Snatching Defeat - continued

 The debate on the American Family Plan  is nicely summarized here:

Opinion | Corporate America Is Lobbying for Climate Disaster - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

The argument is something like this

- The GOP will win the 2022 election because of voter suppression and just because the party is power always loses mid-term elections.

- Therefore the Dems need to "go big" now.   If the GOP wins the election then Biden can veto all attempts to "un-do" the policies.

Krugman also makes the case to "do something" on climate change even though he knows these policies are inefficient and will have minimal impact on the global climate.   He's correct that a policy that might work - carbon tax, tariff and dividend cannot be passed now.

While Joe Manchin offers an alternative view:

Manchin Jolts Democrats by Urging ‘Pause’ on $3.5 Trillion Bill (msn.com)

The argument is something like this:

- We can win the 2022 election if the party runs on achieving results.  The economy will be strong next year with unemployment around 4% and the stock market at all time highs.  We will not have any of the military in a war zone.   We win as long as we don't get pinned by the GOP as tax and spend liberals whose policies have resulted in higher inflation, higher taxes and higher budget deficits.

- We were not elected with a mandate for massive change.  We were elected to deal with the pandemic but mostly to not be Trump.  Biden simply by returning to norms with respect to language and style, embodies this.

- But if we "go big" we will certainly lose the midterm elections.  Biden will then have to spend the next two years vetoing bills.  We then will lose the 2024 POTUS election.

- On the other hand if we go slow we will win the 2022 elections, expand the majorities in both houses and take advantage of a good economy to then continue to press for progressive policies.

The reaction to Manchin's position was immediate:

The chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Representative Pramila Jayapal, replied “Absolutely not” on Twitter to Manchin’s idea of a pause.

Snatching Defeat - continued

Written: Aug 25 after House reached a compromise

Looks like a decent compromise.   I wish that no one would claim a “win” – much better for everyone to say that they didn’t get what they hoped for but that they can live with the outcome.

 

Perhaps the best part of the deal – if I understand it – is that Pelosi will direct the House to pass a bill that the Senate will also pass.     That means negotiating up front prior to bringing it to a vote in the House.

 

I don’t see how they can get this done in a month.   You would think that a 3.5 trillion dollar spending bill that presumably will also be a 3.5 trillion dollar tax increase would require  deep analysis on taxes, cost/benefit analysis of elements of the plan, overall economic impact, budget impact, etc.  This should properly take months to do this with open hearings with testimony from experts.  Instead they seem like they want to get this done in Sept along with raising the debt limit and presumably passing spending bills for fiscal 2022.  

 

My guesstimate is that AFP will come in closer to 1 trillion or 100 billion/year over 10 years.   That would be quite a victory and as Bob referred to it as “a down payment”.   

 

Last comment

 

What the press calls “moderates” voted for

 

900 billion In Covid relief in Dec, unfunded
1.9 trillion in Covid relief in Feb (ARP) also unfunded
1 trillion in infrastructure partially funded but no increase in taxes or fees
3.5 trillion budget to be funded primarily by tax increases

 

 

Snatching Defeat - continued

 Written: Aug. 11

For a brief time I thought the Dems in DC had come up with a good plan.

 

Pass the bipartisan American Jobs Plan (AJB) , pass a budget without the GOP which “outlined” the American Family Plan with the implicit promise from the Manchin wing of the party that they would pass the American Family Plan (AFP) using reconciliation to bypass the filibuster.

 

The Sanders wing of the party could tell their supporters that the AFP would solve all the countries problems.  The Manchin wing could tell their supporters that  the actual AFP bill would be much smaller than 3.5 trillion.  Both sides could claim victory.  All that was needed was for the House to pass the American Jobs Plan and approve the budget.   The details of the AFP would be hashed out over months of intraparty negotiation.  In the meantime Biden gets another big win.

 

But then as I understand it the House will not vote on the AJB until the AFP passes in the Senate.   I just don’t understand the thinking.  The AFP will be a messy intraparty conflict  which will play out over the next 2-3 months.  In the meantime the AJB is blocked by the House.   Does anyone understand this?  What’s the plan – to put pressure on the Manchin wing of the party so that all of the
“progressives” in the House get their way?    I don’t see how that can work.  Manchin has the leverage and he’s been a team player up to now.  

 

If the next elections decide whether we have a functional democracy it may be the biggest threat is not the state legislatures in Georgia or Arizona.    The biggest threat may the House of Representatives in DC.

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

 Written Jul 22:

A short time back I was very optimistic about Biden’s administration policies and the outlook for the next election.   His focus on vaccinations was working.  His 3-way policy of America Rescue Plan, Jobs Plan (infrastructure) and Family Plan (anti-poverty and social safety net improvements) made sense.

 

The first part American Rescue Plan was done through reconciliation which was the right move.  The final bill had only a few concessions to the more moderate Dem Senators.   Biden said it might be “too big” but that was a risk he was willing to take as opposed to it being too small.  Not it looks like it was a too big and we have some “transisent” inflation but by and large this was a progressive, pragmatic and popular bill.

 

Next up was the American Jobs Plan which Biden negotiated as a bipartisan bill.   This was also a good idea.  It may be a little smaller than some wanted but it looked progressive, pragmatic and popular.

 

The next step would be to take bows for an improving job market, a strong stock market, reduction in child poverty from the American Rescue Plan’s child tax credits.   Then take another bow for negotiating a bi-partisan infrastructure bill which eluded Obama and Trump.  Then take another bow for having a sane foreign policy and trade policy.

 

The American Family Plan should have been on the back burner with the idea that the Senate would use reconciliation to pass a Dem bill in 2022.  The Dem caucus would be informed that this bill would be passed and would include some of the non-physical infrastructure elements that the Jobs Plan left out.  But the Dem leaders should have kept a low profile on this and given vague answers.   Eventually  the bill would strike a balance of Sanders and Manchin which no matter how it turned out would be a victory for Biden in 2022.  No one who wants to win in 2022 wants Sanders to write this bill.

 

Then the unforced error.  Publicly tying the bipartisan American Jobs Plan with the upcoming partisan American Family Plan.

 

So now we have uncertainty over the Jobs plan.  The Rescue plan is being critized for temporarily high inflation and some dislocations in the job market.   The Family Plan is being critized for the large increase in spending and in the deficit even before the size of the bill has been determined.   We know that it is hypocritical for the GOP to complain about deficits but we also know that the general public has a short memory.    

 

Bottom line -  The Dems gave the GOP some actual policy talking points.   Unforced error.