Pelosi Blinks on the Infrastructure Package Vote but What About the Progressives?

Pelosi Backs Down

After insisting for months that she would not let the House vote on an infrastructure bill until there was a vote on a broader reconciliation package, Pelosi blinked.

The Speaker now says Biden’s Infrastructure Bill Can’t Wait

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told Democrats on Monday that passage of the $550 billion infrastructure bill must not wait for President Joe Biden’s multitrillion-dollar safety net bill, saying the larger package is not yet ready for a vote.

In a private caucus meeting, Pelosi, D-Calif., said the party must “make difficult choices,” because the dynamics have changed and Democrats have not yet agreed to a spending level, according to a source familiar with the meeting.

“I told all of you that we wouldn’t go on to the [infrastructure bill until] we had the reconciliation bill passed by the Senate. We were right on schedule to do all of that, until 10 days ago, a week ago, when I heard the news that this number had to come down,” Pelosi said, according to the source. “It all changed, so our approach had to change.

“We had to accommodate the changes that were being necessitated. And we cannot be ready to say until the Senate passed the bill we can’t do BIF,” she said, using a shorthand for Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework, the source said.

What About the Progressives?

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, stuck by that position Monday evening after the meeting, saying House progressives are prepared to vote down the infrastructure bill Thursday.

“We need the reconciliation bill, and so this is a situation where the vast, vast, vast majority of Democrats want to get the president’s agenda done,” she said on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show.” “It can’t be a pinky promise, right, Rachel? It’s got to be an actual bill that is written, the legislative text is written, the numbers are agreed to, everything is agreed to.”

How to Tell If the Votes are There

That’s easy. If Pelosi schedules a vote this week, she has them. If not, she doesn’t.

She can only afford to lose 3 votes and the Progressive Caucus is 65 strong. 

Will they blink? I don’t know.

Perhaps there is some purposeful drama. A failed vote to send a message followed by passage.

Also, there are a number of Republicans who will vote for the bill, just not 65 of them.

 So something like 10 Progressives can send a message if there are 7 Republicans who vote passage (Democrats have 3 votes to spare).

Best Outcome

I am in totally favor of starting all over with ideas that make more sense.

The Best outcome is if Progressive bickering and Democrat infighting kill the entire deal infrastructure and all, but especially the $3.5 trillion Progressive Express.

When Does Pelosi Blink On the Debt Ceiling?

For discussion, please see Debt Ceiling Congressional Chicken and How the Fed Might Respond.

Thanks for Tuning In

Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

20 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jojo
Jojo
2 years ago
So many seem upset with the cost of the proposed $3.5 trillion infrastructure bill (cost is over 10 years, which is $350 million/year).

So why isn’t anyone upset with the $7.7 TRILLION “defense” cost over 10 years?

Why not take the $3.5 trillion infrastructure cost out of the defense budget, reducing it to “only” $4.2 trillion over 10 years?
Would we be any less safe?
Bungalow Bill
Bungalow Bill
2 years ago
Isn’t it cute the GOP is now suddenly worried again about massive deficits! I recall last year when both parties were on board with all the COVID socialism spending and there was only one fiscally responsible member in Congress trying to bring light to the wasteful spending. Back them the Republican president threatened to have him kicked out of the GOP for actually being fiscally responsible. You can always tell when the Democrats are back in power. The Republicans go back to pretending they are small government champions.

As for this infrastructure bill, just read James Madisons veto of the bonus bill. 

Of course we are far too gone to consider what the Constitution says…

Call_Me
Call_Me
2 years ago
Reply to  Bungalow Bill
In case you haven’t been paying attention, that is how the 2-party system works in the US.  They are essentially both sides of the same coin, but how they act/complain about things depends on which side is ‘in power’.  Here is how Ds felt about election integrity a few short years ago–
FromBrussels
FromBrussels
2 years ago
….Why should a 80+ years old ,corrupt to the bone  b$tch  still call the fn shots….I  wonder …
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Reply to  FromBrussels
She, and her husband, are well connected useful idiots close to the money printers. Which is all that matters in dystopias with populations so indoctrinated they continue to fall for the trivially nonsensical idiocy that “The System” refers to anything at all besides a crass theft racket.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
She spent decades throwing parties and raising tons of money for Democrat candidates. When she finally ran for Congress everybody on her side of the aisle owed her lots of favors
AWC
AWC
2 years ago
Look, as many $Trillions as is necessary will be injected into the economy, one way or another, whether via fiscal spending, defense dept largess, or helicopter delivery services, medical industry mandates, etc.
Just buy what Nancy is buying, set it and forget it. She’s “Clairvoyant “ you know?  😉 
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
2 years ago
Reply to  AWC
“Look, as many $Trillions as is necessary will be injected into the economy,”
Yeah, well … what do think they have been doing?  How’s that working??
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
“Yeah, well … what do think they have been doing?  How’s that working??”
For all those singularly stupid enough to believe paying more and more for the exact same stream of income represented by a company share, is somehow better than paying less for it, it probably appears to work quite wonderfully. There really is no fixing stupid.
mrchinup
mrchinup
2 years ago
Let’s be honest it would be better to let the entire world crash right now, at least the next generation would have a chance. Let every oligarch grovel at our feet, they have caused all of this mess.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
2 years ago
Reply to  mrchinup
“Let’s be honest it would be better to let the entire world crash right now,”
Absolutely.
Wealth inequality has gone past extreme.  The Haves will do just fine with a lot less … and wealth gap lessens.  
If Stukimoi was here he would note that the buildings / planes / cars / etc would still be here if everything crashed.  Everything repriced is all that happens.  All the wailing / crying / gnashing of teeth is just the Haves fretting about their asset prices tanking.  Bottom 70%?  Tough luck.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
2 years ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
Clarity – The tough luck is bottom 70 response to the haves.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Reply to  mrchinup
For the empiricists out there: The last time that happened, was the Depression and WW2 back to back. Which led to the greatest, most widespread and sustained growth period since back before the Fed started acting as an ever increasing drag on real growth.
And that was despite that particular rearrangement/repricing being accompanied by blowing up and burning down half the world’s productive capital, and a significant chunk of the productive workforce. Yet, despite that little detail, the “reset,” or “randomization” of ownership and privilege, away from those handed control of it by the first few Fed bubbles; was sufficiently beneficial to usher in the 50s and 60s: The moonshot, the planes we still fly, ARPAnet, microchips and Rock’n Roll. 
Get the randomization and deleveraging/desclerotization done without the bombing, burning and killing; and you’re looking at a lot more than that.
Of course, even if people insist on remaining too dumb and indoctrinated to recognize that; there is plenty of solace to be had in knowing The Taliban and the like, will eventually get it done. Albeit in their case, including the bombing, burning and killing. Which will, as last time, still end up being a good thing. Just not necessarily the best.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
2 years ago
“When Does Pelosi Blink On the Debt Ceiling?”
Is this a trick question?
Answer:  Only after her husband has placed option trades accordingly.
WhyMe2016
WhyMe2016
2 years ago
But did Nancy give her husband the “heads up” before changing strategies?
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
2 years ago
Reply to  WhyMe2016
Without a doubt … had to laugh (cry?) when I read this weekend there is at least one fund that invests solely on Pelosi’s holdings.  Seems members of Congress have to make public 45 days after the fact any trade.
Pathetic.
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
2 years ago
At some point, this will all blow up on the debt markets. The constant cycle of tax cuts to starve the beast and more spending can’t go on forever can it ?
whirlaway
whirlaway
2 years ago
I would say that the progressives will blink, and the reconciliation package will be reduced from 3.5T to about 2.5T.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Sounds right.
Jmurr
Jmurr
2 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T
Which is still horrible given what they have already spent. 

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.