WaPo: Biden to announce new social spending framework expected to win support of all Democrats

[BumRushDaShow]

Biden to announce new social spending framework expected to win support of all Democrats

By Tyler Pager, and Sean Sullivan

Today at 5:54 a.m. EDT

President Biden plans to announce Thursday a revised framework for his social spending plan that he expects will gain the support of all Democrats, according to multiple people with knowledge of the situation, marking a potential breakthrough moment after months of lengthy negotiations and stalled talks.

The White House plans to detail specific policies it expects to pass Congress after weeks of whittling down Biden’s agenda, according to one of the people. Democrats on Capitol Hill were preparing written details of the revamped for proposal for release on Thursday, according to the second person.

The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plans on the record. The White House declined to comment.Biden will address House Democrats Thursday morning before delivering remarks from the White House about the plan. Biden’s speech comes ahead of his planned trip to Rome later in the day to begin a pair of international summits.

The specifics of what the president would announce were not immediately clear, nor was it clear whether he would be prepared to announce the support of key Democratic holdouts. But Biden recently told congressional Democrats that he thought he could secure a deal for a spending plan between $1.75 trillion and $1.9 trillion.

(snip)

More: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-to-announce-democratic-agreement-on-social-spending-deal/2021/10/28/2781863c-37d3-11ec-91dc-551d44733e2d_story.html

Since it is a "to be announced", the above won't pass muster in LBN.

[Sherman A1]

1. Interesting to see how this pans out, but $1.9 T

Is a far cry from $3.5T in my back of the envelope guesstimating.

[KPN]

3. Even further from the original ... what, $7 trillion?

And “progressives” are the ones who are being irresponsibly intransigent on this?

[BumRushDaShow]

7. I think the fact that it is even happening at all

is a credit to those voters in GA who crawled over glass during what was expected to be a "low turnout special election" to get both Warnock and Ossoff elected to give us (with the VP's presence) a "majority" in the Senate, even able to bring ANY Democratic legislation up for a vote.

And that is because, as we all know and have experienced between 2014 through much of January 2021, it was certain that Turtle did and would have continued to DOA ALL of the stuff coming from the House, immediately upon receipt.

[Hortensis]

8. Yes. It's still a social programs megabill. Like the ACA,

a lot of people originally opposed are likely to start growling if anyone comes near these benefits and want them developed further.

A lot of people here don't want to admit it, but very solid majorities in both red WV and red AZ OPPOSE the big spending provisions. They want the benefits for themselves but aren't willing to pay for them for others, and they are sure they would be paying for them. The least crazy thing about the right, after decades of putting their corrupt, predatory leaders in power, is fiscal distrust.

Fww, regarding the "loss" of a $7 trillion bill that was never going to happen, if I were inclined I think I'd round it up to a nice $10T and mourn that.

[BumRushDaShow]

9. I remember years ago

a special on TV - possibly CBS (it may have been a Bill Moyers one as he had done a number of them) where there was one segment of a poor white woman sitting on the porch of her broken down house ranting and raving against "welfare" and "those people", and then the interviewer reminded her that she was getting a government check and I think even showed a pic of it (it may have been SSDI), and it was like a light bulb popped and blew out as she sat there dazed.

This is the type of cognitive dissonance that exists out there - and I expect particularly in WV. Alternately, AZ is essentially a state filled with people who fled other states to live there (including many retirees, but more significantly, a pile of RW loons who left California).

[Hortensis]

10. Light bulb popped and didn't come back on.

For a while back in CA I'd expect to hear someone new at every social gathering happily talking about an impending move to Las Vegas or somewhere in AZ because it was so "clean" and "new." So white flight.

Speaking of years ago, used to be progressivism among moderate conservatives was common. They were more cautious about spending, sure, tended to prefer to start out with smaller scopes, but could have supported almost everything in our original package as sensible and needed. Now they're pushing the civilization their grandchildren were supposed to inherit off a cliff to oppose Democrats. Cognitive implosion.

Looking forward to hearing Biden's new proposal. Whatever it is, hopefully most will be able to get behind it with some relief, and just being a change could provide a face-saving excuse to vote yes for anyone who publicly threatened to blow up the whole thing.

[BumRushDaShow]

11. That radical shift in the GOP

was spearheaded by Gingrich - his philosophy was to "blow up the process". I have posted the below often and it applies here -

The Man Who Broke Politics

Newt Gingrich turned partisan battles into bloodsport, wrecked Congress, and paved the way for Trump’s rise. Now he’s reveling in his achievements.

Story by McKay Coppins
November 2018 Issue

Updated on October 17, 2018

[snip]

On June 24, 1978, Gingrich stood to address a gathering of College Republicans at a Holiday Inn near the Atlanta airport. It was a natural audience for him. At 35, he was more youthful-looking than the average congressional candidate, with fashionably robust sideburns and a cool-professor charisma that had made him one of the more popular faculty members at West Georgia College. But Gingrich had not come to deliver an academic lecture to the young activists before him—he had come to foment revolution.

“One of the great problems we have in the Republican Party is that we don’t encourage you to be nasty,” he told the group. “We encourage you to be neat, obedient, and loyal, and faithful, and all those Boy Scout words, which would be great around the campfire but are lousy in politics.” For their party to succeed, Gingrich went on, the next generation of Republicans would have to learn to “raise hell,” to stop being so “nice,” to realize that politics was, above all, a cutthroat “war for power”—and to start acting like it.

The speech received little attention at the time. Gingrich was, after all, an obscure, untenured professor whose political experience consisted of two failed congressional bids. But when, a few months later, he was finally elected to the House of Representatives on his third try, he went to Washington a man obsessed with becoming the kind of leader he had described that day in Atlanta. The GOP was then at its lowest point in modern history. Scores of Republican lawmakers had been wiped out in the aftermath of Watergate, and those who’d survived seemed, to Gingrich, sadly resigned to a “permanent minority” mind-set. “It was like death,” he recalls of the mood in the caucus. “They were morally and psychologically shattered.”

But Gingrich had a plan. The way he saw it, Republicans would never be able to take back the House as long as they kept compromising with the Democrats out of some high-minded civic desire to keep congressional business humming along. His strategy was to blow up the bipartisan coalitions that were essential to legislating, and then seize on the resulting dysfunction to wage a populist crusade against the institution of Congress itself. “His idea,” says Norm Ornstein, a political scientist who knew Gingrich at the time, “was to build toward a national election where people were so disgusted by Washington and the way it was operating that they would throw the ins out and bring the outs in.”

[snip]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gingrich-says-youre-welcome/570832/

[Hortensis]

12. Really good piece. He deliberately introduced a great deal of

the dysfunction into congress, including institutional changes designed to keep members from associating with people from the other party and exchanging ideas.

There's a big reason especially that previous GOP leaders encouraged their followers to be "all those Boy Scout words." Their voters include a large portion of potential "Nazi" types who, encouraged to a cutthroat fight for power, have gone all in and become uncontrollable. The trumpists created their Der Leader every bit as much as he's since formed them, a dreadful interactive process.

And now they're threatening public officials and their families across the nation with death, to the point that it's possible they could be driven out and replaced by RW extremists. Gee, where and when has that happened before? What could be next? People known to be Democrats attacked by mobs in the streets? History says yes.

[betsuni]

14. +1000000

[mcar]

18. Those were proposals, this is a bill

[Tennessee Hillbilly]

2. I sure hope this report is correct

n/t

[BumRushDaShow]

4. I heard something on my local news radio station earlier this morning

that Biden was "announcing" something today ahead of his trip. So it's either a "done deal" or is a "final deadline" to get something ready to vote on.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

5. Let's hope so.

[PoliticAverse]

6. "expected to win support of all Democrats" - maybe be sure this time. n/t

[madville]

15. I have a hard time believing all support removing paid family leave

Haven’t seen any House Democrats comment on the removal of paid family and medical leave in the Senate version. Some agreement Biden and Manchin have made I guess.

[PoliticAverse]

16. See: Democrats try to back Manchin off killing paid family leave proposal

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/578835-democrats-try-to-back-manchin-off-killing-paid-family-leave-proposal

Democratic senators launched a furious effort on the Senate floor Wednesday to back centrist Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) off his opposition to a national paid family leave program, which sources said was going to be cut from the budget reconciliation package.

Senate Health Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D), a leading proponent of paid family leave, cornered Manchin on the Senate floor to get him to change his mind — and they refused to take no for an answer.

Murray insisted that paid family leave is still in the package, disputing reports that negotiators were going to ax the proposal, and said Manchin promised to keep an open mind.

“It’s not out,” she said, recounting her conversation with Manchin. “He said he will keep an open mind. He is not a no.”

[BumRushDaShow]

19. I had heard something yesterday

where it was taken from "12 weeks" down to "4 weeks".

I know the current FMLA is for 12 weeks "unpaid" and I expect that provision would be to amend the current law to actually provide pay for that time (or whatever time period is agreed to).

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Na. I've given up hope. Wake me when it actually passes.

We've been told like five times now since like spring that he was expected to get the support, just to have Manchin and Sinema balk. Hell, it wasn't even a couple days ago a deal was for sure going to be done and that it was finally looking good... just for more grandstanding by those two.

My guess is that they'll do the exact same thing with this new deal and the White House will again cut the costs, announce a deal is about to happen...and they'll balk again.

Biden is being played. No deal will be struck at this rate.

[Moebym]

20. Then what would you suggest?

What I've noticed about the people with doom-and-gloom takes on the negotiations is that they all believe - no, they know - Biden and the Democrats on the Hill are screwing everything up, but when pressed for details or solutions, can't offer much (if any).

The only people who know what exactly is going on are the ones behind those closed doors. We are basing our speculation on secondhand information.

[Drunken Irishman]

21. I never said Biden is screwing it up.

But we've had multiple moments where it appeared they were closing in on a deal, just to have the two senators balk and it unravels again.

We'll see if this is different.

[mcar]

17. This is great news

Yes, the process has been messy, but that's governing. This is a BFD!