Biden negotiated a compromise deal with 11 Republican Senators on a big infrastructure package. Within hours of the deal, Biden had new demands.
Graham is a warmonger and extreme political opportunist of the worst kind. He went from brutal attacks on Trump to sucking up in the worst way (wrong on both ends).
However, one must discuss the issues at hand rather than hypocrisy, biased partisanship, and issues not at hand.
On that basis, Graham is correct in his stance.
Biden's Change of Tune
Just hours after Biden embraced a nearly $1 trillion infrastructure plan crafted by a bipartisan group of senators on Thursday, he said he wouldn’t sign it unless Congress also sent him a package of child-care, climate, education and other provisions expected to advance without GOP votes.
Biden's Change In Tune puts the deal in jeopardy.
The White House said that Mr. Biden spoke with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) on Friday and reiterated his support for both pieces of legislation. Ms. Sinema’s office declined to comment. The centrist lawmaker, who helped lead the bipartisan talks, said a day earlier at the White House that she was “always committed to work with anyone to get things done” when asked about reconciliation.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said on the Senate floor late Thursday that Democratic leaders had “pulled the rug out from under their bipartisan negotiators” by insisting on parallel tracks and issued “an ultimatum on behalf of your left-wing base.”
“There is one deal and that is a deal that includes all the things we need for infrastructure,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) “They have to come together. It’s not possible to do one without the other.”
But centrist Democrats have balked at the size and price tag of Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders’s (I., Vt.) plan to draft a $6 trillion package that Democrats could pass without GOP support through the reconciliation process.
The defection of a single Democrat would derail the process, given the 50-50 Senate. Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) has already signaled misgivings about the package’s cost and the amount of debt incurred.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said Thursday she wouldn’t bring up the bipartisan infrastructure bill unless the antipoverty package had passed the Senate.
“The last thing they want is for true infrastructure, responsibly paid for, to pass because that’s the sweetener that allows them to try to spend all this additional money through reconciliation on their entire socialist agenda,“ said Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, a member of Senate GOP leadership.
Some Republicans, including Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas, had backed the bipartisan proposal earlier in part because they hoped it would make a second package a harder sell to centrist Democrats. Mr. Moran was working Friday to seek assurances from Mr. Manchin, Ms. Sinema and other Democrats who worked on the bipartisan deal that they wouldn’t support the reconciliation package, according to his spokesman.
Lies, Delusions, and Accurate Statements
- Sanders is delusional to propose spending $6 trillion when Manchin and Sinema have concerns over $1 trillion.
- Warren is a liar when she says "It’s not possible to do one without the other.” Of course it's possible. Rather what is impossible is to get Republican support for huge tax increases.
- I suspect Pelosi is a liar as well, but that is not proven yet.
- The Gold Medal winner for statement of the day goes to Sen. John Barrasso: “The last thing they want is for true infrastructure, responsibly paid for, to pass because that’s the sweetener that allows them to try to spend all this additional money through reconciliation on their entire socialist agenda."
I do not see republicans supporting the antipoverty package that she demands. And if they don't, would she rather have something or nothing?
Of course, this really comes down to the same key question.
What precisely will Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Krysten Sinema of Arizona go along with?
I do not know, nor does anyone else.
We do know that Sinema’s office declined to comment. But no one can say what that means, if indeed anything at all.
Manchin seems easier to read. He has stated misgivings about the package’s cost and the amount of debt incurred. I suspect he would bend a little, but not much.
However, the amount he is willing to bend may depend on how much Sinema is willing to bend. It's easier on both of them if they stay together.
As former UK Prime Minister Theresa May said in a lie "No deal is better than a bad deal."
Theresa May lied because she tried hard to get the worst deal possible with the EU. Fortunately, Boris Johnson delivered the goods: True Brexit.
In the US, we are now at the mercy of what Manchin and Sinema will agree with. I believe not much, but I could be wrong.
Battle Cry of the Day
Progressives are highly unlikely to be pleased. And the more displeased they are, the better off the country will be.
Some infrastructure spending is warranted, but it is not worth the stated cost demanded by Biden, Pelosi, Warren, and Sanders.
"No deal is better than a bad deal" is again the appropriate battle cry of the day.