Sinema and Manchin Flush With Lobbyist Contributions as They Hold Up Biden Agenda

[bluewater]

Amid ongoing Build Back Better negotiations, lobbyists have stepped up their contributions to Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, the sole Democratic holdouts against advancing the Biden agenda through the Senate.

Manchin and Sinema are the 2018 Senate class’s top recipients of contributions from lobbyists. In the first half of 2021, Sinema (first elected to the Senate in 2018) received $408,000 in contributions from lobbyists, 150% of what she received at the same time last year despite not being up for re-election until 2024. Manchin (re-elected in 2018) received $512,000 from lobbyists, nearly three times as much as last year. Together, the two top the list of their Senate cohort—both Democrats and Republicans—in donations from lobbyists, which include direct campaign contributions from lobbyist and/or lobbyist-controlled PACs, costs of lobbyists attending/organizing fundraisers, or sponsorship of events promoting Manchin or Sinema.

To place these quantities in perspective, the typical six-year electoral cycle means that Senate candidates receive the highest volume of lobbyist contributions in the year or two running up to their elections, followed by a trough until the next cycle. Manchin’s 2021 contributions are now at the same level as his election year, and Sinema has received a steady stream of lobbyist money into her coffers since taking office. Both are taking in lobbyist contributions at more than three times the rate of the average Senator.

The data presented provides real-time evidence that Sinema and Manchin’s obstruction of the Biden agenda is being rewarded by lobbyists seeking to influence their legislative priorities. In this case, those priorities are to smother provisions like negotiated pharmaceutical pricing through Medicare and a just transition to renewable energy, measures that directly target the interests of Big Pharma and Big Oil. This comes as new DFP polling shows Sinema at a severe disadvantage for a potential primary challenger in 2024.

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2021/10/27/sinema-and-manchin-flush-with-lobbyist-contributions


What a surprise....

[PoliticAverse]

1. Stopping negotiation of drug prices is worth hundreds of billions of dollars

to the pharmaceutical industry.

[bluewater]

3. So true.

[Celerity]

25. $400 to 450 billion or so over the next 10 years.

It's fucking criminal that Medicare cannot negotiate that. It's fucking criminal that, government aside, regular prices for many things are rapaciously jacked up for people living in the US pat versus most all of the advanced world.

Go look at almost all the Dem Senators who voted in 2003 to block price negotiation. Most are long gone now, but Sinema and Manchin are channelling their inner spirit animal. When some call/called them (both the old 2003 ones and then Coal and Curtsy) corpodems, those blockages are perfect examples of why that perjorative is used by some (others who use it call almost ALL Dems that, and those who do that are just trolls).

[FoxNewsSucks]

2. I can't believe I actually saw someone here

saying they couldn't be corrupt, because CEO's etc could only give them $2800 max.

Those individual limits are pennies compared to PAC money and lobbyists.

The corruption and influence is obvious

[bluewater]

13. +1000

[Maraya1969]

4. The revulsion that I feel toward these 2 right now cannot be expressed

[jaxexpat]

9. Exasperation...............

About as far from the key to enlightenment as one's personal state can recognize.....except for maybe (and neck-n-neck with) revulsion. It is rarely appreciated, in it's fullness, how life on the fragile edge of civility is so uncomfortable and hilarious to all but the participants.

[Bayard]

5. I know I'm shocked!

Selling out your country for personal gain. Now.....where have we seen that before?

[Hortensis]

6. Terrible. But tell this guy the BBB includes $150 BILLION for in-home care.

That $150 BILLION includes PERMANENT significant changes to Medicaid to upgrade care. Plus other assistance to the disabled, elderly, and caregivers is included. The biggest actions in over 40 years, which is when the New Deal era ended.

That website (Sean McElwee) suggests Democrats, Biden specifically, need to be pressured to address
those who need in-home care.

McElwee's 30, allied with Justice Dems and similar groups popular with anti-Democratic types, works openly for LW replacement of mainstream Democrats.

[Joinfortmill]

7. Bought and paid for. Vote.

[czarjak]

8. When you're making Rick Santorum take a victory lap...

[George II]

10. They're not holding up the Biden agenda, a few Democrats in the House are doing so.

Plus, this is an interesting site, which has compiled all the votes in both the House and Senate since Biden took office.

Some of the results are quite surprising.................or not.

Does Your Member Of Congress Vote With Or Against Biden?

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-congress-votes/

[FoxNewsSucks]

14. Nope. It's those two causing the problem and delay. Just them.

That vote statistic is meaningless unless it includes all proposals, not just things that were actually voted on. How many bills would have had an "against" vote had they not escaped having to go on record, including blockage by one of them?

In any case, since it seems some here have forgotten, the original proposal was a $6T reconciliation and a corporate-friendly infrastructure bill. Progressives didn't like things in the BIF, conservadems didn't like things in the reconciliation proposal. But they agreed to vote for both to get some of what they wanted. It was compromised down to 3.5T BBB + BIF to be linked but voted separately. And the deal was made.

Then, with little or no rational explanation, Manchin & Sinema refused to keep their word to vote for both bills. Demanding they get all of what they want or, as Manchin put it, a top line of ZERO.

Biden proposed a framework. Progressives committed publicly to supporting it and insist it be voted on so Manchinema can't walk out after the BIF passes.

Manchinema STILL haven't committed to voting for it or even being completely clear what they would vote for.

This embarrassing mess is their fault, and theirs alone. The House has done its job and passed or committed to passing the BBB and BIF . If Manchinema could be trusted, maybe the House would go ahead and pass the BIF first. But they've shown their word means nothing. So everything is being reduced and held up because of Manchin and Sinema.

[George II]

16. They came to an agreement with Biden and Schumer on Thursday morning. That's why Biden....

....went to the Capitol to meet with House Democrats. The plan was for Biden to announce the deal and then fly to Rome.

But about a half dozen in the House backed away and said they weren't going to vote for anything.

A couple of them, especially Tlaib, proudly announced it on Twitter.

And what's this "Manchinema" garbage. They're two Democratic Senators.

[FoxNewsSucks]

17. Because the two Democratic Senators still won't commit to voting for it

You may think the "manchinema" naming that I see becoming more commonly used is garbage or cutesy, and I'll agree it is to an extent. It's also garbage and cutesy to flounce onto the senate floor inappropriately dressed, curtsy, and give a thumbs-down. It's also not Democratic to block the raising of the minimum wage for those who desperately need it.

Between those two, they've blocked minimum wage hikes, demanded no corporate tax hikes, demanded pharma be able to continue to mercilessly gouge Americans, demanded less tax hikes on the rich, demanded corporate giveaways, demanded medicare not be improved, demanded Americans not get the paid leave the rest of the civilized world has, and blocked desperately-needed climate action. Other than the party designation behind their printed names, how is one supposed to tell that they are Democratic Senators? Sure can't tell from their actions.

And again, if they'd committed publicly to voting for Biden's framework, the BIF would have had its vote. Frankly, and it's unfortunate, they've shown they can't be trusted and this is the result of that.

[wellst0nev0ter]

19. Explain this:

Link to tweet

[George II]

20. What does that have to do with what I said? Are politicians living in bubbles?

[wellst0nev0ter]

21. He's obviously not serving his state constituents

And not even you can explain it away, I see.


If Manchinema is as loyal as you say, we should just put the BBB bill in front of them as it stands and tell them to take it or leave it.

A loyal Democrat going to blow up Biden's agenda, is she?

[George II]

22. Apparently his constituents don't agree. He's been elected twice, ergo nothing to "explain away".

[wellst0nev0ter]

23. Wow, this is almost *too* easy

Link to tweet

So much cope. Manchin and his defenders have pissed away every last drop of their credibility.

[George II]

24. I agree, "almost *too* easy". Data for Progress.........

[wellst0nev0ter]

29. You're more than welcome to show your own poll

That West Virginians don't actually support BBB.

Or keep coping, whichever works.

[George II]

32. That Data for Progress poll reminds me of the OH-11 poll this summer, showing Nina Turner leading..

...Shontel Brown by 35%. How did that work out?

[wellst0nev0ter]

34. You're right, DFP messed up with that OH-11 poll

Which was conducted by an entirely different firm.

There is absolutely no leg to stand on, so the only option is to deflect and cope with an unrelated special election.

This is clearly not a serious discussion, so I'll end this reply thread. Have a good rest of the day.

[George II]

35. The point is, far left pollsters can be biased in their polling results, and.....

People can be in favor of an overall agenda, i.e., West Virginians in favor of the BBB agenda, without agreeing with every single aspect of that agenda.

In fact, as shown on page 3 of that poll result, West Virginians do NOT strongly support 6 of the 8 items listed.

Did you look at the details?

[NurseJackie]

36. "West Virginians do NOT strongly support 6 of the 8 items listed."

In fact, as shown on page 3 of that poll result, West Virginians do NOT strongly support 6 of the 8 items listed. --- Did you look at the details?

Ooo! Ooo! Easy! I know the answer to that!

[lapucelle]

31. The text is up and has been up for review since Thursday morning.

It's House progressives who held up the vote.

Source: Reuters

Pelosi says legislative text ready on Biden social and climate plan
Thu, October 28, 2021, 11:31 AM

WASHINGTON, Oct 28 (Reuters) - U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday Democrats are moving forward on a bipartisan infrastructure bill and that legislative text is ready on President Joe Biden's larger social spending and climate plan.

Progressive Democrats in the House of Representatives said earlier they needed to see something in writing before they could back the $1.75 trillion spending bill.

"The text is up. People have said, 'I want to see text.' The text is up for review," Pelosi said at a news conference.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The text of the bill:

file:///C:/Users/test/AppData/Local/Temp/BILLS-117HR5376RH-RCP117-17.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If Manchinema is as loyal as you say, we should just put the BBB bill in front of them as it stands and tell them to take it or leave it.

Sanders signals House should hold off on infrastructure vote
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Thursday said he’s not prepared to support a stripped-down $1.75 billion framework unveiled earlier in the day by the White House and signaled that progressives in the House should hold off on voting for a separate infrastructure measure.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/578919-sanders-says-white-house-framework-has-major-gaps


The junior senator from VT was on State of the Union (CNN) this morning saying he's still "working on the bill", so if you want a "loyalty test" concerning President Biden's framework and bill, by all means have at it.

Despite the demonization of some members of the Democratic caucus, it's pretty clear where the obstruction lies.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure whose agenda it serves to focus on what's not in the bill rather than what is in the bill, but they've given the media its "Democrats fail" narrative the weekend before election day.

[lapucelle]

33. Looks to me like Rolling Stone is working overtime to sow distrust and division among Democrats.

Furthermore, Rolling Stone's opening contention is factually wrong.

Joe Manchin is one of the two Democratic senators standing in the way of a historic bill that would expand the social safety net and address the climate crisis...

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-donor-nelson-peltz-call-joe-manchin-1245419/

Here's where the junior senator from VT and his followers stand on Sunday, October 31.

The current framework of the economic bill includes hearing expansion but Sanders, who has advocated for Medicare expansion that includes vision and dental as well as drug pricing reform, said he has been on the phone all weekend trying to get it included in the House version of the economic bill.

snip=============================================================================

When asked about Sanders' comments to CNN on trying to add more provisions into the legislation, Khanna said he still expects a vote on Tuesday.

"I'm a yes, progressives will be a yes, we're working to get all of this in," he said.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/31/politics/bernie-sanders-framework-agreement-senate-cnntv/index.html

Why on earth would Rolling Stone work so hard to stir up outrage against two Democratic senators when it's clear to anyone following the actual news that there are several players standing in the way of President Biden's framework, bill, and agenda?

Why are so many partisan media outlets seemingly unaware that the text of the bill has been up and available since Thursday morning? Why are they silent as to exactly what went on at the October 21 caucus meeting and in the House last Thursday? Why are they flogging the narrative that $1.75 trillion in social spending is a bad thing? Why are they so focused on what isn't in the bill rather than what is in the bill?

And why are they doing this right before election day?

Cui bono?

[jalan48]

11. This is an example of "Corporatism" for those on DU who don't think it applies to Democrats.

[SergeStorms]

12. Disgusting.

I fully expect Manchin to either go (I) or (R) by his next election, and Sinema leaving "public service" for a lobbyist job.

They could never seriously call themselves Democrats again.

[PoliticAverse]

26. He got a bunch of Republican votes for the bi-partisan infrastructure bill. n/t

[betsuni]

27. "80% of the Republicans, in both the House and the Senate, voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act,

as did 69% of the Democrats in the Senate and 63% in the House. Neither the parties themselves, nor America, were particularly polarized, and the outcome was decisive. We got things done. ... We were tackling our social problems at breakneck speed: legislation on civil rights, voting rights, women's rights, health care, and the war on poverty, all passed in a two-year period. So what when wrong? Polarization began ripping our country apart in the late 1960s, and it's just gotten worse."

Steven Stoft, "Ripped Apart"

The Republican Party is nothing like it was then, bipartisanship is rare now, the bully pulpit is a myth.

[lagomorph777]

28. LBJ wouldn't twist their arms.

He'd have 'em on the floor in a Full Nelson, begging for air.

[JustAnotherGen]

30. LBJ had 66 Democratic Party Senators

In 1964.

57 days of filibuster (73 in total for the Civil Rights bill) prior to the CRA preceded that vote.

He had 68 January 1965.