Joe Manchin doesn’t represent the Democratic party. He represents the state of West Virginia. I haven’t studied the leanings, desires and wishes of West Virginia Democrats, but I would expect that they don’t necessarily line up with the National Democratic party. And you can knock Manchin for only going after votes, but those people that vote in West Virginia are his constituents. I also don’t think he gives a fuck about what you think about him.
To do something about climate, Congress must pass a bill.
“Good intentions”—aka holding up bills you don’t feel go far enough on the theory that voters will love you for it—has been proven to be a complete and utter losing strategy. On November 2 2021, voters signaled that Democratic gridlock is NOT seen as ‘heroic’. It was NOT an effective get-out-the-vote strategy.
Pass the damn bills and don’t get hung up on ‘making’ Manchin (and/or Sinema) do what you want. Anything else means total GOP control in 2022—and for the rest of US history.
I never said anything “good intentions.” I never said anything about “holding up the bill.” I never said anything about progressives holding up the bill for things they merely want. I said they are willing to try more risky moves because they care about the climate part of the bill more than the rest.
If the bill doesn’t include anything about climate, then Congress passing the bill does nothing to help the climate.
I’m not sure where you are getting the idea that progressives prevent progress. The last time the Dems held all three houses, I don’t remember the progressives ever holding up legislation that would have passed otherwise.
I don’t give a shit about good intentions. But I do notice that Manchin is whining about the progressives playing “political games,” while this is something he himself does. He’s trying to paint them as the bad guys for doing the exact same thing he is doing. That suggests to me that he feels like he’s losing.
That was the point of my post. I made an argument that it seemed like Manchin’s position was weakening. I get if you disagree, but I don’t get quoting a line from my post out of context, and then arguing against things I never said.
Certainly, they don’t line up in a lot of places, particularly environmental and energy policy. On the other hand, the Democrats just dropped paid family leave to try to placate Manchin, and that’s polling at about 70% support in West Virginia. Not sure whose interests Manchin is serving there, but it doesn’t appear to be his constituency.
I heard Manchin say this morning that a 4 week leave proposal was being put back in but he hasn’t read the specifics and could not comment on how he would vote.
Oh, I agree with all of that.
As to whether this is a sign that Manchin feels himself to be losing—that seems a bit more subjective.
My main point, using your post as a jumping-off place, is that the Progressive Caucus IS holding up the passage of legislation that would not only help Americans, but would help elect and re-elect Democrats. The PC is holding up this passage of legislation because they think it’s a smart electoral strategy. I believe not only that they are wrong about that, but that they got a very sharp lesson November 2 that they were wrong about that—a lesson they will studiously ignore.
Yes, there are always additional provisions to protect the environment that “should” be in a bill. But the name of the game here is not to put everything in a bill that “should” be there–it’s to pass the bill.
Yes, Manchin/Sinema are (in my view) acting in bad faith and will obstruct many good things that “should” go into these bills. But there’s no cover for the Progressive Caucus there. They believe M/S give them cover, but they are wrong, wrong, wrong. It’s not M/S that voters will be thinking about in November 2022—it’s the failure of the Democrats to DO ANYTHING.
The PC believes that holding out for all that “should” be in a bill will be rewarded by voters; the usual construction is that holding out will inspire a tidal wave of Democratic voters who are grateful that the PC is holding up the legislation to be sure all the “should” items are in the bill.
We saw two days ago that this was hogwash. Neither the bipartisan infrastructure bill nor the reconciliation bill have been passed, due to PC “noble obstructionism”----and did this inspire a tidal wave of Democratic voters to come out for any of the elections held Nov 2?
It did not.
(Don’t get too hung up on my posts that happen to reply to you being “about you.” In every case I’m replying to one particular idea or assertion, NOT attempting any kind of take-down or personal criticism of you.)
Everyone thinks if nothing gets passed ever that it would be bad for democrats.
The progressives think that holding up the bipartisan bill now so that in the future they get more of their “shoulds” than they otherwise would will pay off later and it will benefit them/the party as a whole in future elections.
Yeah. This is what puts the lie to the “Manchin needs to win WV! Would you prefer a REPUBLCAN?!?!?!?” argument. He’s opposing programs that are insanely popular in WV, not to mention the rest of the damn country.
Hell, even if it was true that passing these bills would lose WV, passing them would have enough of an impact that the Dems might win in a lot of other states that are still up in the air.
Refusing to pass a bill that’s as popular as this one is just makes no fucking sense at all.
In what future? (My bolding)
I think that may just be the future where the USA civilization is destroyed and you and I are fighting warlord troops in the wilderness wearing rags and really long beards…
The thing about this is that I suspect some on the left actually LOVED the ‘resist’ period and fantasize about the glories of being The Resistance, and so are basically okay with the program of having a do-nothing Congress that leads to GOP victories in 2022 and all the ghastly consequences.
Because they think it will be, you know, Cool.
eta: that’s not even counting the doctrinaire lefties who explicitly believe the Fall of Democracy is the necessary first step to a Socialist Paradise. Because there’s no point in counting those idiots.
Oh, Sure we do. I want my house full of holes? My car destroyed? I want to have to live with my family being killed in concentration camps by scumbag GQPs? I want to have to live with putting down Golf Club scumbag assholes just to be able to live free?
“Cool” is you Alt Right Scumbags being knocked for a loop for being the same NAZI scumbags your grandparents cried about…
Say what?
Sounds as though you think I was accusing you of being one of the Resistance Cosplay fantasists I was decrying. If so, I’m not sure why. I haven’t seen anything in your posts that would lead in that direction.
No intelligent person who thinks it through would root for the GOP to take Congress, on the theory that living under perpetual one-party rule (a consequence of GOP anti-democracy beliefs and actions) would be ‘romantic’ or enjoyable in any way.
Discard and wait? Till when? Unfortunately, those who oppose the agenda will happily accept the benefits if they pass. I know lots of “hate the government, but love my VA disability check”. They will not change their voting habits because, well, literally “F* the libs”. There is no hoping they “see the light”. These people do not envision a government that stops them from getting what they “deserve”. They just want one that stops others they don’t feel are deserving. The only way to change their mind is to let the GOP cut their government benefits to the bone. Maybe, just maybe they will connect the dots. Don’t bet on it though.
This is a moot point now but intent and impact are not the same.
If you thought that the impact of holding out was that neither bill would ever be passed, that is not the same as saying the intent of holding out was to prevent either bill from getting passed to show how tough they are.
Thank everything holy that most of the Progressive Caucus decided to be practical and let Democrats rack up a win.
As for what the intentions of Jayapal et al. were, of course none of us can read their minds. My guess is that they believed that Manchin (and possibly Sinema) were so desperate to get the ‘hard infrastructure’ (aka bipartisan) bill passed that they would “have to give in” and abandon their unreasonable demands about the Build Back Better (aka human infrastructure) bill.
In other words, the P Caucus thought that they had actual leverage over Manchin and/or Sinema. They thought they could force Manchin to permit some pro-environmental provisions to pass, and force Sinema to permit some drug-price reform provisions to pass. All on the theory that M/S wanted the hard-infrastructure bill so ardently that they would, again, “have to give in.”
I believe this was delusional thinking.
Manchin, certainly, has been vocal about the virtues of keeping the federal government from spending ANY money (i.e. the usual Republican Virtues line of talk), even on roads and bridges. Which means the P Caucus had NO, repeat, NO leverage over Manchin that could have “forced” him to okay pro-environmental provisions in BBB in order to get the hard-infrastructure bill passed. Their entire strategy depended on Manchin supposedly being desperate to get the hard (bipartisan) bill passed------------------------------but he wasn’t. He isn’t. He’s fine with it not passing.
When you hold out for something despite having no leverage that could let you achieve that something, you’re not heroic. You may be lost in fantasies of being heroic, but you’re not heroic.
That’s the essence of my recent complaints about the Progressive Caucus—now, thankfully, moot.
How many reps make up the progressive caucus? Weren’t the six Democratic “no” votes all by progressives?
Yes, the ‘no’ votes were all progressives.*
Wikipedia says:
The page has some interesting charts and graphs on the size, geographic origins, and influence of the Caucus since its 1991 founding.
*per Newsweek:
Thanks for that. 96 is certainly a lot more than I imagined. I was thinking a dozen or so.
Yeah, Wikipedia says it’s the largest “ideological” group in Congress.
The Caucus’s own dot-gov pages repeatedly claim “nearly 100 members.” I don’t know if this is an attempt to sound more important than a mere 94 members (in the House, as this seems to be a House-only site) would sound, or if their membership is so fluid and ever-changing that they’re trying to avoid having to correct the site on a regular basis…
https://progressives.house.gov/about-the-cpc
eta: also interestingly, their News page stops at 3 November. Nothing about yesterday’s votes. So I guess maybe they DO dislike having to update their site!