just not upset enough, or aware enough? Or do they really not understand how government systems work, especially when people are actually following laws and regulations and trying to make changes that will last?
The rocket attack? Awful, as all state violence is . . . as all violence is. But does there seem to be a pretty standard retaliatory rationale behind it. They attacked ours, we attack theirs. Best solution, probably not, but I have no idea what's actually going on in that situation. I wish it was very simple and comprehensible . . . but it's not.
And with the unaccompanied immigrant kids, my understanding is that they are trying to put them in the camps so they can be taken care of, put in the asylum system, and united with whoever they're supposed to be with, as long as it's safe. Ideal, no. Best that we have? Maybe.
What better way do people actually see that system happening?
(I admit, I hate that ICE is involved at all. They should be abolished, banished, and their memories salted over, so to speak. But somebody has to get them in the system somehow. CBP is not much better . . . but, again, Biden can't wave his executive wand and say that CBP is now not in charge of the borders . . .)
And the min wage is not done. The dems and the president seem to be still pushing to find a way to make it happen. And Biden supports it, and is openly talking often about the need for organized labor and labor reforms. That is huge!
Could they have found a work-around and forced it into the recovery bill. Sure. By using the kinds of tactics that the GOP has long used and which became a threat to our system of government itself. Fire somebody to get your way. Ignore the rulings you don't like.
And then what? Pretty much guarantee that the bill wouldn't have passed?
I didn't want Biden, but I think he's a hell of a lot better than I thought he might be, and he's pushing the most progressive policies I've seen from a president in my lifetime.
Is he everything? Of course not. But do we know how the next four years will go because of the last two months? Nope. But it is promising.
Make calls. Keep organizing. Do what you can do. Keep working.
He never was going to be the fix for everything. Nobody could be.
posted by pt68 at 11:01 AM on March 9, 2021 [27 favorites]
The rocket attack? Awful, as all state violence is . . . as all violence is. But does there seem to be a pretty standard retaliatory rationale behind it. They attacked ours, we attack theirs. Best solution, probably not, but I have no idea what's actually going on in that situation. I wish it was very simple and comprehensible . . . but it's not.
And with the unaccompanied immigrant kids, my understanding is that they are trying to put them in the camps so they can be taken care of, put in the asylum system, and united with whoever they're supposed to be with, as long as it's safe. Ideal, no. Best that we have? Maybe.
What better way do people actually see that system happening?
(I admit, I hate that ICE is involved at all. They should be abolished, banished, and their memories salted over, so to speak. But somebody has to get them in the system somehow. CBP is not much better . . . but, again, Biden can't wave his executive wand and say that CBP is now not in charge of the borders . . .)
And the min wage is not done. The dems and the president seem to be still pushing to find a way to make it happen. And Biden supports it, and is openly talking often about the need for organized labor and labor reforms. That is huge!
Could they have found a work-around and forced it into the recovery bill. Sure. By using the kinds of tactics that the GOP has long used and which became a threat to our system of government itself. Fire somebody to get your way. Ignore the rulings you don't like.
And then what? Pretty much guarantee that the bill wouldn't have passed?
I didn't want Biden, but I think he's a hell of a lot better than I thought he might be, and he's pushing the most progressive policies I've seen from a president in my lifetime.
Is he everything? Of course not. But do we know how the next four years will go because of the last two months? Nope. But it is promising.
Make calls. Keep organizing. Do what you can do. Keep working.
He never was going to be the fix for everything. Nobody could be.
posted by pt68 at 11:01 AM on March 9, 2021 [27 favorites]
Maybe they're not pandering. Maybe they're just assholes?
Or - not to go all Pollyanna, as this is only one possibility, and admittedly not the most common one - maybe some of them are decent people who are trying to choose good policy and disagree with you? I know I'm not going to change any minds here, but increasing the minimum wage to $15 isn't clearly the optimal policy; it has costs. (In contrast, for instance, I'd argue that anyone voting to retain the carried interest tax break is clearly motivated by self-interest and/or fear, rather than principles.)
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 11:02 AM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
Or - not to go all Pollyanna, as this is only one possibility, and admittedly not the most common one - maybe some of them are decent people who are trying to choose good policy and disagree with you? I know I'm not going to change any minds here, but increasing the minimum wage to $15 isn't clearly the optimal policy; it has costs. (In contrast, for instance, I'd argue that anyone voting to retain the carried interest tax break is clearly motivated by self-interest and/or fear, rather than principles.)
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 11:02 AM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
I know I'm not going to change any minds here, but increasing the minimum wage to $15 isn't clearly the optimal policy; it has costs.
You're not going to change any minds because that is really weak evidence and the CBO report that has been mentioned here before as outlining the costs was half-assed, poorly written, and little more than a partisan policy paper. If that kind of thing is the best that the best economic minds in the US can provide, then yeah, we should not listen to them and try the experiment in real-time.
posted by The_Vegetables at 11:34 AM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
You're not going to change any minds because that is really weak evidence and the CBO report that has been mentioned here before as outlining the costs was half-assed, poorly written, and little more than a partisan policy paper. If that kind of thing is the best that the best economic minds in the US can provide, then yeah, we should not listen to them and try the experiment in real-time.
posted by The_Vegetables at 11:34 AM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
I'm most impressed with the scale of change from previous centrist dem administrations around unions and labor: Biden fired Peter Robb in violation of usual norms, (cautiously) endorsed the Amazon unionization vote in Alabama, and now endorsed the Pro Act. Pressure works folks: keep it up.
posted by latkes at 11:44 AM on March 9, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by latkes at 11:44 AM on March 9, 2021 [10 favorites]
(Also, please call your congress person today and demand they endorse the PRO ACT)
posted by latkes at 11:47 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by latkes at 11:47 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
pt68 As it happens, yes I do think the Democrats should do as Trump and McConnell did. But that's still a side issue.
I'm not being childish and impatient and demanding we do everything right now. I literally, simply, do not see any possible way for any non-budgetary bill to pass given Manchin and Sinema's frequently and fervently expressed desire to keep the filibuster.
I think we're done, game over, the bill that just passed is the best and only thing that will be passed until 2022 when the Republicans retake the House and Senate and work overtime cranking out bill after bill for Biden to veto.
Let''s take minimum wage for example, since you think Biden is working behind the scenes to get it passed.
I'll even make it easier. Assume for the sake of your argument that every single one of the eight Democrats who voted to keep America poor can be convinced to change their minds. Even Sinema who was so happy and cheerful about voting to keep us poor that she patted McConnell on the back then literally danced down the aisle to cast her vote for poverty with a cheerful pose and a dramatic thumbs down.
Out of the Senate Repubicans who are the sixteen you are so confident will be swayed by Biden's efforts?
Because that's what it's going to take.
Or if minimum wage doesn't work for your example take literally any other non-budgetary bill the Democrats theoretically want passed. HB1. Whatever.
Same question: which specific sixteen Republican Senators do you believe will incur the wrath of McConnell and Trump to vote with the Democrats and why do you believe they will do this?
posted by sotonohito at 11:51 AM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
I'm not being childish and impatient and demanding we do everything right now. I literally, simply, do not see any possible way for any non-budgetary bill to pass given Manchin and Sinema's frequently and fervently expressed desire to keep the filibuster.
I think we're done, game over, the bill that just passed is the best and only thing that will be passed until 2022 when the Republicans retake the House and Senate and work overtime cranking out bill after bill for Biden to veto.
Let''s take minimum wage for example, since you think Biden is working behind the scenes to get it passed.
I'll even make it easier. Assume for the sake of your argument that every single one of the eight Democrats who voted to keep America poor can be convinced to change their minds. Even Sinema who was so happy and cheerful about voting to keep us poor that she patted McConnell on the back then literally danced down the aisle to cast her vote for poverty with a cheerful pose and a dramatic thumbs down.
Out of the Senate Repubicans who are the sixteen you are so confident will be swayed by Biden's efforts?
Because that's what it's going to take.
Or if minimum wage doesn't work for your example take literally any other non-budgetary bill the Democrats theoretically want passed. HB1. Whatever.
Same question: which specific sixteen Republican Senators do you believe will incur the wrath of McConnell and Trump to vote with the Democrats and why do you believe they will do this?
posted by sotonohito at 11:51 AM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
When I read the despair and anger over "not enough and not fast enough" from MeFites, I'm never completely sure how to process it. Am I wrong and just not upset enough, or aware enough? Or do they really not understand how government systems work, especially when people are actually following laws and regulations and trying to make changes that will last?First, I think you are somewhat mis-characterizing the "despair and anger", or at least that's not how I read the comments here that are critical or skeptical of what has been accomplished so far.
As for "do they really not understand how government systems work?" at least a few of the comments are specifically concerned with the reality that the Democrats, in order to pass this package, which contains relief that millions of families are desperately in need of, have had to use a legislative process (reconciliation) to which they have extremely limited recourse. Basically they get one or two chances per year to pass legislation under these terms and for anything else the likelihood is that the legislation will be effectively blocked in the Senate by the rules of that chamber (i.e. the filibuster.)
Therefore when people say that the Democrats' legislative agenda is done and they won't be passing anything else, that is possibly a bit of hyperbole but it is also possible that it will be quite literally true -- certainly the rules under which any other legislation can be passed have just gotten orders of magnitude harder, in large part because of an expressed preference for preserving the rules of the Senate over passing the Democratic agenda.
(on edit: sotonohito's response came in while I was composing mine, making pretty much the same point about reconciliation and the filibuster.)
posted by Nerd of the North at 11:55 AM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
I think we're done, game over,
Dude. You literally always think that, regardless of the circumstances.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:09 PM on March 9, 2021 [33 favorites]
Dude. You literally always think that, regardless of the circumstances.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:09 PM on March 9, 2021 [33 favorites]
I do hope that Biden/the Democratic Party takes a page from Trump with respect to checks sent directly to people from the federal government. If Trump could sign the checks and claim credit, so should they.
“The president’s name will not appear in the memo line” of the stimulus checks, @PressSec says.
Lol. I guess it's a good thing not a single Republican voted Yes on the bill, otherwise the administration would be scrambling to print "This money was brought to you on behalf of a bipartisan coalition of Democrats and Republicans" on the checks.
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
“The president’s name will not appear in the memo line” of the stimulus checks, @PressSec says.
Lol. I guess it's a good thing not a single Republican voted Yes on the bill, otherwise the administration would be scrambling to print "This money was brought to you on behalf of a bipartisan coalition of Democrats and Republicans" on the checks.
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
“The president’s name will not appear in the memo line” of the stimulus checks, @PressSec says.
Good. That's some fascist cult of personality bullshit, like holding your party's national convention from the White House.
posted by mark k at 1:15 PM on March 9, 2021 [17 favorites]
Good. That's some fascist cult of personality bullshit, like holding your party's national convention from the White House.
posted by mark k at 1:15 PM on March 9, 2021 [17 favorites]
Blaming Biden for a sudden surge in unaccompanied minors arriving at the border is a really bad-faith hot take.
By the accounts I've read, the administration is working to rapidly place these kids with sponsors. But the system they inherited -- run by Trump's goons up until several weeks ago -- was not capable of handling the current influx humanely or even competently.
Let's revisit this in a couple of months and see how they're doing then.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:15 PM on March 9, 2021 [12 favorites]
By the accounts I've read, the administration is working to rapidly place these kids with sponsors. But the system they inherited -- run by Trump's goons up until several weeks ago -- was not capable of handling the current influx humanely or even competently.
Let's revisit this in a couple of months and see how they're doing then.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:15 PM on March 9, 2021 [12 favorites]
Oh, also:
Let's ignore ... the inability to remember the name of his defense secretary
We're still playing the game of mischaracterizing Biden's speech impediment as dementia, huh?
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:16 PM on March 9, 2021 [22 favorites]
Let's ignore ... the inability to remember the name of his defense secretary
We're still playing the game of mischaracterizing Biden's speech impediment as dementia, huh?
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:16 PM on March 9, 2021 [22 favorites]
A "Rescue Plan" that includes a single, one off, payment of $1,400 which exactly no one outside the wonkiest of Democratic Party devotees will see as anything but a betrayal of his $2,000 check promise.
That ignores the extension of $300/week federal unemployment benefits, the $3000/$3600 child tax credits, the expansion of Obamacare premium supports, and plenty of other stuff.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:22 PM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
That ignores the extension of $300/week federal unemployment benefits, the $3000/$3600 child tax credits, the expansion of Obamacare premium supports, and plenty of other stuff.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:22 PM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
My main criticism of Bernie Sanders was that he was too unwilling to compromise in order to be part of a coalition. By implication, if he's in a coalition–and he's been unusually quiet compared to his behaviour in previous terms–he feels that he can support its program. I don't expect that will always be the case, and I'm not saying that he's necessarily a touchstone for good policies, but his behaviour on this issue at this time is instructive.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:26 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:26 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
Good. That's some fascist cult of personality bullshit, like holding your party's national convention from the White House.
We weren't okay with it when Trump did it and we shouldn't be if Biden did. The Republicans are gambling that no one will remember (or be told by Fox News) that they opposed pandemic relief, but since Democrats seem to be learning from their previous mistakes, hopefully they will take credit for their successes -- and point out Republican opposition.
posted by Gelatin at 1:29 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
We weren't okay with it when Trump did it and we shouldn't be if Biden did. The Republicans are gambling that no one will remember (or be told by Fox News) that they opposed pandemic relief, but since Democrats seem to be learning from their previous mistakes, hopefully they will take credit for their successes -- and point out Republican opposition.
posted by Gelatin at 1:29 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
#AbolishICE should still be something people are trying to do. To be fair, it hasn't been at the top of the slogan list since 2018 or so, so it's not like people focusing on other things are just apologizing for Biden. There is just co much crap.
At least part of the problem is that unlike (say) the EPA, clearing out the top level of corrupt fascists at ICE leaves you with a layer of fascists beneath them. There have been many reports of agents simply ignoring some of the actions already taken. They really were Trump's cossacks, and they're still riding around causing harm.
But our immigration system has been full of racists and politicians who don't want to confront them through many administrations.
That ignores the extension of $300/week federal unemployment benefits, the $3000/$3600 child tax credits, the expansion of Obamacare premium supports, and plenty of other stuff.
Yeah, I mean the direct checks from the rescue plan are maybe a quarter of the aid being offered, and not the most progressive part either. I assume people who fixate on the checks realize that and just wanted the bigger checks as well, which is fine, but it's not like that was the most important thing.
I also think it was suboptimal politics to do the smaller checks and the slightly lower phase-out, but it's weird to obsess about that aspect of it, since it becomes an attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
posted by mark k at 1:31 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
At least part of the problem is that unlike (say) the EPA, clearing out the top level of corrupt fascists at ICE leaves you with a layer of fascists beneath them. There have been many reports of agents simply ignoring some of the actions already taken. They really were Trump's cossacks, and they're still riding around causing harm.
But our immigration system has been full of racists and politicians who don't want to confront them through many administrations.
That ignores the extension of $300/week federal unemployment benefits, the $3000/$3600 child tax credits, the expansion of Obamacare premium supports, and plenty of other stuff.
Yeah, I mean the direct checks from the rescue plan are maybe a quarter of the aid being offered, and not the most progressive part either. I assume people who fixate on the checks realize that and just wanted the bigger checks as well, which is fine, but it's not like that was the most important thing.
I also think it was suboptimal politics to do the smaller checks and the slightly lower phase-out, but it's weird to obsess about that aspect of it, since it becomes an attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
posted by mark k at 1:31 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
But that's it. We're done now. This single bill is going to be the grand total of all bills passed by the Biden Administration
This kind of stuff doesn't make you sophisticated, or clever, or funny, or even a realist. It's just reactionary nihilism with no basis in fact and which actively harms both the discourse here and politics as a whole.
We need to take a step back. Democrats have 50 Senators. 50. And they just passed a 1.9TRILLION dollar economic stimulus that halves child poverty, increases the income of the bottom 20% by 20%, fixes the biggest currently addressable outstanding problem with Obamacare, and funds a laundry list of other progressive policies.
This bill was an absolute triumph compared to what was considered possible even 6 years ago. Is it perfect? Obviously not. If the standard by which we judge success is "is this perfect" then god help us all, we might as well all go home and eat rat poison or something.
posted by Justinian at 1:33 PM on March 9, 2021 [59 favorites]
This kind of stuff doesn't make you sophisticated, or clever, or funny, or even a realist. It's just reactionary nihilism with no basis in fact and which actively harms both the discourse here and politics as a whole.
We need to take a step back. Democrats have 50 Senators. 50. And they just passed a 1.9TRILLION dollar economic stimulus that halves child poverty, increases the income of the bottom 20% by 20%, fixes the biggest currently addressable outstanding problem with Obamacare, and funds a laundry list of other progressive policies.
This bill was an absolute triumph compared to what was considered possible even 6 years ago. Is it perfect? Obviously not. If the standard by which we judge success is "is this perfect" then god help us all, we might as well all go home and eat rat poison or something.
posted by Justinian at 1:33 PM on March 9, 2021 [59 favorites]
I think we're done, game over, the bill that just passed is the best and only thing that will be passed until 2022 when the Republicans retake the House and Senate and work overtime cranking out bill after bill for Biden to veto.
Let''s take minimum wage for example, since you think Biden is working behind the scenes to get it passed.
I think this is beyond pessimistic and inconsistent with the facts. At this point, the Democratic proposal is $15/hour permanently indexed to wage growth by 2025, Manchin is up to $11/hour in two years (which gets somewhat closer to $15 by 2025 number because of the indexing, though very much not all the way there), and the Republican counter-proposal is a woefully inadequate $10/hour by 2025. "Nothing changes" is a possible outcome from those three proposals, but certainly not the only inevitable one. And Manchin is talking openly about proposals that would fundamentally break the filibuster, such as requiring Republicans to physically hold the floor to use it, which would open the door to passing legislation with 50 votes. He's also said he's open to passing voting rights legislation with 50 votes, though it's not clear what mechanism he has in mind. And I don't think Senate Budget Committee Chair Bernie Sanders is planning on doing fuck all with the job until 2022.
When you say "we have achieved the absolute maximum that Manchin will permit us to achieve and it seems absurd to imagine that anything else will pass," that simply doesn't match with the words coming out of the man's mouth. He's frustrating as hell and hurts people, but he's talked quite directly about passing voting rights and infrastructure bills (which is not only jobs, but also that having effective public transit is something that can give millions of people back literally hours of their lives every day), increasing the minimum wage and permanently indexing it so it increases automatically in the future, and reforms to the filibuster that can allow these things to move forward. Manchin held up the relief bill for a day, got almost nothing for it, caved, and declared victory; he's far more interested in the appearance he gives off than anything else. I don't know what happens. I don't know if all of that gets a $15/hour minimum wage passed—I sincerely hope so because the difference between Manchin's current proposal and the Dem one is substantial—but I do think there's enormous reason to believe that Democrats are not simply done legislating for the rest of this Congress, and Manchin's own words are just one reason why.
posted by zachlipton at 1:53 PM on March 9, 2021 [24 favorites]
Let''s take minimum wage for example, since you think Biden is working behind the scenes to get it passed.
I think this is beyond pessimistic and inconsistent with the facts. At this point, the Democratic proposal is $15/hour permanently indexed to wage growth by 2025, Manchin is up to $11/hour in two years (which gets somewhat closer to $15 by 2025 number because of the indexing, though very much not all the way there), and the Republican counter-proposal is a woefully inadequate $10/hour by 2025. "Nothing changes" is a possible outcome from those three proposals, but certainly not the only inevitable one. And Manchin is talking openly about proposals that would fundamentally break the filibuster, such as requiring Republicans to physically hold the floor to use it, which would open the door to passing legislation with 50 votes. He's also said he's open to passing voting rights legislation with 50 votes, though it's not clear what mechanism he has in mind. And I don't think Senate Budget Committee Chair Bernie Sanders is planning on doing fuck all with the job until 2022.
When you say "we have achieved the absolute maximum that Manchin will permit us to achieve and it seems absurd to imagine that anything else will pass," that simply doesn't match with the words coming out of the man's mouth. He's frustrating as hell and hurts people, but he's talked quite directly about passing voting rights and infrastructure bills (which is not only jobs, but also that having effective public transit is something that can give millions of people back literally hours of their lives every day), increasing the minimum wage and permanently indexing it so it increases automatically in the future, and reforms to the filibuster that can allow these things to move forward. Manchin held up the relief bill for a day, got almost nothing for it, caved, and declared victory; he's far more interested in the appearance he gives off than anything else. I don't know what happens. I don't know if all of that gets a $15/hour minimum wage passed—I sincerely hope so because the difference between Manchin's current proposal and the Dem one is substantial—but I do think there's enormous reason to believe that Democrats are not simply done legislating for the rest of this Congress, and Manchin's own words are just one reason why.
posted by zachlipton at 1:53 PM on March 9, 2021 [24 favorites]
The disconnect is that this bill isn't crumbs. It's very substantial. They delivered, and they deserve credit.
posted by Justinian at 2:04 PM on March 9, 2021 [18 favorites]
posted by Justinian at 2:04 PM on March 9, 2021 [18 favorites]
sotonohito, i'm not arguing the numerical realities of the current Congress, but I will argue that there are ways to continue to move policy in more progressive directions, and to chip away at resistance to those policies. Look at the Manchin filibuster situation mentioned upstream: he went from a hard "no' to a "maybe some changes". Again, to say it's "game over" is premature.
And yes, Nerd of the North, I do think some of these responses represent "despair and anger", and I get it, but I'm not in favor right now of abandoning hope, both for my sake or for anyone else. I'm not naive. I grew up in and around small town southern politics, as in ALL of the cliches, but I also saw people make changes in that. Use the system even as you change the system.
Anyway, I'm trying to keep myself out of the pit of despair myself, and after the past few years I'm less inclined to look favorably on a lot of my fellow bipedal primates, but I cling to hope and effort.
posted by pt68 at 2:05 PM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
And yes, Nerd of the North, I do think some of these responses represent "despair and anger", and I get it, but I'm not in favor right now of abandoning hope, both for my sake or for anyone else. I'm not naive. I grew up in and around small town southern politics, as in ALL of the cliches, but I also saw people make changes in that. Use the system even as you change the system.
Anyway, I'm trying to keep myself out of the pit of despair myself, and after the past few years I'm less inclined to look favorably on a lot of my fellow bipedal primates, but I cling to hope and effort.
posted by pt68 at 2:05 PM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
I have unfollowed an awful lot of people on places who have declared this bill a total failure and democrats are completely ruined forever. If no one was in this thread providing facts to push back against the nihilism, I think I would've had to completely nuke the site from my bookmarks, so thank you. You did my brain a great service today, and I on a personal level am going to keep doing what I can with volunteering, talking, donating, VOTING to move progressive issues forward.
This bill was not perfect. I have many disappointments, many of which start very clearly at how my state reelected a completely shit R senator and swung further right, but it isn't all disappointment and no, democracy did not die this week in my humble opinion.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 2:18 PM on March 9, 2021 [20 favorites]
This bill was not perfect. I have many disappointments, many of which start very clearly at how my state reelected a completely shit R senator and swung further right, but it isn't all disappointment and no, democracy did not die this week in my humble opinion.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 2:18 PM on March 9, 2021 [20 favorites]
If there's more legislation coming to address these things then Democrats will get credit for them when it passes.
So basically after Democrats eliminate child poverty, abolish ICE, restore worker rights, stop racism, and end inequality and so on, you'll give them credit.
But not for any of the bills that were passed that moved us in that direction. Like, only after whatever the last bill is passes. Because before that it's just not acceptable.
I'm not sure how you expect any party or faction to ever gain the power to do any of the things you want, if you think withholding support--even credit--until after they are already done is the correct approach.
posted by mark k at 2:25 PM on March 9, 2021 [20 favorites]
So basically after Democrats eliminate child poverty, abolish ICE, restore worker rights, stop racism, and end inequality and so on, you'll give them credit.
But not for any of the bills that were passed that moved us in that direction. Like, only after whatever the last bill is passes. Because before that it's just not acceptable.
I'm not sure how you expect any party or faction to ever gain the power to do any of the things you want, if you think withholding support--even credit--until after they are already done is the correct approach.
posted by mark k at 2:25 PM on March 9, 2021 [20 favorites]
The fight for 15 is a loser of a deal to begin with. Minimum wage, had it been tied to inflation from the start, would be closer to $25, rather than $15. Keeping in mind that minimum wage workers are currently unable to afford a two-bedroom rental in ANY state in the US, we should be grateful for $15, but there's always room for Overton's window to shift left.
posted by fragmede at 2:25 PM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by fragmede at 2:25 PM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
Remember who our biggest enemy is. All this and more could have been done on Day One but for Republican interference (okay, maybe not the minimum wage hike, but still). Republicans hate America and are trying to destroy democracy. That's still happening. Keeping together a knife-edge majority in the Senate is not just a matter of will. Should we blame the delay of 50 days on the 8 Democrats, or the 50 Republicans?
There's plenty to be disappointed about regarding the Democratic Party. But you've got to assume that those who want to wield power tend to be the worst human beings available. It's not like electing the actual Best People is one of our options.
posted by rikschell at 2:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
There's plenty to be disappointed about regarding the Democratic Party. But you've got to assume that those who want to wield power tend to be the worst human beings available. It's not like electing the actual Best People is one of our options.
posted by rikschell at 2:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
I do wonder how Stacey Abrams keeps doing the amazing work she's doing just reading some internet comments.
...she probably knows not to read internet comments...
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 2:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
...she probably knows not to read internet comments...
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 2:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
The most important thing in the short term for all these pushes over the minimum wage isn't actually the size of the initial increase, it's the indexing to wage growth. Because that sets a ratchet and stops the minimum wage from falling every further behind and is very, very hard for the GOP to remove in the same way that killing the ACA proved almost impossible despite it having been the almost sole focus of their party for 6 years.
Getting to 11 isn't as good as getting to 15, but getting to 11 with indexing would actually be better than getting to 15 without it. Obviously I can't see any increase happening without indexing to inflation or wage growth but the point is lots of folks are, I think, focused too much on certain top-line numbers like the actual wage or the size of the one-time relief checks while ignoring the structural changes being made. Bit of missing the forest for the trees.
posted by Justinian at 2:32 PM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
Getting to 11 isn't as good as getting to 15, but getting to 11 with indexing would actually be better than getting to 15 without it. Obviously I can't see any increase happening without indexing to inflation or wage growth but the point is lots of folks are, I think, focused too much on certain top-line numbers like the actual wage or the size of the one-time relief checks while ignoring the structural changes being made. Bit of missing the forest for the trees.
posted by Justinian at 2:32 PM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
Cezar, if that's your standard then as far as I can tell there has never been a government or society of any size, anywhere, at any point in history, ever, which would have met your standard to be given credit for doing something good (as opposed to "less bad"). Because nobody anywhere, ever, has totally eliminated child poverty, ended inequality, etc etc. Which, hey, fine but maybe stop acting like it's some objectively reasonable standard rather than an idiosyncratic quirk.
posted by Justinian at 2:46 PM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
posted by Justinian at 2:46 PM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
posted by Marticus at 3:00 PM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
posted by Marticus at 3:00 PM on March 9, 2021 [16 favorites]
Democrats control the government. They could do these things right now.
This assumes that all Democrats believe the same thing and are willing to vote in lockstep to approve some kind of pre-arranged agenda they all previously hashed out and agreed upon. That's simply not the way the US Government (or any multi-party government I'm aware of) works. I suppose the recent GOP has worked that way, but only because it aspires to a single-party state led by a demogogue.
posted by rikschell at 3:06 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
This assumes that all Democrats believe the same thing and are willing to vote in lockstep to approve some kind of pre-arranged agenda they all previously hashed out and agreed upon. That's simply not the way the US Government (or any multi-party government I'm aware of) works. I suppose the recent GOP has worked that way, but only because it aspires to a single-party state led by a demogogue.
posted by rikschell at 3:06 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
Mod note: Comment and a couple replies removed, and I want to remind folks that "here's what I've decided other people actually think" stuff is basically always a bad idea for a comment. "Speak for yourself, not others" is right there at the top of the Guidelines, please make that effort.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:09 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:09 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
Juat to clarify I am explicitly NOT claiming this bill was terrible. I thought it could be better and i thought the optics of eight Democratic Senators voting against a minimum wage increase (and especially Sinema's super happy dance when she did it) were terrible.
But my objection is not and never has been that the bill was terrible. It contained many things I like
Justinian yes, the bill did good things. I never said otherwise.
How about addressing my real concern: that this was it and Manchin won't let us do anything else?
sideshow I am not now nor have I ever been an accelerationist.
pt68 that is somewhat hopeful. Until he actually allows the Democrats to pass bills with 50+1 I won't feel good.
posted by sotonohito at 3:09 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
But my objection is not and never has been that the bill was terrible. It contained many things I like
Justinian yes, the bill did good things. I never said otherwise.
How about addressing my real concern: that this was it and Manchin won't let us do anything else?
sideshow I am not now nor have I ever been an accelerationist.
pt68 that is somewhat hopeful. Until he actually allows the Democrats to pass bills with 50+1 I won't feel good.
posted by sotonohito at 3:09 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Democrats control the government. They could do these things right now. They currently have the power. That's my point. If they aren't doing these things then they don't want to do them. If they're planning to do those things then I'll give them credit when they do them.
Democrats aren't a monolith; even Senate Democrats -- they're fifty people with significant ideological difference running the gamut from what would usually be considered somewhat right-of-center (Manchin) to what would be considered somewhat left-of-center, in a healthy democracy anywhere else.
But, I do have a good deal of sympathy for leadership. They're not just "the Democratic Party" anymore in the sense of that's their name -- they're the only major small-d democratic party and face a disloyal opposition by a very strong and united neofascist party, and frankly they're doing a pretty admirable job at holding together an unusually ideologically diverse coalition.
Manchin, so far as I can tell, seems to be surprisingly foolish and blinded by self-importance even by Senatorial standards, but ultimately he was got on board with a bill that was very nearly what the House sent to the Senate in the first place, and he seems (as noted by a few people above) to be very cautiously opening the door to filibuster reform, which would then open up a lot more options for constructive steps in a progressive direction.
As your basic Warren-type social democrat, I'm pretty heartened by how well Dem leadership have handled things so far. They're playing pretty well with about the weakest of hands you can have while still actually holding power.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
Democrats aren't a monolith; even Senate Democrats -- they're fifty people with significant ideological difference running the gamut from what would usually be considered somewhat right-of-center (Manchin) to what would be considered somewhat left-of-center, in a healthy democracy anywhere else.
But, I do have a good deal of sympathy for leadership. They're not just "the Democratic Party" anymore in the sense of that's their name -- they're the only major small-d democratic party and face a disloyal opposition by a very strong and united neofascist party, and frankly they're doing a pretty admirable job at holding together an unusually ideologically diverse coalition.
Manchin, so far as I can tell, seems to be surprisingly foolish and blinded by self-importance even by Senatorial standards, but ultimately he was got on board with a bill that was very nearly what the House sent to the Senate in the first place, and he seems (as noted by a few people above) to be very cautiously opening the door to filibuster reform, which would then open up a lot more options for constructive steps in a progressive direction.
As your basic Warren-type social democrat, I'm pretty heartened by how well Dem leadership have handled things so far. They're playing pretty well with about the weakest of hands you can have while still actually holding power.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
The GOP had total control from Jan. 2017 to Jan. 2019 and actually only got one thing through barely and it was a horrible tax cut. They were completely humiliated trying to remove the Affordable Care Act by McCain's thumbs down.
Which was imitated this week also on the senate floor vote, perhaps that is irony.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 3:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Which was imitated this week also on the senate floor vote, perhaps that is irony.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 3:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
I've yet to see anyone give a clear answer on what we are supposed to do with the record number of unaccompanied minors arriving at the border. Like, they're arriving today, what do we do today? Not structural changes to immigration, what do we do today?
"What we do today" needs to be no less than the "structural changes." It is not more complicated or more involved or more resource-intensive to treat these children (as splitpeasoup powerfully put it upthread) like mine or yours as opposed to incarcerating them. It takes courage, though. All of the faith traditions that I am familiar with are unambiguous about when the right time is to do the right thing. More recently Martin Luther King Jr. wrote sharply and famously on this topic. Spoiler alert: that time-- for doing what's right-- isn't "later".
posted by dusty potato at 3:23 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
"What we do today" needs to be no less than the "structural changes." It is not more complicated or more involved or more resource-intensive to treat these children (as splitpeasoup powerfully put it upthread) like mine or yours as opposed to incarcerating them. It takes courage, though. All of the faith traditions that I am familiar with are unambiguous about when the right time is to do the right thing. More recently Martin Luther King Jr. wrote sharply and famously on this topic. Spoiler alert: that time-- for doing what's right-- isn't "later".
posted by dusty potato at 3:23 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
I like the idea of them recreating the talking filibuster. Make them get up there and talk for hours. I want to hear the noises that come out of their mouths when they run out of sound-bites.
Mitch McConnell would end up making a thin keening, like a bow being drawn across a human nerve, drawn taut - Ted Cruz would be making a continuous thick fart with, distantly, an organ pumping out the Dies Irae - Mitt would just sound like Mitt but as the pre-prepared words ran out he would start to give the game away, start talking about things like bio-feudalism, maggot politics, the True Constellations that map the dead stars.
That would be fun.
posted by thatwhichfalls at 3:28 PM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
Mitch McConnell would end up making a thin keening, like a bow being drawn across a human nerve, drawn taut - Ted Cruz would be making a continuous thick fart with, distantly, an organ pumping out the Dies Irae - Mitt would just sound like Mitt but as the pre-prepared words ran out he would start to give the game away, start talking about things like bio-feudalism, maggot politics, the True Constellations that map the dead stars.
That would be fun.
posted by thatwhichfalls at 3:28 PM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
dusty potato, agreed that systemic change needs to happen NOW. People are being hurt NOW.
But change NOW is not all at once, immediately.
MLK certainly pushed for NOW, but he also acted as though he knew that change NOW occupies the days and weeks and months that are required to halt bad actions, build new systems, and implement that change in a lasting way.
LATER was a way to not do anything NOW. But change IS happening NOW.
In my city of Louisville, KY, a lot of people have been creating change NOW for this year that's passed since the police murdered Breonna Taylor, and we will be working on that change NOW for a while to come.
It's happening NOW.
Just not all at once.
posted by pt68 at 3:50 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
But change NOW is not all at once, immediately.
MLK certainly pushed for NOW, but he also acted as though he knew that change NOW occupies the days and weeks and months that are required to halt bad actions, build new systems, and implement that change in a lasting way.
LATER was a way to not do anything NOW. But change IS happening NOW.
In my city of Louisville, KY, a lot of people have been creating change NOW for this year that's passed since the police murdered Breonna Taylor, and we will be working on that change NOW for a while to come.
It's happening NOW.
Just not all at once.
posted by pt68 at 3:50 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
Democrats aren't a monolith; even Senate Democrats
This. Since the Democrats are the Party of Ideas, and everyone thinks their idea is the best, Democrats are always arguing about what to do.
It's not as cohesive as the GOP's "Do Everything You Can To Oppose Democrats", but can potentially deliver what the voters want. ( minus the "Do Everything You Can To Oppose Democrats" voters )
But that makes them vulnerable to this kind of bullshit where one or two people can hold the nation hostage like legislative terrorists. And I think the Democratic leadership should start calling them out on it. The time for internal squabbles is over. It's time to vote on legislation, you're either with us, or you're against us.
posted by mikelieman at 4:19 PM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
This. Since the Democrats are the Party of Ideas, and everyone thinks their idea is the best, Democrats are always arguing about what to do.
It's not as cohesive as the GOP's "Do Everything You Can To Oppose Democrats", but can potentially deliver what the voters want. ( minus the "Do Everything You Can To Oppose Democrats" voters )
But that makes them vulnerable to this kind of bullshit where one or two people can hold the nation hostage like legislative terrorists. And I think the Democratic leadership should start calling them out on it. The time for internal squabbles is over. It's time to vote on legislation, you're either with us, or you're against us.
posted by mikelieman at 4:19 PM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
Biden plans media and travel blitz to sell relief plan -- and make the benefits permanent
After signing a massive but temporary expansion of the social safety net into law this week, President Joe Biden will set about convincing Americans that its benefits -- which amount to a dramatic reshaping of the country's economy -- must be made permanent.posted by octothorpe at 4:22 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
His first venue will be a primetime address Thursday night, a direct-to-camera reckoning on a year of pandemic that aides say will still lean heavily into positive signs the country is slowly emerging from crisis -- fueled along, he'll say, by the contents of his new law.
====
Biden will spend the ensuing weeks firing up Air Force One to fly around the country highlighting where the bill's effects will be most felt, an effort designed to sell people outside Washington that it is in part because of his plan that vaccinations are speeding up, schools are reopening and life is starting to look like normal, according to people familiar with the plans.
This many comments and no one’s mentioned the first Major White House scandal - The First Dogs just got sent back to Delaware after a biting incident.
posted by Mchelly at 4:29 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Mchelly at 4:29 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Would Manchin really lose his job to a republican after doubling the salary for minimum wage workers in his state where over 60% of the population supports $15? It would still be worth it. The proposal takes a couple years to get wages to 15, which isn't enough, but would help so many people so very much.
posted by theora55 at 4:52 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by theora55 at 4:52 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
I count it as a huge victory that the government is going from a partisan tool to torture the wrong Americans and becoming something that can help people, however minimal and flawed it might be.
The pressure and Discourse around some of these policies have been 10 years in the making and organizers are finally making a dent. That's worth celebrating.
posted by ichomp at 5:05 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
The pressure and Discourse around some of these policies have been 10 years in the making and organizers are finally making a dent. That's worth celebrating.
posted by ichomp at 5:05 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Let's ignore the airstrikes and the inability to remember the name of his defense secretary and record breaking numbers of kids in cages.
posted by Foosnark at 5:03 AM on March 9 [13 favorites +] [!]
it would be fucking great if this kind of ableism was treated like the bullshit bigotry it is
posted by schadenfrau at 5:20 PM on March 9, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by Foosnark at 5:03 AM on March 9 [13 favorites +] [!]
it would be fucking great if this kind of ableism was treated like the bullshit bigotry it is
posted by schadenfrau at 5:20 PM on March 9, 2021 [10 favorites]
re: "record breaking numbers of kids in cages"
Not necessarily bad. If we have record breaking numbers of unaccompanied alien minors, we've have record numbers temporarily in detention. Can you tell me if the Biden administration is complying with the spirit of the Flores Settlement Agreement and keeping their detention to no more than 20 days?
posted by mikelieman at 5:24 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Not necessarily bad. If we have record breaking numbers of unaccompanied alien minors, we've have record numbers temporarily in detention. Can you tell me if the Biden administration is complying with the spirit of the Flores Settlement Agreement and keeping their detention to no more than 20 days?
posted by mikelieman at 5:24 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
The same thing we do if the lost child was mine or yours. Try as hard as possible to connect them to their families; if none can be found, find foster homes or group homes for them. Treat it as a matter for Child Protective Services, not Customs and Border Protection.
Great! And while you’re trying to connect them to their family, or finding the right foster home, where are they? Because that doesn’t happen immediately, or in one day, or two days. Meanwhile you have desperately tired, hungry, and possibly sick or injured kids to take care of today.
Please read.
posted by schoolgirl report at 5:42 PM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
Great! And while you’re trying to connect them to their family, or finding the right foster home, where are they? Because that doesn’t happen immediately, or in one day, or two days. Meanwhile you have desperately tired, hungry, and possibly sick or injured kids to take care of today.
Please read.
posted by schoolgirl report at 5:42 PM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
The new Child Tax Credit is pretty brilliant. The government will begin sending $300 or $250 checks each month for every middle and lower income child in the country. This is the closest thing ever to a universal basic income for kids.
It is the biggest single action in reducing child poverty in decades. It will lift 5 million children out of poverty, reducing child poverty by 45%.
It only lasts for a year under the current law, but Democrats can campaign on making it permanent.
posted by JackFlash at 5:47 PM on March 9, 2021 [15 favorites]
It is the biggest single action in reducing child poverty in decades. It will lift 5 million children out of poverty, reducing child poverty by 45%.
It only lasts for a year under the current law, but Democrats can campaign on making it permanent.
posted by JackFlash at 5:47 PM on March 9, 2021 [15 favorites]
Put me in the camp that isn't ready to celebrate government being "back". Sorry, that's just how I feel. Was I relieved when it became clear Biden would win? Yes. Was I even more relieved, and surprised, when the Democrats swept the Georgia senate runoffs? You bet. The 1.9 trillion dollar stimulus wouldn't be happening if they didn't. But the "transformational" change to our economy (if the provisions expanding the safety net in the stimulus somehow were made permanent) are coming after over half a million people died in a once in a century (we hope) natural disaster and many millions more were thrown into poverty or otherwise displaced due to the second order effects of the disaster response.
We're basically meeting the bare minimum for a functioning government and society by providing belated relief for people affected by the calamity. It would be great if we could extend some of the provisions to make them permanent, but that is still just a start. We're back at square one, except countless lives were lost or ruined along the journey to the mere possibility of what amounts to initial steps or temporary patches (expanded ACA subsidies) to address the ills of poverty, racial inequality, economic inequality, and lack of true universal healthcare afflicting this country, amongst other ailments too numerous to mention.
It shouldn't take hundreds of thousands of deaths to amass the political will necessary to make even small changes to address those issues. And even now, "centrists" and "moderates" water down reforms purely as an act of political branding. We're still staring down the barrel of climate change, structural racism, widening economic inequality, and global inequality, which will cause continued suffering and drive instability and crises of which the current pandemic may be very well be just a foretaste. We need a functioning government, not one that just reacts to crises after they've already past.
Despite the above, do I see signs for optimism? Yes, but not in anything the Democrats are doing right now. My reaction to measures like the stimulus is relief that they're meeting the bare minimum necessary to clean up after the current crisis and prevent things from getting (much) worse. Rather, my optimism lies in the forces pushing the Democrats to do more, as well the forces running candidates for office from the left to inject new blood into our politics that isn't (yet) beholden to entrenched interests resistant to any kind of change. It will be those organizations that will push Biden in positive directions, such as his pro labor gestures, but, more importantly, it is those forces that I hope will build a more lasting coalition capable of actually address the problems confronting this country and the world.
As relayed to me by someone attempting to meet with state level politicians regarding issues affecting an organization to which I belong: They told me we needed a PAC. In other words, you don't get anything that you don't ask and aren't prepared to fight for.
posted by eagles123 at 6:22 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
We're basically meeting the bare minimum for a functioning government and society by providing belated relief for people affected by the calamity. It would be great if we could extend some of the provisions to make them permanent, but that is still just a start. We're back at square one, except countless lives were lost or ruined along the journey to the mere possibility of what amounts to initial steps or temporary patches (expanded ACA subsidies) to address the ills of poverty, racial inequality, economic inequality, and lack of true universal healthcare afflicting this country, amongst other ailments too numerous to mention.
It shouldn't take hundreds of thousands of deaths to amass the political will necessary to make even small changes to address those issues. And even now, "centrists" and "moderates" water down reforms purely as an act of political branding. We're still staring down the barrel of climate change, structural racism, widening economic inequality, and global inequality, which will cause continued suffering and drive instability and crises of which the current pandemic may be very well be just a foretaste. We need a functioning government, not one that just reacts to crises after they've already past.
Despite the above, do I see signs for optimism? Yes, but not in anything the Democrats are doing right now. My reaction to measures like the stimulus is relief that they're meeting the bare minimum necessary to clean up after the current crisis and prevent things from getting (much) worse. Rather, my optimism lies in the forces pushing the Democrats to do more, as well the forces running candidates for office from the left to inject new blood into our politics that isn't (yet) beholden to entrenched interests resistant to any kind of change. It will be those organizations that will push Biden in positive directions, such as his pro labor gestures, but, more importantly, it is those forces that I hope will build a more lasting coalition capable of actually address the problems confronting this country and the world.
As relayed to me by someone attempting to meet with state level politicians regarding issues affecting an organization to which I belong: They told me we needed a PAC. In other words, you don't get anything that you don't ask and aren't prepared to fight for.
posted by eagles123 at 6:22 PM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
In addition to the child tax credits, the increased subsidies for ACA coverage are due to expire at the end of 2022. Very good issues for Dems to campaign on going into the midterms.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:27 PM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:27 PM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
record breaking numbers of kids in cagesAnyone repeating this might want to consider that part of why they’re hearing such inflammatory and inaccurate language is because people like Stephen Miller are trying to maintain immigration as a wedge issue. Any time you find yourself saying what people like that are hoping you’ll say it’s a good idea to ask what they’re leaving out. This problem isn’t simple and most of the solutions will take time since there’s a backlog of problems, not to mention a global pandemic.
Given the number of groups saying the new administration is working with them, in particular, I think the assumption of bad faith is unhelpful, as is a reflexive grasp for false-equivalence. It’d be much better to focus on specific things which could be done better, especially since that’s process of digging into those issues is usually a good way to learn why they’re not as easily solved as we’d like.
posted by adamsc at 7:05 PM on March 9, 2021 [15 favorites]
Yeah, I think the temptation to think "ok, there are easy solutions to [complicated problem]" is a pretty easy one. That was one of Trump's best tools to get power: he promised that if only he were elected, he would drain the swamp and Make America Great Again and all the things. And ultimately, for all the destruction and cruelty he and his cronies were able to accomplish, they could've done much worse if they'd bothered to figure out how to do a lot of the things that are just... complicated.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:13 PM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:13 PM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]
The 1.9 trillion dollar stimulus wouldn't be happening if they didn't. But the "transformational" change to our economy (if the provisions expanding the safety net in the stimulus somehow were made permanent) are coming after over half a million people died in a once in a century (we hope) natural disaster and many millions more were thrown into poverty or otherwise displaced due to the second order effects of the disaster response.
"Disaster response"? There effectively was no fucking response from the federal government for almost a year, with the then-president spreading lies and disinformation. Now we have a president who had a plan and is putting it into place, despite the tiniest-possible Senate majority and active opposition from the GOP Nazi sympathizers in Congress. (Who supported Trump's aid packages and unanimously opposed Biden's.)
posted by kirkaracha at 7:24 PM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
"Disaster response"? There effectively was no fucking response from the federal government for almost a year, with the then-president spreading lies and disinformation. Now we have a president who had a plan and is putting it into place, despite the tiniest-possible Senate majority and active opposition from the GOP Nazi sympathizers in Congress. (Who supported Trump's aid packages and unanimously opposed Biden's.)
posted by kirkaracha at 7:24 PM on March 9, 2021 [7 favorites]
My reaction to measures like the stimulus is relief that they're meeting the bare minimum necessary to clean up after the current crisis and prevent things from getting (much) worse.
The Democrats have 50 votes in the Senate, with VP Harris as a tiebreaker. With united Republican opposition, anything the Democrats pass has to be acceptable by the most conservative Democrats in the Senate. The stimulus doesn't go as far as I would want either, but it's the most liberal thing that can pass the current composition of the Senate.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:26 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
The Democrats have 50 votes in the Senate, with VP Harris as a tiebreaker. With united Republican opposition, anything the Democrats pass has to be acceptable by the most conservative Democrats in the Senate. The stimulus doesn't go as far as I would want either, but it's the most liberal thing that can pass the current composition of the Senate.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:26 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
I highly recommend all of Aura Bogado's work—she's one of the best immigration reporters in the country—on the difference between cages and shelters, especially this thread which explains how the unaccompanied minor shelter system works in reality and the many problems with it that need to be addressed. She's been reporting on this system for years, and she writes about how it's important to understand what's really wrong with it rather than reducing it to "kids in cages."
posted by zachlipton at 7:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by zachlipton at 7:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]
"Disaster response"? There effectively was no fucking response from the federal government for almost a year, with the then-president spreading lies and disinformation. Now we have a president who had a plan and is putting it into place, despite the tiniest-possible Senate majority and active opposition from the GOP Nazi sympathizers in Congress. (Who supported Trump's aid packages and unanimously opposed Biden's.)
The Democrats have 50 votes in the Senate, with VP Harris as a tiebreaker. With united Republican opposition, anything the Democrats pass has to be acceptable by the most conservative Democrats in the Senate. The stimulus doesn't go as far as I would want either, but it's the most liberal thing that can pass the current composition of the Senate.
The bolded is the problem in my view.
The following can simultaneously be true:
1) The stimulus is good because it will reduce suffering due to the pandemic.
2) The Biden administration response to the pandemic and the stimulus the Democrats just passed is better than Trumps non-response (not hard!)
3) Whatever the Democrats are able to pass to address healthcare, racism, the environment will do some good and be better than nothing
4) Those measures won't be enough because of the ideological composition and structural makeup of the Democratic Party
5) Whatever the Democrats do or don't do will most certainly be better than most anything the Republicans would do (again, not hard!)
You can be happy with what was passed but also sad because of what was lost and apprehensive about what it to come and our ability to address it. I wholeheartedly reject the notion that criticism of the Democrats is "political nihilism" or "harms the discourse".
posted by eagles123 at 8:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
The Democrats have 50 votes in the Senate, with VP Harris as a tiebreaker. With united Republican opposition, anything the Democrats pass has to be acceptable by the most conservative Democrats in the Senate. The stimulus doesn't go as far as I would want either, but it's the most liberal thing that can pass the current composition of the Senate.
The bolded is the problem in my view.
The following can simultaneously be true:
1) The stimulus is good because it will reduce suffering due to the pandemic.
2) The Biden administration response to the pandemic and the stimulus the Democrats just passed is better than Trumps non-response (not hard!)
3) Whatever the Democrats are able to pass to address healthcare, racism, the environment will do some good and be better than nothing
4) Those measures won't be enough because of the ideological composition and structural makeup of the Democratic Party
5) Whatever the Democrats do or don't do will most certainly be better than most anything the Republicans would do (again, not hard!)
You can be happy with what was passed but also sad because of what was lost and apprehensive about what it to come and our ability to address it. I wholeheartedly reject the notion that criticism of the Democrats is "political nihilism" or "harms the discourse".
posted by eagles123 at 8:17 PM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
So two people here have posted this New Yorker article as a plea for being patient on child detention. The New Yorker article makes clear that CBP incarceration is awful, and ORR is a much better option for kids, despite the Trump admin trying to weaponize ORR into an arm of ICE. So far so good.
The problem is that none of this is a rebuttal to yesterday's CBS News tweet higher in this thread which says that the number of kids in CBP detention has tripled. Yes, CBP. Not ORR.
The last sentence of the New Yorker article: Podkul told me, “I’ve seen the conditions in Mexico and in C.B.P. holding cells at the border, and children aren’t safe in either of them.”
(BTW, I'm not saying all this as a reason to say that Biden is doing a bad job - I'm pretty happy with Biden overall. But we shouldn't be complacent with how these brown kids are getting treated - it's not OK.)
posted by splitpeasoup at 8:26 PM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
The problem is that none of this is a rebuttal to yesterday's CBS News tweet higher in this thread which says that the number of kids in CBP detention has tripled. Yes, CBP. Not ORR.
The last sentence of the New Yorker article: Podkul told me, “I’ve seen the conditions in Mexico and in C.B.P. holding cells at the border, and children aren’t safe in either of them.”
(BTW, I'm not saying all this as a reason to say that Biden is doing a bad job - I'm pretty happy with Biden overall. But we shouldn't be complacent with how these brown kids are getting treated - it's not OK.)
posted by splitpeasoup at 8:26 PM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
I wholeheartedly reject the notion that criticism of the Democrats is "political nihilism" or "harms the discourse".The trick is doing it in a way which assigns blame in proportion to responsibility and has some plausible way to do more than gripe online: for example, any attack on Biden for, for example, minimum wage should highlight the 50 Republicans who staunchly opposed everything, demonstrate awareness that e.g. Manchin doesn’t report to him, and – most importantly – recognize that you’re not going to get someone that much more liberal than Manchin representing WV and that picking off Republican senators in other states is a better idea than flipping WV to the GOP.
posted by adamsc at 8:30 PM on March 9, 2021 [11 favorites]
Trump almost won despite killing a half million people and destroying the economy. The Senate was won by a hair. Congress lost seats.
If you want more progressive legislation for the long term, I would say the best bang for your buck is to campaign for DC and PR statehood. Grumbling about how Biden or Manchin sucks is not going to do it.
A lot of people like what Trump is selling; coming up with a way to defeat/disable a resurgent Confederacy is the challenge of our times. When Trump won, I knew this was going to be a 20 year fight at least. Let's keep that in mind.
posted by benzenedream at 8:45 PM on March 9, 2021 [21 favorites]
If you want more progressive legislation for the long term, I would say the best bang for your buck is to campaign for DC and PR statehood. Grumbling about how Biden or Manchin sucks is not going to do it.
A lot of people like what Trump is selling; coming up with a way to defeat/disable a resurgent Confederacy is the challenge of our times. When Trump won, I knew this was going to be a 20 year fight at least. Let's keep that in mind.
posted by benzenedream at 8:45 PM on March 9, 2021 [21 favorites]
So every single post criticizing the democrats has to come with a disclaimer that the Republicans are worse? Could we maybe create a script that embeds that as a signature or perhaps a mutually understood symbol? I'm beginning to understand why single party states had such weird communication styles .....
"Giving due acknowledgement to the perpetual mendacity of the Republicans, I respectfully submit the following criticisms of our glorious party ..."
I'm sorry to make a stupid joke, but personally speaking, there are some things I assume based on context. Communication gets unwieldy otherwise.
On another point, the Republican West Virginia governor was to the left of Manchin on the stimulus. Raising the minimum wage is popular across party lines. The electorate is economically to the left of both political parties if you go issue by issue, but beyond that, my sense is that the pandemic temporarily changed the usual rules by which people view government aide. To put it more bluntly: Where in normal times people might fear a huge stimulus is a wasteful giveaway to "them", right now they are willing to put aside those fears out of need and because they see a personal benefit.
We'll see if that holds. That unique nature of the current situation is another reason I'm not ready to celebrate some huge political sea change. On the other hand, the popularity of UBI amongst young people across racial lines perhaps signals a more permanent shift. The "U" as in "universal" being the key aspect, I suspect.
posted by eagles123 at 8:46 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
"Giving due acknowledgement to the perpetual mendacity of the Republicans, I respectfully submit the following criticisms of our glorious party ..."
I'm sorry to make a stupid joke, but personally speaking, there are some things I assume based on context. Communication gets unwieldy otherwise.
On another point, the Republican West Virginia governor was to the left of Manchin on the stimulus. Raising the minimum wage is popular across party lines. The electorate is economically to the left of both political parties if you go issue by issue, but beyond that, my sense is that the pandemic temporarily changed the usual rules by which people view government aide. To put it more bluntly: Where in normal times people might fear a huge stimulus is a wasteful giveaway to "them", right now they are willing to put aside those fears out of need and because they see a personal benefit.
We'll see if that holds. That unique nature of the current situation is another reason I'm not ready to celebrate some huge political sea change. On the other hand, the popularity of UBI amongst young people across racial lines perhaps signals a more permanent shift. The "U" as in "universal" being the key aspect, I suspect.
posted by eagles123 at 8:46 PM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]
Raising the minimum wage is popular across party lines. The electorate is economically to the left of both political parties
I don't think this is true. The $15 minimum wage is supported by 60% of the electorate according to the two latest polls from Ipsos and Politico. 84% of Democrats in the Senate supported it and 99% of Democrats in the House supported it, both at much higher rates than the electorate.
Kind of hard to get things done when not a single Republican will lift a hand to help.
posted by JackFlash at 9:39 PM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
I don't think this is true. The $15 minimum wage is supported by 60% of the electorate according to the two latest polls from Ipsos and Politico. 84% of Democrats in the Senate supported it and 99% of Democrats in the House supported it, both at much higher rates than the electorate.
Kind of hard to get things done when not a single Republican will lift a hand to help.
posted by JackFlash at 9:39 PM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
How about addressing my real concern: that this was it and Manchin won't let us do anything else?
Democrats get to pass one more reconciliation bill this year. It will be infrastructure. If Biden passes the relief and infrastructure bills he will have done more good than any president I can remember.
There is reason to be anxious about the future. Republicans may win the midterms, game the rules, establish one party rule, and then end democracy for the foreseeable future. But if we equate Biden with Republicans or dismiss his efforts as meaningless, then we are buying into one of the big lies pushed during Russia's disinformation campaign that none of it matters and people should just sit on their hands or rage until nirvana drops in our laps. If we want the world to change, we've got to vote Republicans out together.
posted by xammerboy at 10:06 PM on March 9, 2021 [21 favorites]
Democrats get to pass one more reconciliation bill this year. It will be infrastructure. If Biden passes the relief and infrastructure bills he will have done more good than any president I can remember.
There is reason to be anxious about the future. Republicans may win the midterms, game the rules, establish one party rule, and then end democracy for the foreseeable future. But if we equate Biden with Republicans or dismiss his efforts as meaningless, then we are buying into one of the big lies pushed during Russia's disinformation campaign that none of it matters and people should just sit on their hands or rage until nirvana drops in our laps. If we want the world to change, we've got to vote Republicans out together.
posted by xammerboy at 10:06 PM on March 9, 2021 [21 favorites]
Defining "economically left" is a broad topic. Admittedly, I was being loose with my terminology. Nevertheless, if you look at priorities of American voters, centrist and even right wing concerns like deficits and spending are surprisingly low down the list compared to the attention they receive from politicians who style themselves as moderate.
Latest Pew poll on voter priorities
Open ended morning consult poll
Note the Republican section in the morning consult poll. Surprisingly lacking specifics, mostly focused on being angry at Biden and that Trump lost, and with less mention of traditional right wing concerns like spending and entitlements than you would think based on the coverage those issues get.
At the very least, given the emphasis the Manchin's and even Susan Collins of the world place on being perceived as deficit hawks, you would think deficits and spending would be much higher on the priority lists of voters. This discrepancy didn't just pop up with COVID either.
There also is the example of voters, even in states that went for Trump, passing minimum wage hikes and drug decriminalization laws.
There was a specific study I remember from a couple of years ago that directly measured voters' political views against the aggregate votes and policy platforms of politicians in both parties, but it is late and I can't seem to dig it up right now, so I apologize.
posted by eagles123 at 10:07 PM on March 9, 2021
Latest Pew poll on voter priorities
Open ended morning consult poll
Note the Republican section in the morning consult poll. Surprisingly lacking specifics, mostly focused on being angry at Biden and that Trump lost, and with less mention of traditional right wing concerns like spending and entitlements than you would think based on the coverage those issues get.
At the very least, given the emphasis the Manchin's and even Susan Collins of the world place on being perceived as deficit hawks, you would think deficits and spending would be much higher on the priority lists of voters. This discrepancy didn't just pop up with COVID either.
There also is the example of voters, even in states that went for Trump, passing minimum wage hikes and drug decriminalization laws.
There was a specific study I remember from a couple of years ago that directly measured voters' political views against the aggregate votes and policy platforms of politicians in both parties, but it is late and I can't seem to dig it up right now, so I apologize.
posted by eagles123 at 10:07 PM on March 9, 2021
eagles123: I don't think polling voters about policies is a very good metric. A more accurate way to gauge what policies a voter supports is to look at what policies that voter votes for. This isn't that hard to demonstrate, I think. If you polled a bunch of voters and they said that they support racial and religious equality but they always voted for the GOP would you believe that they actually support those things, or would you believe that voting for the GOP means they likely don't actually support those things in any meaningfully way?
If you say you support a policy but always vote for the people who are furthest from that position, isn't the reasonable conclusion that you don't actually support it?
posted by Justinian at 11:46 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
If you say you support a policy but always vote for the people who are furthest from that position, isn't the reasonable conclusion that you don't actually support it?
posted by Justinian at 11:46 PM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]
This thread is absolutely bananas. Childhood poverty will be cut nearly in half, people will be getting free cash money in the mail, people will be eligible for vastly cheaper/free health care plans, people who lose their jobs will be able to elect COBRA coverage that is 100% FREE for up to two years, etc etc etc. Like yeah, it's not perfect (nationalized healthcare and a $25 minimum wage tied to inflation), but Jesus Christ people, this is a big fucking deal that will substantively improve lives. I have literally never been able to say that about anything the Federal government has done in my entire lifetime.
posted by flamk at 12:30 AM on March 10, 2021 [37 favorites]
posted by flamk at 12:30 AM on March 10, 2021 [37 favorites]
The same thing we do if the lost child was mine or yours. Try as hard as possible to connect them to their families; if none can be found, find foster homes or group homes for them. Treat it as a matter for Child Protective Services, not Customs and Border Protection.
This is exactly what they're attempting to do. The beds in HHS are more limited because of Covid restrictions. There is a huge overflow. How do you propose they do it faster so that the thousands of unaccompanied kids coming to the border don't need to be sheltered at all? Let them go on their way to become homeless kids on the street?
Here's a good overview of what Biden is trying to do and some of the hurdles he's faced with regard to the unaccompanied minor migrants.
Somewhat unrelated: Why aren't the monthly payments to families with children being shouted about from rooftops? Am I missing something? This seems to me to be a much bigger deal than a one off check, and if made permanent, this would be the single largest step in reducing childhood poverty in my lifetime in this country.
posted by newpotato at 2:34 AM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
This is exactly what they're attempting to do. The beds in HHS are more limited because of Covid restrictions. There is a huge overflow. How do you propose they do it faster so that the thousands of unaccompanied kids coming to the border don't need to be sheltered at all? Let them go on their way to become homeless kids on the street?
Here's a good overview of what Biden is trying to do and some of the hurdles he's faced with regard to the unaccompanied minor migrants.
Somewhat unrelated: Why aren't the monthly payments to families with children being shouted about from rooftops? Am I missing something? This seems to me to be a much bigger deal than a one off check, and if made permanent, this would be the single largest step in reducing childhood poverty in my lifetime in this country.
posted by newpotato at 2:34 AM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
Why aren't the monthly payments to families with children being shouted about from rooftops?
Previously on MetaFilter
posted by CheesesOfBrazil at 3:43 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
Previously on MetaFilter
posted by CheesesOfBrazil at 3:43 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
I've said for years that if the Dems came out with a unified platform built around progressive policies, they'd win every election from now on.
These policies should be: universal health care, raising the minimum wage to at least $15 immediately (not in some far off future) with yearly increases, forgiving student loan debt, making college/trade schools free or at least substantially cheaper, decriminalization of all drugs and the redirection of the monies spent on enforcement/incarceration put to treatment programs.
But instead we'll continue to get the incrementalism/corporatism that has been what has defined the Democrats for two generations.
posted by drstrangelove at 4:02 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
These policies should be: universal health care, raising the minimum wage to at least $15 immediately (not in some far off future) with yearly increases, forgiving student loan debt, making college/trade schools free or at least substantially cheaper, decriminalization of all drugs and the redirection of the monies spent on enforcement/incarceration put to treatment programs.
But instead we'll continue to get the incrementalism/corporatism that has been what has defined the Democrats for two generations.
posted by drstrangelove at 4:02 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
Yes, it would be great to do better than this. But it would also be very, very bad to do worse than this. We came close to another four years of Trump "leading" us through the pandemic. We came much much closer to having Mitch McConnell blocking any progress. Now there's a lot of focus on Manchin and moderate Democrats who suck and block the more progressive side of the platform.
But let me tell you how I learned to appreciate Blue Dog Democrats. When I moved down to North Carolina, I was represented by Heath Shuler in the House. He was a Democrat, but he voted with the Republicans like 90% of the time. Voted against the ACA. Made me hopping mad. Now I'm represented by Madison Cawthorn, a wink-wink Actual Nazi. Even the worst Democrat is someone who caucuses with you, and that means getting control of the agenda and the committees. Those things are WAY more important than ideological purity.
Democrats have the structural problem that their constituency WANTS things. If they can't pass legislation, they get (rightfully) punished at the ballot box. The problem is that to punish them, you have to help the other side, which is even more regressive, and whose constituency is happy for them to do nothing but block the Democrats from doing anything.
It would be helpful if there were a way to keep Republicans out of power and punish Democrats who aren't willing to push for what the people want, but there doesn't seem to be a way to do so. It's fine to blow off steam and complain about the situation, but yes a lot of us are going to push back defending "Do-nothing Democrats" as being better than the alternative.
My heroes are people like AOC who find a specific and realistic target (a Democrat who does not act to represent their district) and put in the hard work to vote in someone better without overly risking throwing the seat to the other side. Working the margins like that is unsexy stuff, generally, but it's where we'll make the most progress.
posted by rikschell at 5:17 AM on March 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
But let me tell you how I learned to appreciate Blue Dog Democrats. When I moved down to North Carolina, I was represented by Heath Shuler in the House. He was a Democrat, but he voted with the Republicans like 90% of the time. Voted against the ACA. Made me hopping mad. Now I'm represented by Madison Cawthorn, a wink-wink Actual Nazi. Even the worst Democrat is someone who caucuses with you, and that means getting control of the agenda and the committees. Those things are WAY more important than ideological purity.
Democrats have the structural problem that their constituency WANTS things. If they can't pass legislation, they get (rightfully) punished at the ballot box. The problem is that to punish them, you have to help the other side, which is even more regressive, and whose constituency is happy for them to do nothing but block the Democrats from doing anything.
It would be helpful if there were a way to keep Republicans out of power and punish Democrats who aren't willing to push for what the people want, but there doesn't seem to be a way to do so. It's fine to blow off steam and complain about the situation, but yes a lot of us are going to push back defending "Do-nothing Democrats" as being better than the alternative.
My heroes are people like AOC who find a specific and realistic target (a Democrat who does not act to represent their district) and put in the hard work to vote in someone better without overly risking throwing the seat to the other side. Working the margins like that is unsexy stuff, generally, but it's where we'll make the most progress.
posted by rikschell at 5:17 AM on March 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
My heroes are people like AOC who find a specific and realistic target (a Democrat who does not act to represent their district) and put in the hard work to vote in someone better without overly risking throwing the seat to the other side. Working the margins like that is unsexy stuff, generally, but it's where we'll make the most progress.
I think it’s important to point out that the local Democratic establishment considered AOC a damned loudmouth upstart and fought tooth and nail against her election in the primary. She is not the result of a natural and smooth trend toward socialism within the party, she is the result of ignoring what party elders demand and taking power despite them.
posted by showbiz_liz at 6:04 AM on March 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
I think it’s important to point out that the local Democratic establishment considered AOC a damned loudmouth upstart and fought tooth and nail against her election in the primary. She is not the result of a natural and smooth trend toward socialism within the party, she is the result of ignoring what party elders demand and taking power despite them.
posted by showbiz_liz at 6:04 AM on March 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
I think as Democrats we've been brainwashed for years to believe we are in disarray so we can't process actual wins very well. We go in assuming we will be disappointed. We're traumatized. We have absorbed so many Republican talking points about ourselves we spew them on cue.
I was definitely not pro-Biden but this bill is fucking amazing. It does not solve every problem. But for the love of god, people, take the fucking win. It doesn't mean you think Biden is God and the Democrats his infallible angels. It is not kissing anyone's ass or ignoring work that still needs to be done to say "fuck yeah, we did something good!"
posted by emjaybee at 6:19 AM on March 10, 2021 [27 favorites]
I was definitely not pro-Biden but this bill is fucking amazing. It does not solve every problem. But for the love of god, people, take the fucking win. It doesn't mean you think Biden is God and the Democrats his infallible angels. It is not kissing anyone's ass or ignoring work that still needs to be done to say "fuck yeah, we did something good!"
posted by emjaybee at 6:19 AM on March 10, 2021 [27 favorites]
emjaybee I think that we lost a lot of rhetorical steam from the utterly terrible optics surrounding our utter and complete defeat on the minimum wage issue.
It's one thing to have the Democrats fight tooth and nail but fail to get a minimum wage hike due to Republican opposition.
It's another, dispiriting and enervating, thing to have the Democrats not merely vote to keep us poor, but to have the enraging and horrifying video of Sen Sinema literally patting McConnell on the back to assure him that Americans will still be poor, then literally dancing up to the podium before striking a cheery and happy pose and giving a dramatic thumbs down to us being less poor.
That's the kind of video that makes everyone lose heart and makes it really damn hard to accept the bill as a great victory, or any kind of victory.
Logically, sure, this was a kind of OK bill and a moderate win for us. Emotionally that final vote and video made the bill feel like a loss.
But your point is taken. Yes, this bill was a small step in the right direction and it was a small win. Agreed. I can't really make myself feel happy about it, but I can at least rationally agree it was a win.
JackFlash Kind of hard to get things done when not a single Republican will lift a hand to help.
Yeah no.
That's not a valid excuse for failures by the Democratic Party, for two reasons.
The first reason is Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The Republicans got her installed on the Court in less than two weeks and just barely before the election. All with (nominal) 100% Democratic opposition. That proves no party with a majority needs help from the other party to get shit done.
The second reason is that the DEMOCRATS set rules so they need a mother may I from not one, not two, but **SIXTEEN** Republican Senators before they can do literally anything outside budget bills. The Republicans didn't make that rule, the Democrats did.
The Democrats have the majority. Absolutely anything that happens, or does not happen, is 100% their responsibility.
We worked our asses off to give the Democrats the majority, I personally donated a couple hundred bucks I really couldn't afford, and many hours of my time I could have spent doing other things, because I wanted the Democrats to win.
But, see, I wanted the Democrats to win so they could get shit done not becuse it gives us the warm fuzzies to know that the bombs in the ongoing infinite unwinnable endless Middle Eastern baby killing war are dropped by the order of a Democrat instead of a Repulican.
We worked to get Democrats elected because we wanted to get shit done.
Three months after the Democrats took ownership of the entire Federal goverment, they now have one small thing done.
If, as I fear, it is all that gets done, if it's the ACA of 2021, the disappointing and underwhelming bill that is endlessly praised becuase it's literally all the Democrats did with the massive power we gave them, then the Democrats will lose so hard in 2022 it'll make the 2010 loss look like a triumphant victory.
posted by sotonohito at 7:53 AM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
It's one thing to have the Democrats fight tooth and nail but fail to get a minimum wage hike due to Republican opposition.
It's another, dispiriting and enervating, thing to have the Democrats not merely vote to keep us poor, but to have the enraging and horrifying video of Sen Sinema literally patting McConnell on the back to assure him that Americans will still be poor, then literally dancing up to the podium before striking a cheery and happy pose and giving a dramatic thumbs down to us being less poor.
That's the kind of video that makes everyone lose heart and makes it really damn hard to accept the bill as a great victory, or any kind of victory.
Logically, sure, this was a kind of OK bill and a moderate win for us. Emotionally that final vote and video made the bill feel like a loss.
But your point is taken. Yes, this bill was a small step in the right direction and it was a small win. Agreed. I can't really make myself feel happy about it, but I can at least rationally agree it was a win.
JackFlash Kind of hard to get things done when not a single Republican will lift a hand to help.
Yeah no.
That's not a valid excuse for failures by the Democratic Party, for two reasons.
The first reason is Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The Republicans got her installed on the Court in less than two weeks and just barely before the election. All with (nominal) 100% Democratic opposition. That proves no party with a majority needs help from the other party to get shit done.
The second reason is that the DEMOCRATS set rules so they need a mother may I from not one, not two, but **SIXTEEN** Republican Senators before they can do literally anything outside budget bills. The Republicans didn't make that rule, the Democrats did.
The Democrats have the majority. Absolutely anything that happens, or does not happen, is 100% their responsibility.
We worked our asses off to give the Democrats the majority, I personally donated a couple hundred bucks I really couldn't afford, and many hours of my time I could have spent doing other things, because I wanted the Democrats to win.
But, see, I wanted the Democrats to win so they could get shit done not becuse it gives us the warm fuzzies to know that the bombs in the ongoing infinite unwinnable endless Middle Eastern baby killing war are dropped by the order of a Democrat instead of a Repulican.
We worked to get Democrats elected because we wanted to get shit done.
Three months after the Democrats took ownership of the entire Federal goverment, they now have one small thing done.
If, as I fear, it is all that gets done, if it's the ACA of 2021, the disappointing and underwhelming bill that is endlessly praised becuase it's literally all the Democrats did with the massive power we gave them, then the Democrats will lose so hard in 2022 it'll make the 2010 loss look like a triumphant victory.
posted by sotonohito at 7:53 AM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
Three months after the Democrats took ownership of the entire Federal government
I'm not even an American and I know that's not how things actually work. The organizing resolution was passed Feb. 3rd.
posted by aramaic at 8:07 AM on March 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
I'm not even an American and I know that's not how things actually work. The organizing resolution was passed Feb. 3rd.
posted by aramaic at 8:07 AM on March 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
Mod note: One comment deleted. Please don't put words into other people's mouth through sarcastic paraphrase of their comments; it makes discussion a lot worse than it needs to be. Please see the Guidelines. On a separate issue: a comment way upthread equates Biden skipping a name because of his stutter with not knowing/remembering the name. Please be more thoughtful about this, making fun of someone for their stutter sends a pretty gross message to other folks with disabilities including your fellow Mefites. Please don't do this.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 8:10 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 8:10 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
aramaic
You are 100% correct, that is when the resolution was passed. But it only took that long becuase Schumer allowed it to take that long. A Senate with 50 Democrats was sworn in on Jan 3. The VP to give them the tie breaking vote was sworn in on Jan 21.
The Democrats took 100% control of Congress and the Presidency on Jan 21. The fact that it took Schumer endless weeks before he finally asserted his ownership of the Senate is part of my problem not proof that I'm wrong.
We're moving at a snail's pace because that's how fast the Democrats choose to move.
posted by sotonohito at 8:21 AM on March 10, 2021
You are 100% correct, that is when the resolution was passed. But it only took that long becuase Schumer allowed it to take that long. A Senate with 50 Democrats was sworn in on Jan 3. The VP to give them the tie breaking vote was sworn in on Jan 21.
The Democrats took 100% control of Congress and the Presidency on Jan 21. The fact that it took Schumer endless weeks before he finally asserted his ownership of the Senate is part of my problem not proof that I'm wrong.
We're moving at a snail's pace because that's how fast the Democrats choose to move.
posted by sotonohito at 8:21 AM on March 10, 2021
You are 100% correct, that is when the resolution was passed. But it only took that long because Schumer allowed it to take that long. A Senate with 50 Democrats was sworn in on Jan 3. The VP to give them the tie breaking vote was sworn in on Jan 21.
The resolution was subject to filibuster. It didn't just require 51 votes. Schumer is not a dictator who can just issue orders to Sinema and Manchin on the filibuster.
If you want more progressive legislation, you need to elect more Democrats. Things would look a lot different if Democrats had won senate seats in Maine or Montana or Iowa or North Carolina.
posted by JackFlash at 8:49 AM on March 10, 2021 [18 favorites]
The resolution was subject to filibuster. It didn't just require 51 votes. Schumer is not a dictator who can just issue orders to Sinema and Manchin on the filibuster.
If you want more progressive legislation, you need to elect more Democrats. Things would look a lot different if Democrats had won senate seats in Maine or Montana or Iowa or North Carolina.
posted by JackFlash at 8:49 AM on March 10, 2021 [18 favorites]
Amy Coney Barrett was pushed through in record time because court appointments were already no longer subject to the Filibuster. While I'm in favor of nuking the Filibuster, I understand Democrats who are wary of doing so. The Senate is structured to favor conservatives, and getting rid of the rule now would mean if and when Democrats are in the minority again, they've lost that tool to block legislation the other side wants to pass.
I don't agree with that line of argument, because Republicans have proved themselves willing to ignore every rule and norm when it suits them and they would not hesitate to nuke the Filibuster themselves if it were in their favor to do so. Also, the modern GOP almost never wants to pass legislation; generally they're just happy with nothing getting passed. So I don't agree, but I understand the argument. And it's hard to convince senators who rely on the rule to inflict their own personal power against the chamber to let go of it.
We have to remember that our aims and goals are very different from the other side's, and so we can't use the same tools and strategies. Passing legislation and blocking legislation are very different prospects, and one is MUCH easier than the other (guess which one is ours). So saying "the Republicans got what they wanted easily enough, why can't we?" is kind of like asking why it's so much work to throw a weight upwards when it obviously moves so easily downwards without any effort at all!
posted by rikschell at 9:33 AM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
I don't agree with that line of argument, because Republicans have proved themselves willing to ignore every rule and norm when it suits them and they would not hesitate to nuke the Filibuster themselves if it were in their favor to do so. Also, the modern GOP almost never wants to pass legislation; generally they're just happy with nothing getting passed. So I don't agree, but I understand the argument. And it's hard to convince senators who rely on the rule to inflict their own personal power against the chamber to let go of it.
We have to remember that our aims and goals are very different from the other side's, and so we can't use the same tools and strategies. Passing legislation and blocking legislation are very different prospects, and one is MUCH easier than the other (guess which one is ours). So saying "the Republicans got what they wanted easily enough, why can't we?" is kind of like asking why it's so much work to throw a weight upwards when it obviously moves so easily downwards without any effort at all!
posted by rikschell at 9:33 AM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
JFC I can't actually get over it. Three months? THREE. MONTHS?!
If you were accurate about January 3, which you are not, you are factually 100% incorrect... January 3 to March 10 (I'm being generous and counting the past two days for you) is just over TWO months. January 20 is when Joe Biden assumed the presidency. It will be two months from then in 10 days.
And you have the absolute cajones to say three months like you're stating a fact. I will not allow blatant disinformation to go without direct and forceful pushback. Dates are easily counted. Please at least try to post factual things.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 9:46 AM on March 10, 2021 [17 favorites]
If you were accurate about January 3, which you are not, you are factually 100% incorrect... January 3 to March 10 (I'm being generous and counting the past two days for you) is just over TWO months. January 20 is when Joe Biden assumed the presidency. It will be two months from then in 10 days.
And you have the absolute cajones to say three months like you're stating a fact. I will not allow blatant disinformation to go without direct and forceful pushback. Dates are easily counted. Please at least try to post factual things.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 9:46 AM on March 10, 2021 [17 favorites]
Proposal: If you're super mad about someone's argument on metafilter about political action, channel that rage into attending a rally for a cause you support, calling a member of congress about legislation you support, joining a group that is advocating for issues that are important to you, writing a persuasive essay about an issue that's important to you, or hell, throwing a brick through an enemy's window.
posted by latkes at 9:58 AM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by latkes at 9:58 AM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Can you point to a recent congress moving so quickly on something so massive?
It took them about two weeks to bailout the banks in 2008.
posted by graventy at 10:00 AM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
It took them about two weeks to bailout the banks in 2008.
posted by graventy at 10:00 AM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
Proposal: If you're super mad about someone's argument on metafilter about political action, channel that rage into attending a rally for a cause you support, calling a member of congress about legislation you support, joining a group that is advocating for issues that are important to you, writing a persuasive essay about an issue that's important to you, or hell, throwing a brick through an enemy's window.
This kind of response is starting to become a cheap rhetorical device to defer criticism and conversation, not to mention a bit condescending. I'm probably guilty of it too, but maybe let's take it as an assumption that participants on these pages are aware that political action also exists off of metafilter.
posted by Think_Long at 11:26 AM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
This kind of response is starting to become a cheap rhetorical device to defer criticism and conversation, not to mention a bit condescending. I'm probably guilty of it too, but maybe let's take it as an assumption that participants on these pages are aware that political action also exists off of metafilter.
posted by Think_Long at 11:26 AM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
January 3 to March 10
January, February, March; sounds like 3 months to me (spanning, not duration).
This would go a lot smoother if people weren't leaping to "I call blatant disinformation", "you're using talking points of the enemy", etc. We're all here because we want to be, this isn't some high-stakes arena where what plays out here gets reflected into the broader world, this isn't Fallen London where we're playing the Great Game and a courier in Vienna knows something to set the world on fire (unless the Pawn representing them gets sacrificed).
If people say things, they probably have reasons for that (or if not, it's probably not Deliberate Nefarious Deeds). Try and approach people from that lens, it'll save us all a lot of shouting & stunt-bravura.
posted by CrystalDave at 11:38 AM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
January, February, March; sounds like 3 months to me (spanning, not duration).
This would go a lot smoother if people weren't leaping to "I call blatant disinformation", "you're using talking points of the enemy", etc. We're all here because we want to be, this isn't some high-stakes arena where what plays out here gets reflected into the broader world, this isn't Fallen London where we're playing the Great Game and a courier in Vienna knows something to set the world on fire (unless the Pawn representing them gets sacrificed).
If people say things, they probably have reasons for that (or if not, it's probably not Deliberate Nefarious Deeds). Try and approach people from that lens, it'll save us all a lot of shouting & stunt-bravura.
posted by CrystalDave at 11:38 AM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Maybe the topic of "What is three months?" needs its own thread.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 11:53 AM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by paper chromatographologist at 11:53 AM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
Because I have lived in two seperate millenia, I am two thousand years old? Good to know.
posted by rikschell at 12:03 PM on March 10, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by rikschell at 12:03 PM on March 10, 2021 [8 favorites]
I apologize unreseredly for my factual error.
It was two months. Not three.
On topic, I'll ask just once more since people seem to be optimistic here but I've not yet seen any good reason for that optimism. I solomnly swear not to debate, argue, discuss, or disagree with any responses. I really, genuinely, do want some reason not to despair and I don't see any and I am asking for any thread of hope.
Given the Senate rules requiring 16 defecting Republican Senators to advance any non-budgetary bills does anyone have any real reason to think the Democrats will pass HB1 or any other non-budgetary bills?
posted by sotonohito at 12:04 PM on March 10, 2021
It was two months. Not three.
On topic, I'll ask just once more since people seem to be optimistic here but I've not yet seen any good reason for that optimism. I solomnly swear not to debate, argue, discuss, or disagree with any responses. I really, genuinely, do want some reason not to despair and I don't see any and I am asking for any thread of hope.
Given the Senate rules requiring 16 defecting Republican Senators to advance any non-budgetary bills does anyone have any real reason to think the Democrats will pass HB1 or any other non-budgetary bills?
posted by sotonohito at 12:04 PM on March 10, 2021
For lefties who are feeling hopeless, I'd encourage you to read this piece by Anand Giridharadas, no fan of the Dems.
During the nail-biter negotiations in recent weeks, I confess to falling into a familiar despair. Why not do the obvious thing and raise the minimum wage for millions? Why not fight for the biggest possible checks and the longest-running unemployment aid?
But as I began to focus on the final package, that familiar sense of dismay began to lift. This wasn’t everything. But it was a lot. It will help a lot of people, and help them now. Leaders on the progressive end of things and in the moderate, milquetoasty middle agree this is some of the most significant, far-reaching public action in decades.
But what most stands out to me about the American Rescue Plan is that it points to the ascendancy of certain ideas in the national discussion and the fading of others. As President Biden has said in one of his famous parent quotations, “Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.” In several significant ways, the American Rescue Plan hints at important turnings in the society’s values.
He goes into more detail at the link about what that means--giving people money directly, centering the poor and individuals (not corporations), getting away from austerity measures, etc., all evidence of a rethinking of priorities.
posted by carrienation at 12:07 PM on March 10, 2021 [5 favorites]
During the nail-biter negotiations in recent weeks, I confess to falling into a familiar despair. Why not do the obvious thing and raise the minimum wage for millions? Why not fight for the biggest possible checks and the longest-running unemployment aid?
But as I began to focus on the final package, that familiar sense of dismay began to lift. This wasn’t everything. But it was a lot. It will help a lot of people, and help them now. Leaders on the progressive end of things and in the moderate, milquetoasty middle agree this is some of the most significant, far-reaching public action in decades.
But what most stands out to me about the American Rescue Plan is that it points to the ascendancy of certain ideas in the national discussion and the fading of others. As President Biden has said in one of his famous parent quotations, “Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.” In several significant ways, the American Rescue Plan hints at important turnings in the society’s values.
He goes into more detail at the link about what that means--giving people money directly, centering the poor and individuals (not corporations), getting away from austerity measures, etc., all evidence of a rethinking of priorities.
posted by carrienation at 12:07 PM on March 10, 2021 [5 favorites]
I've said for years that if the Dems came out with a unified platform built around progressive policies, they'd win every election from now on.
Counterpoint: 2016.
Hillary Clinton ran on the most progressive platform any Democrat had up til then, and the so-called "liberal media" covered her failure to comply with email best practices instead.
Note also that the media let Republicans get away with insisting they "care about" people with pre-existing conditions while actually voting to take their coverage away.
posted by Gelatin at 12:07 PM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
Counterpoint: 2016.
Hillary Clinton ran on the most progressive platform any Democrat had up til then, and the so-called "liberal media" covered her failure to comply with email best practices instead.
Note also that the media let Republicans get away with insisting they "care about" people with pre-existing conditions while actually voting to take their coverage away.
posted by Gelatin at 12:07 PM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
It's already been pointed out numerous times that it looks like Manchin is going to propose altering filibuster rules that will make filibusters difficult to maintain. Have you ever thought it might be shaking out this way by design? That Democrats are getting rid of the filibuster, but doing it in a way that protects Manchin's conservative credibility? Plus, infrastructure, which will likely be based on green new deal proposals. Is this nothing?
If you want to be optimistic, look at healthcare. Democrats had candidates that ran on universal healthcare and it did not win the day. It doesn't look like enough people will support a change that is that big all at once. But Biden's healthcare changes put us on a path toward making the public option enticing enough that nearly everyone will choose it. This is the alternate path to universal healthcare and it appears to be working.
posted by xammerboy at 12:17 PM on March 10, 2021 [10 favorites]
If you want to be optimistic, look at healthcare. Democrats had candidates that ran on universal healthcare and it did not win the day. It doesn't look like enough people will support a change that is that big all at once. But Biden's healthcare changes put us on a path toward making the public option enticing enough that nearly everyone will choose it. This is the alternate path to universal healthcare and it appears to be working.
posted by xammerboy at 12:17 PM on March 10, 2021 [10 favorites]
I think the House was savvy to make HB1 the first thing they passed. It's an existential bill for the Democratic Party, and if anything is going to convince the Senate to pull the trigger on killing the filibuster, it will be protecting and expanding the vote. You're completely right that congress will be unable to pass anything without killing the filibuster first and then whipping the Democratic caucus bloody. I understand why you're pessimistic on that happening.
But for me, I'm just so profoundly relieved we even have this window of opportunity where such things are possible, that that alone feels like hope. I don't think there's any reason it's bad to feel this way as long as it doesn't make me cocky and complacent (not that my calls to my all-GOP elected officials will matter).
I don't think there's anything wrong with you feeling the way you feel either, as long as the despair doesn't make you complacent either. I think folks on your end get a lot of heat here because through all the political megathreads, there was a perception that people who expressed despair about Democrats would suppress the vote. I know in 2016 when I was campaigning door to door I talked to a lot of people who expressed similar concerns.
I wish there were a better way to punish moderate and complacent Democratic politicians. We should primary them from the left when it's reasonably safe to do so. But I'm not a fan of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, and that means voting for the lesser of two evils. We've seen what four years of noselessness is like, and I don't want to go through that again.
posted by rikschell at 12:31 PM on March 10, 2021 [9 favorites]
But for me, I'm just so profoundly relieved we even have this window of opportunity where such things are possible, that that alone feels like hope. I don't think there's any reason it's bad to feel this way as long as it doesn't make me cocky and complacent (not that my calls to my all-GOP elected officials will matter).
I don't think there's anything wrong with you feeling the way you feel either, as long as the despair doesn't make you complacent either. I think folks on your end get a lot of heat here because through all the political megathreads, there was a perception that people who expressed despair about Democrats would suppress the vote. I know in 2016 when I was campaigning door to door I talked to a lot of people who expressed similar concerns.
I wish there were a better way to punish moderate and complacent Democratic politicians. We should primary them from the left when it's reasonably safe to do so. But I'm not a fan of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, and that means voting for the lesser of two evils. We've seen what four years of noselessness is like, and I don't want to go through that again.
posted by rikschell at 12:31 PM on March 10, 2021 [9 favorites]
Dude, where are you getting that 16 number? Cloture, or getting something non-Byrd-y into a reconciliation bill would take 10. 2/3 would take 17.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:46 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:46 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Snapshot of the deeply weird times we're living in:
National Guard stumble upon euphoric Dem celebration of the stimulus law in the Rotunda, grab Bernie for a photo.
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:30 PM on March 10, 2021 [4 favorites]
National Guard stumble upon euphoric Dem celebration of the stimulus law in the Rotunda, grab Bernie for a photo.
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:30 PM on March 10, 2021 [4 favorites]
Justinian:
eagles123: I don't think polling voters about policies is a very good metric. A more accurate way to gauge what policies a voter supports is to look at what policies that voter votes for. This isn't that hard to demonstrate, I think. If you polled a bunch of voters and they said that they support racial and religious equality but they always voted for the GOP would you believe that they actually support those things, or would you believe that voting for the GOP means they likely don't actually support those things in any meaningfully way?
If you say you support a policy but always vote for the people who are furthest from that position, isn't the reasonable conclusion that you don't actually support it?
The idea for the 15 dollar minimum wage came from grass roots organizing. It wasn't dreamed up by Democratic politicians and then put before voters as an enticement to gain votes. Raising the wage to 15 dollars was considered a fringe position until organizations like fight for 15 and other labor groups started organizing and pressing Democrats to enact it.
In other words, voters can't vote for something if the choice isn't put in front of them. It's true that voters prioritize issues, so they often vote for politicians who don't agree with them on lower priority issues, but, as it relates to the current discussion, there is no evidence that voters prioritize deficits to the extent one would think based on the emphasis "moderates" place on them. In fact, deficits and other shibboleths of the "moderates" and "centrists" are examples of issues voters might say is a priority if you ask them in isolation but then never act on those views when voting. Republicans famously always run-up deficits, but voters never seem to punish them.
On the other hand, as I mentioned, voters do vote for initiatives such raising the minimum wage and legalizing marijuana through referendums if given the choice at the state level.
Really, when it comes to policy choices, the chain tends to run like this: interest groups ----> policy options proposed by politicians. Those interest groups (e.g. lobbying groups from Greenpeace to organized labor to the Koch brothers) are imperfect avatars of the views of American voters, though labor tends to come closest. The actual policies that end up getting enacted tend to be those favored by economic elites.
More here: Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens
From the article:
In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
posted by eagles123 at 1:37 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
eagles123: I don't think polling voters about policies is a very good metric. A more accurate way to gauge what policies a voter supports is to look at what policies that voter votes for. This isn't that hard to demonstrate, I think. If you polled a bunch of voters and they said that they support racial and religious equality but they always voted for the GOP would you believe that they actually support those things, or would you believe that voting for the GOP means they likely don't actually support those things in any meaningfully way?
If you say you support a policy but always vote for the people who are furthest from that position, isn't the reasonable conclusion that you don't actually support it?
The idea for the 15 dollar minimum wage came from grass roots organizing. It wasn't dreamed up by Democratic politicians and then put before voters as an enticement to gain votes. Raising the wage to 15 dollars was considered a fringe position until organizations like fight for 15 and other labor groups started organizing and pressing Democrats to enact it.
In other words, voters can't vote for something if the choice isn't put in front of them. It's true that voters prioritize issues, so they often vote for politicians who don't agree with them on lower priority issues, but, as it relates to the current discussion, there is no evidence that voters prioritize deficits to the extent one would think based on the emphasis "moderates" place on them. In fact, deficits and other shibboleths of the "moderates" and "centrists" are examples of issues voters might say is a priority if you ask them in isolation but then never act on those views when voting. Republicans famously always run-up deficits, but voters never seem to punish them.
On the other hand, as I mentioned, voters do vote for initiatives such raising the minimum wage and legalizing marijuana through referendums if given the choice at the state level.
Really, when it comes to policy choices, the chain tends to run like this: interest groups ----> policy options proposed by politicians. Those interest groups (e.g. lobbying groups from Greenpeace to organized labor to the Koch brothers) are imperfect avatars of the views of American voters, though labor tends to come closest. The actual policies that end up getting enacted tend to be those favored by economic elites.
More here: Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens
From the article:
In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
posted by eagles123 at 1:37 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
dusty potato, agreed that systemic change needs to happen NOW. People are being hurt NOW. [...] But change NOW is not all at once, immediately. [...] MLK certainly pushed for NOW, but he also acted as though he knew that change NOW occupies the days and weeks and months that are required to halt bad actions, build new systems, and implement that change in a lasting way. [...] LATER was a way to not do anything NOW. But change IS happening NOW..
With respect, this line of justification for inaction resembles FUD. I'm not suggesting that you are coming in bad faith; I think FUD to reset expectations is the primary modus operandi of the national Democratic Party, and to some extent it's the political air we all breathe.
However, for a great number of the deep harms in our society, the solution that is most immediately needed is not to "build new systems" or "implement change"-- it is to stop harming. If someone is beating me, what I need most urgently from them is not to come up with a Fist Cessation Implementation Plan, or to make sure that a first aid kit is available before they commit to stopping, but for them to stop! That may be just the first step, but it is the most urgent and necessary step. The solution to incarcerating children is: stop incarcerating children.
We may be talking past one another; if you are simply conveying a realistic appraisal of what is likely to happen, I don't disagree with you. We know who Joe Biden is and he will not wield the great power he has to stop these harms.
posted by dusty potato at 1:58 PM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
With respect, this line of justification for inaction resembles FUD. I'm not suggesting that you are coming in bad faith; I think FUD to reset expectations is the primary modus operandi of the national Democratic Party, and to some extent it's the political air we all breathe.
However, for a great number of the deep harms in our society, the solution that is most immediately needed is not to "build new systems" or "implement change"-- it is to stop harming. If someone is beating me, what I need most urgently from them is not to come up with a Fist Cessation Implementation Plan, or to make sure that a first aid kit is available before they commit to stopping, but for them to stop! That may be just the first step, but it is the most urgent and necessary step. The solution to incarcerating children is: stop incarcerating children.
We may be talking past one another; if you are simply conveying a realistic appraisal of what is likely to happen, I don't disagree with you. We know who Joe Biden is and he will not wield the great power he has to stop these harms.
posted by dusty potato at 1:58 PM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
They don't get it because they don't vote based on their stated policy preferences. The conclusions one can draw from that are either they are stupid or that they don't actually care that much about the stuff they say they care about.
posted by Justinian at 2:18 PM on March 10, 2021 [4 favorites]
They don't get it because they don't vote based on their stated policy preferences. The conclusions one can draw from that are either they are stupid or that they don't actually care that much about the stuff they say they care about.
posted by Justinian at 2:18 PM on March 10, 2021 [4 favorites]
Regardless of the causes of the detention of children in adult facilities at the moment, I think we’re probably all in agreement that it’s bad and they should work quickly to fix it.
The administration does appear to be acting like this is a problem rather than a desired state, which is nice and is a change, but yeah they need to fix it, as soon as possible, and they will deserve criticism if they don’t.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 2:50 PM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
The administration does appear to be acting like this is a problem rather than a desired state, which is nice and is a change, but yeah they need to fix it, as soon as possible, and they will deserve criticism if they don’t.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 2:50 PM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
The Tax Policy Center (which is a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute) released its estimate of how after-tax income will change under the ARP.
The lowest quintile -- 44 million tax units -- are expected to see their after-tax income rise 20.1 percent. Second quintile, 9.3%; third, 5.5%; fourth, 3.6% and highest, 0.7%.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:34 PM on March 10, 2021 [8 favorites]
The lowest quintile -- 44 million tax units -- are expected to see their after-tax income rise 20.1 percent. Second quintile, 9.3%; third, 5.5%; fourth, 3.6% and highest, 0.7%.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:34 PM on March 10, 2021 [8 favorites]
One might almost say that the income benefits from this bill are highly progressive.
posted by Justinian at 3:48 PM on March 10, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by Justinian at 3:48 PM on March 10, 2021 [8 favorites]
One might almost say that the income benefits from this bill are highly progressive.
A family of four will be getting as much as $10,000 this year ($1,400 + $1,400 + $3,600 + $3,600). That's not vouchers. It's not food stamps. It's not a tax refund next year. That's cash money right into their bank account starting next week to spend as they decide best.
posted by JackFlash at 5:38 PM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
A family of four will be getting as much as $10,000 this year ($1,400 + $1,400 + $3,600 + $3,600). That's not vouchers. It's not food stamps. It's not a tax refund next year. That's cash money right into their bank account starting next week to spend as they decide best.
posted by JackFlash at 5:38 PM on March 10, 2021 [7 favorites]
While progressives are correct to hold Biden to his promises, and to expect more and to demand better, it is definitely interesting to see centrists starting to champion progressive ideals they laughed at not too long before the general election. The pendulum definitely seems to be swinging the other way, these days, not least in Nevada — if not in DC, itself.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 5:38 PM on March 10, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 5:38 PM on March 10, 2021 [5 favorites]
Yeah, it's easy to forget how quickly the center of gravity really has moved in the Democratic Party. As recently as 2012, the Democratic president refused to even take a position on marriage equality until... somebody, can't remember who, did a gaffe....
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:46 PM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:46 PM on March 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
They don't get it because they don't vote based on their stated policy preferences. The conclusions one can draw from that are either they are stupid or that they don't actually care that much about the stuff they say they care about.
Voters vote for 15 dollar minimum wages, legalizing drugs, and reinstating the right to vote for felons when given the opportunity to vote directly on those via referenda. Which occurs because voters organize to make those initiatives happen. What voters don't seem to care about is deficits, despite the emphasis placed on that by self-styled moderates holding up the Senate via procedure mechanisms, not to mention the opposition of moderates to those measures. That's my overall point.
The journal article, which I know is long and somewhat technical, further demonstrates empirically that when the majority of voters do find themselves on the opposite side of special interest groups and economic elites, they invariably lose unless intense pressure is applied. Further, with the limited exception of labor unions, most interest groups influencing politics don't reflect the views of the majority of voters. Because of the decline of organized labor since its peak in the 50's and 60's in the US, the influence of the average voter on policy has decreased. Only when the views of the majority of voters and elites overlap, which sometimes happens but isn't the rule, are the wishes of the majority expressed.
Per the article, the theory of democracy upon which your argument rests falls into the category of "majoritarian theories" of electoral democracy. The present study reported by the article as well as the previous research it summarizes demonstrates that majoritarian theories are not supported by empirical observation. In other words, "the data" does not support those theories when applied to American democracy.
Perhaps, with the emergence of groups like Fight for 15 along with a reinvigorated labor movement, the views of non-elite Americans will find greater expression. For me, that is the hope upon which my optimism rests.
Reprinted link to the study
posted by eagles123 at 5:48 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Voters vote for 15 dollar minimum wages, legalizing drugs, and reinstating the right to vote for felons when given the opportunity to vote directly on those via referenda. Which occurs because voters organize to make those initiatives happen. What voters don't seem to care about is deficits, despite the emphasis placed on that by self-styled moderates holding up the Senate via procedure mechanisms, not to mention the opposition of moderates to those measures. That's my overall point.
The journal article, which I know is long and somewhat technical, further demonstrates empirically that when the majority of voters do find themselves on the opposite side of special interest groups and economic elites, they invariably lose unless intense pressure is applied. Further, with the limited exception of labor unions, most interest groups influencing politics don't reflect the views of the majority of voters. Because of the decline of organized labor since its peak in the 50's and 60's in the US, the influence of the average voter on policy has decreased. Only when the views of the majority of voters and elites overlap, which sometimes happens but isn't the rule, are the wishes of the majority expressed.
Per the article, the theory of democracy upon which your argument rests falls into the category of "majoritarian theories" of electoral democracy. The present study reported by the article as well as the previous research it summarizes demonstrates that majoritarian theories are not supported by empirical observation. In other words, "the data" does not support those theories when applied to American democracy.
Perhaps, with the emergence of groups like Fight for 15 along with a reinvigorated labor movement, the views of non-elite Americans will find greater expression. For me, that is the hope upon which my optimism rests.
Reprinted link to the study
posted by eagles123 at 5:48 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Yeah. You have to take a multi-leveled approach: the slog to get what you can through Congress and executive action; working on the ground through grassroots campaigns, rebuilding labor and community organizing; and coming up with a compelling vision of a progressive future that people can buy into.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:51 PM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:51 PM on March 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
But the point of that comment is that it doesn't really matter what voter preferences are for the purpose of getting legislation passed. Sure, when you can get things through referenda that's great -- but also, I'm leery of doing complex things that way because people will typically vote for more benefits and lower taxes, which since the states can't legally have unbalanced budgets just leads to bad things. Or people get tricked into things that they actually didn't want through slick campaigns, such as California's recent referendum regarding the status of rideshare drivers.
For practical purposes, if people say they want Policy X but continue to vote for legislators who oppose Policy X, their opinion is usually meaningless.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:56 PM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
For practical purposes, if people say they want Policy X but continue to vote for legislators who oppose Policy X, their opinion is usually meaningless.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:56 PM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]
Yeet that overton window!
posted by Marticus at 6:06 PM on March 10, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by Marticus at 6:06 PM on March 10, 2021 [4 favorites]
But the point of that comment is that it doesn't really matter what voter preferences are for the purpose of getting legislation passed. Sure, when you can get things through referenda that's great -- but also, I'm leery of doing complex things that way because people will typically vote for more benefits and lower taxes, which since the states can't legally have unbalanced budgets just leads to bad things. Or people get tricked into things that they actually didn't want through slick campaigns, such as California's recent referendum regarding the status of rideshare drivers.
For practical purposes, if people say they want Policy X but continue to vote for legislators who oppose Policy X, their opinion is usually meaningless.
Well yeah, that's kind of the entire point of the study/review I posted. Voter preferences, at least the the preferences of the majority, don't matter. Where the study perhaps differs from your statement is that after review over 2000 examples of votes on hundreds of bills over a multi-decade period, they didn't find a statistical relationship between the intent of the majority and political outcomes independent of the relationship between the intent of economic elites and interest groups and political outcomes. It's true that voters sometimes vote against their stated preferences. It's also true that they sometimes vote against their economic interests. Those points granted, however, the study indicates that even when voters try to vote for their stated preferences, they don't have much influence unless those preferences align with elites and interest groups.
Or at least, the majority of voters doesn't have influence unless they organize into groups to lobby for their preferences. The we might come closer the majoritarian pluralism as perhaps envisioned by Madison. The post WWII rise of organized labor might have represented a step towards that state of affairs; although, I would say that arraignment wasn't without problems. Either way, we've backslid considerably since then in terms of the concentration of political power.
And I agree about the danger of referenda. I was thinking of the California referendum concerning rideshare drivers as I was writing my comment as an example of how the economic elites mentioned in the study/review can influence even more direct democracy. I didn't intend to put forth referenda as a potential solution to the problem; rather, I was just highlighting them as examples of voters voting for measures that used to be considered extreme lefty positions when given the choice.
posted by eagles123 at 8:23 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
For practical purposes, if people say they want Policy X but continue to vote for legislators who oppose Policy X, their opinion is usually meaningless.
Well yeah, that's kind of the entire point of the study/review I posted. Voter preferences, at least the the preferences of the majority, don't matter. Where the study perhaps differs from your statement is that after review over 2000 examples of votes on hundreds of bills over a multi-decade period, they didn't find a statistical relationship between the intent of the majority and political outcomes independent of the relationship between the intent of economic elites and interest groups and political outcomes. It's true that voters sometimes vote against their stated preferences. It's also true that they sometimes vote against their economic interests. Those points granted, however, the study indicates that even when voters try to vote for their stated preferences, they don't have much influence unless those preferences align with elites and interest groups.
Or at least, the majority of voters doesn't have influence unless they organize into groups to lobby for their preferences. The we might come closer the majoritarian pluralism as perhaps envisioned by Madison. The post WWII rise of organized labor might have represented a step towards that state of affairs; although, I would say that arraignment wasn't without problems. Either way, we've backslid considerably since then in terms of the concentration of political power.
And I agree about the danger of referenda. I was thinking of the California referendum concerning rideshare drivers as I was writing my comment as an example of how the economic elites mentioned in the study/review can influence even more direct democracy. I didn't intend to put forth referenda as a potential solution to the problem; rather, I was just highlighting them as examples of voters voting for measures that used to be considered extreme lefty positions when given the choice.
posted by eagles123 at 8:23 PM on March 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Well of course the positions of lobbying groups, elites, donors, etc. are another powerfully predictive variable. Very few people, I think, would disagree with that. But the fact remains that voters' electoral choices make a difference and their preferences are pretty unimportant if the preferences aren't reflected in what they do at the ballot box.
The converse may often not be true. But it's at least a necessary if not sufficient condition. And if voters do vote in accordance with their preferences, things do sometimes change. The opinion of elites didn't suddenly change in November 2020; but policy outcomes are much different than they would've been if Trump had been reelected and/or if Republicans had held onto the Senate and/or taken the House.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:02 AM on March 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
The converse may often not be true. But it's at least a necessary if not sufficient condition. And if voters do vote in accordance with their preferences, things do sometimes change. The opinion of elites didn't suddenly change in November 2020; but policy outcomes are much different than they would've been if Trump had been reelected and/or if Republicans had held onto the Senate and/or taken the House.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:02 AM on March 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
New CBS poll showing 75% approval for the relief bill including 94% support from Democrats.
posted by octothorpe at 6:21 AM on March 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 6:21 AM on March 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
Sen Manchin reiterates his absolute opposition to ending, or modifying, the filibuster. He is specifically quoted as opposing a move to force a talking filibuster or any other move that would allow bills to ever pass by simple majority.
posted by sotonohito at 6:33 AM on March 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by sotonohito at 6:33 AM on March 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
From that WP article:
posted by octothorpe at 6:51 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
“I haven’t seen an effort by any of our leadership to go sit down and work with them,” Manchin told reporters Tuesday, sharply criticizing Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) for no outreach to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).I have no idea what Republican party Manchin thinks he shares a chamber with but it's not the one that actually exists.
“Just make that effort. Make a little bit more of an effort with him and Mitch McConnell and make an effort with the leadership. John Thune’s a very good guy. Roy Blunt, I hate to see Roy leaving. These are all good people,” Manchin said, referencing two lieutenants in McConnell’s GOP leadership team.
posted by octothorpe at 6:51 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
Here are the two direct Manchin quotes from that WaPo article regarding the filibuster:
But I don't think these quotes indicate an absolute opposition to a "talking filibuster" or some other kind of reform, particularly if it can be framed as reform or "saving" the filibuster rather than destroying it.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:41 AM on March 11, 2021 [4 favorites]
“At the end of the day, you understand the minority must have input, and it must be a process to get to that 60-vote threshold,” Manchin said.Guessing what's in Manchin's head is kind of hard since he's basically been spewing out contradictory nonsense for the last month. My main takeaway is that he has some level of pretty misguided belief in bipartisanship, but mostly he just likes being the center of attention. I'm very very tired of having to treat conservative white cis dudes with kid gloves so they don't blow things up, but unfortunately in this case you gotta figure out how to do it.
“I make it very clear to everybody. There’s no way that I would vote to prevent the minority from having input into the process in the Senate,” he said. “That means protecting the filibuster.”
But I don't think these quotes indicate an absolute opposition to a "talking filibuster" or some other kind of reform, particularly if it can be framed as reform or "saving" the filibuster rather than destroying it.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:41 AM on March 11, 2021 [4 favorites]
Manshin's statements also potentially put heat on McConnell to show the kind of bipartisanship that Manshin is talking about (fat chance!).
The problem is, Manshin isn't entirely wrong when he says it's better to have bills that have more people on all sides agree to them, but he's ignoring McConnell's long record of bad-faith obstructionism.
But maybe when (not if) McConnell just goes ahead and opposes everything, including and especially the Lewis Voting Rights Act, Manshin could, more in sorrow than in anger, agree to filibuster "reform" that prevents the minority from having an absolute veto like they currently do.
posted by Gelatin at 7:49 AM on March 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
The problem is, Manshin isn't entirely wrong when he says it's better to have bills that have more people on all sides agree to them, but he's ignoring McConnell's long record of bad-faith obstructionism.
But maybe when (not if) McConnell just goes ahead and opposes everything, including and especially the Lewis Voting Rights Act, Manshin could, more in sorrow than in anger, agree to filibuster "reform" that prevents the minority from having an absolute veto like they currently do.
posted by Gelatin at 7:49 AM on March 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
I suspect the best way to get him on board is to have a requirement that 41 senators hold the floor and/or progressively lower the threshold needed for cloture. And then point out to him that if there's ultimately an up-or-down vote on things (and everyone knows it), there's more of an incentive for the minority to work with the majority in order to get at least some concessions in exchange for the stamp of bipartisanship. And Manchin, of course, would take center stage in helping to broker those glorious deals with Susan Collins etc.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:55 AM on March 11, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:55 AM on March 11, 2021 [4 favorites]
On the latest Josh Marshall podcast, the Talking Points Memo crew talks a bit about the filibuster. Some interesting points:
- In any discussion with long time anti-filibuster professionals--like legislative aides--you don't "abolish" the filibuster. You "reform" it or even "save" it.
- They (the aides who are Marshall's sources) are generally more optimistic about the chances for "reform" now, which he said he didn't quite understand but he trusted their assessment.
- You don't change it for the sake of changing it. You do it in the context of getting a specific bill passed when the right one arises. The minimum wage might have been a good opportunity--popular, easy to understand, people were paying attention--except it didn't have fifty votes. "Hard to make the case for majority rule on an issue where you can't get a majority."
I don't know if Manchin's recent round of statements, which happened after the podcast. impacts the above assessment. I'd guess kind of not? We'll have the filibuster in it's current form until we don't.
posted by mark k at 8:10 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
- In any discussion with long time anti-filibuster professionals--like legislative aides--you don't "abolish" the filibuster. You "reform" it or even "save" it.
- They (the aides who are Marshall's sources) are generally more optimistic about the chances for "reform" now, which he said he didn't quite understand but he trusted their assessment.
- You don't change it for the sake of changing it. You do it in the context of getting a specific bill passed when the right one arises. The minimum wage might have been a good opportunity--popular, easy to understand, people were paying attention--except it didn't have fifty votes. "Hard to make the case for majority rule on an issue where you can't get a majority."
I don't know if Manchin's recent round of statements, which happened after the podcast. impacts the above assessment. I'd guess kind of not? We'll have the filibuster in it's current form until we don't.
posted by mark k at 8:10 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
Yeah, I listened to that as well. They seemed to think that voting rights is more likely than the $15 minimum wage to use as a test case, although I'd think that infrastructure would be even better. I guess the issue there is that then you have to do the whole pay-for stupid argument, but if I recall correctly Manchin has made mouth noises about doing tax increases on the rich to pay for stuff. For whatever that's worth.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:15 AM on March 11, 2021
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:15 AM on March 11, 2021
They seemed to think that voting rights is more likely than the $15 minimum wage to use as a test case
I tend to agree, because if they don't fix it, Republican state legislatures can keep disenfranchising Democrats with the phony pretext of "preventing voter fraud," so it's essential for Democrats, and no Republican will vote for it, despite it being obviously the right thing to do. (As a bonus, Republicans have to at least pretend to believe the Big Lie that Trump had the election stolen.) And as much as Manshin depends on some Republican crossover voters to stay in the Senate, he also depends on Democrats, so preventing their disenfranchisement is a matter of political survival for him, too.
posted by Gelatin at 8:47 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
I tend to agree, because if they don't fix it, Republican state legislatures can keep disenfranchising Democrats with the phony pretext of "preventing voter fraud," so it's essential for Democrats, and no Republican will vote for it, despite it being obviously the right thing to do. (As a bonus, Republicans have to at least pretend to believe the Big Lie that Trump had the election stolen.) And as much as Manshin depends on some Republican crossover voters to stay in the Senate, he also depends on Democrats, so preventing their disenfranchisement is a matter of political survival for him, too.
posted by Gelatin at 8:47 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
I'm very very tired of having to treat conservative white cis dudes with kid gloves so they don't blow things up, but unfortunately in this case you gotta figure out how to do it.
Counterpoint: Conservative white cis dudes who threaten to blow things up are terrorists, holding America hostage their demands. We saw how far they'll go -- building a gallows to literally lynch the Vice President for doing his Constitutional duty.
Never negotiate with terrorists. Manchin must be made to understand this, and that he's either on the side of America or the side of terrorists. He's right though that Schumer should step up negotiations with Republicans. To find the ones he can offer something to peel them away, and cut Manchin out of the loop.
posted by mikelieman at 9:53 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
Counterpoint: Conservative white cis dudes who threaten to blow things up are terrorists, holding America hostage their demands. We saw how far they'll go -- building a gallows to literally lynch the Vice President for doing his Constitutional duty.
Never negotiate with terrorists. Manchin must be made to understand this, and that he's either on the side of America or the side of terrorists. He's right though that Schumer should step up negotiations with Republicans. To find the ones he can offer something to peel them away, and cut Manchin out of the loop.
posted by mikelieman at 9:53 AM on March 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
Susan Collins: "Why Chuck seems to be going out of his way to alienate the most bipartisan member of the Senate is a mystery to me."
Says a lot that "the most bipartisan member of the Senate" voted against an American Rescue Plan that has the support of 75% of the public. It seems that the "most bipartisan member of the Senate" is a far right extremist, farther right than 75% of voters -- and that the rest of the Republican senators are even farther right than that.
posted by JackFlash at 10:05 AM on March 11, 2021 [9 favorites]
Says a lot that "the most bipartisan member of the Senate" voted against an American Rescue Plan that has the support of 75% of the public. It seems that the "most bipartisan member of the Senate" is a far right extremist, farther right than 75% of voters -- and that the rest of the Republican senators are even farther right than that.
posted by JackFlash at 10:05 AM on March 11, 2021 [9 favorites]
Sounds great mikelieman. If we just convince Manchin to vote with the Democrats, then he'll... vote with the Democrats.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:08 AM on March 11, 2021
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:08 AM on March 11, 2021
(also, everyone negotiates with hostage-takers. They just pretend they don't in public.)
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:10 AM on March 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:10 AM on March 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
The problem is, Manshin isn't entirely wrong when he says it's better to have bills that have more people on all sides agree to them
Yeah, no. Assumes facts not in evidence. Bipartisan bills have been incredibly shitty in the past. And maybe now moreso than ever, Republicans have extremely bad ideas. There's no reason whatsoever to strive for a bill that garners Republican support at this point in time.
posted by JenMarie at 6:30 PM on March 11, 2021 [7 favorites]
Yeah, no. Assumes facts not in evidence. Bipartisan bills have been incredibly shitty in the past. And maybe now moreso than ever, Republicans have extremely bad ideas. There's no reason whatsoever to strive for a bill that garners Republican support at this point in time.
posted by JenMarie at 6:30 PM on March 11, 2021 [7 favorites]
The opinion of elites didn't suddenly change in November 2020; but policy outcomes are much different than they would've been if Trump had been reelected and/or if Republicans had held onto the Senate and/or taken the House.
At least the elites whose politicians are able to enact policy changed slightly based on the outcome of the election. The study/review focused on policy in the aggregate, so it captured areas of agreement and disagreement between the parties. There are areas where the elites backing the parties disagree, so the outcome of elections still matter. Republicans tend to be backed by traditional heavy industry, mineral extraction, and transportation. Democrats tend to be backed by media, tech, academia, and increasingly upper middle class professionals. Democrats also receive support from what remains of organized labor.
Regarding Manchin, he once released an ad of him shooting a gun at the Cap and Trade bill and touting his NRA endorsement.
Manchin's opposition to Cap and Trade is understandable given West Virginia's history as a coal mining state, as is his desire to tout the endorsement of the NRA given West Virginia's rural character and cultural conservatism. His opposition to a 15 dollar minimum wage isn't considering West Virginia also has a history of economic populism and labor organization.
Regarding the filibuster, I think HR 1 has to be first priority as a test case both morally and practically. Republican enacted voter restrictions are a threat to moral views held by all Democrats as well as a threat to the future electoral prospects of the Democratic party. Plus, the filibuster has a long history of use as a weapon to thwart civil rights legislation. I don't see how you can be a Democrat and still support allowing the Republicans to use the filibuster to act against civil rights, which is what the Republican Party is doing by using it to block Democratic attempts to counteract state level Republican attacks on voting rights. Really, the filibuster has no place in a modern government at all. Governments need to be able to respond faster to events. We don't live in an age where the sailing ship is a state of the art means of transportation.
posted by eagles123 at 6:35 PM on March 11, 2021 [7 favorites]
At least the elites whose politicians are able to enact policy changed slightly based on the outcome of the election. The study/review focused on policy in the aggregate, so it captured areas of agreement and disagreement between the parties. There are areas where the elites backing the parties disagree, so the outcome of elections still matter. Republicans tend to be backed by traditional heavy industry, mineral extraction, and transportation. Democrats tend to be backed by media, tech, academia, and increasingly upper middle class professionals. Democrats also receive support from what remains of organized labor.
Regarding Manchin, he once released an ad of him shooting a gun at the Cap and Trade bill and touting his NRA endorsement.
Manchin's opposition to Cap and Trade is understandable given West Virginia's history as a coal mining state, as is his desire to tout the endorsement of the NRA given West Virginia's rural character and cultural conservatism. His opposition to a 15 dollar minimum wage isn't considering West Virginia also has a history of economic populism and labor organization.
Regarding the filibuster, I think HR 1 has to be first priority as a test case both morally and practically. Republican enacted voter restrictions are a threat to moral views held by all Democrats as well as a threat to the future electoral prospects of the Democratic party. Plus, the filibuster has a long history of use as a weapon to thwart civil rights legislation. I don't see how you can be a Democrat and still support allowing the Republicans to use the filibuster to act against civil rights, which is what the Republican Party is doing by using it to block Democratic attempts to counteract state level Republican attacks on voting rights. Really, the filibuster has no place in a modern government at all. Governments need to be able to respond faster to events. We don't live in an age where the sailing ship is a state of the art means of transportation.
posted by eagles123 at 6:35 PM on March 11, 2021 [7 favorites]
Does anyone here have information about what Cyrus Vance's announcement that he won't run for another term means for Trump prosecutions? Because my gut reaction is that it suggests that (once again) Trump will get away with it all.
posted by another_20_year_lurker at 9:19 AM on March 12, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by another_20_year_lurker at 9:19 AM on March 12, 2021 [1 favorite]
Skaters gonna skate.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:37 PM on March 12, 2021
posted by kirkaracha at 12:37 PM on March 12, 2021
The New Yorker on whether Cy Vance will file charges against Trump. (Spoiler: probably yes)
posted by (Over) Thinking at 6:27 PM on March 15, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by (Over) Thinking at 6:27 PM on March 15, 2021 [1 favorite]
« Older Anti-Hauntology: Mark Fisher, SOPHIE, and the... | How I cut GTA Online loading times by 70% Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by adept256 at 10:27 PM on March 8, 2021 [39 favorites]