‘They Still Need Joe Manchin’s Vote On Literally Everything’

[GURPS]

But the real venom came from the White House, in the form of a blistering statement from press secretary Jen Psaki:

Just as Senator Manchin reversed his position on Build Back Better this morning, we will continue to press him to see if he will reverse his position yet again, to honor his prior commitments and be true to his word.
In the meantime, Senator Manchin will have to explain to those families paying $1,000 a month for insulin why they need to keep paying that, instead of $35 for that vital medicine,” Psaki continued. “He will have to explain to the nearly two million women who would get the affordable day care they need to return to work why he opposes a plan to get them the help they need. Maybe Senator Manchin can explain to the millions of children who have been lifted out of poverty, in part due to the Child Tax Credit, why he wants to end a program that is helping achieve this milestone—we cannot.

Benson joined the panel discussion on Fox News’ “Outnumbered,” and he argued that the White House might have gotten out a bit over its skis in that response.

“That statement that she put out was blistering and I would say somewhat shocking, actually,” Benson said. “Manchin’s decision was not shocking because you are right, Kayleigh, he’s been telegraphing it for months, and he put it in writing in a statement signed by Chuck Schumer. We knew what his demands were and Build Back Better did not come close to those demands, so he decided to pull the plug. Maybe we will see something next year very pared down, not really close to BBB, more in line with what Manchin said, but his decision here was not shocking.”

“The calculation of the White House, though: mind-blowing,” Benson continued. “They still need Joe Manchin’s vote on literally everything. It’s a 50-50 Senate. They are accusing him of being a liar and acting in bad faith.”

‘They Still Need Joe Manchin’s Vote On Literally Everything’: Guy Benson Calls WH Decision To Torch Manchin ‘Mind-Blowing’

Fox News contributor Guy Benson said Monday that the White House may have miscalculated its response to Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) following the news that he would not vote for President Joe Biden’s signature policy priority, the Build Back Better Act. Manchin told anchor Bret Baier on “Fox News...

www.dailywire.com

Whine about drug prices all you want, but one of Biden's early moves - remove Trumps Drug Price Freezes

 

[herb749]

People want the drug price part, just not the rest of the garbage that comes with it. Once again they want to talk about a part of the bill people want and not about the parts that don't mean anything to those same people.

 

[stgislander]

Sorry for posting to an old thread, but Joe Manchin has gut punched his fellow Dems again. I heard on the radio this morning that he told Chuck the Schmuck that there's no way he's voting to tax the rich and corporations to fight Climate Change. The only thing he will support is lowering the cost of prescription drugs.

 

[SamSpade]

If they didn't load their proposals with so many poison pills, they wouldn't NEED Manchin's vote.

 

[BOP]

If they didn't load their proposals with so many poison pills, they wouldn't NEED Manchin's vote.

Well, at least they have almost everyone on board. That wasn't true in the past. I know it frustrated the hell out of the Won, that he couldn't garner enough votes to support his pet legislation from his own party. The original "First Responders'" bill comes immediately to mind.

Of course, there's always the remote possibility that Manchin is the more moderate's ace-in-the-hole for those of them fearful of their own political futures if they don't vote the party line.

 

[SamSpade]

Well, at least they have almost everyone on board. That wasn't true in the past. I know it frustrated the hell out of the Won, that he couldn't garner enough votes to support his pet legislation from his own party. The original "First Responders'" bill comes immediately to mind.

Of course, there's always the remote possibility that Manchin is the more moderate's ace-in-the-hole for those of them fearful of their own political futures if they don't vote the party line.

See, to me their remarks about Manchin are like having a house luncheon with 21 people, and the boss says "who wants liver and onions?" and ten hands go up. He turns to ONE GUY and tells him "you know, you're ruining lunch for everyone else".

And you can see my point - if you just make the options a little less severe, you could easily get more votes from everyone else.

 

[stgislander]

And you can see my point - if you just make the options a little less severe, you could easily get more votes from everyone else.

Case in point Joe's vote against the first WHPA bill.

 

[Hijinx]

To me this doesn't point out Manchins refusal to go along .
To me this points out that the rest of them don't have minds of their own, they just stick up their hand when Schumer and Pelosi tell them to.
If a party consists of people like this they are utterly worthless to a country and a gold mine for the crooks they listen to.

 

[GURPS]

Driving the news: Democrats made no attempt to hide their rage and indignation after reports Thursday night that Manchin had told party leaders that due to inflation concerns he was out on any economic package with climate change spending or new taxes on the wealthy or corporations.

• After negotiating with Schumer all spring on a modified package to include $1 trillion in revenue and $500 billion in new spending, he was again taking his ball and going home.

What they're saying: "We're going to have to get two more Democrats — real Democrats — who will actually help us to implement the president's agenda and not obstruct it," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the chair of the House Progressive Caucus, told reporters.

• Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told SiriusXM host Dean Obeidallah that "Manchin is not particularly concerned about President Biden succeeding. He's not particularly concerned about the needs of working people.”
• "Sen. Manchin’s refusal to act is infuriating,” Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) tweeted.

Manchin somewhat tempered his stance on Friday, telling a radio show in his home state that he simply wants more time and to see how the Federal Reserve responds to the 9.1% June inflation report. He also underscored his willingness to get the Medicare piece done now.

Reality check: Dems fear if they wait another month for Manchin to get comfortable with approximately $300 billion to fight climate change, they'll get nothing.

• They're left shouting their outrage on Twitter and cable news.
• But their anger and frustration won’t change the fundamental filibuster math that has governed the Senate for 18 months.

How we got here: Frustration with Manchin in the Democratic caucus runs deep. It stems, in part, due to his crafty habit of always playing for more time.

• Last September, he first called for a "strategic pause," in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.
• In November, he told Fox News he wanted to "slow down and take a breath."
• All the while, Manchin's relationship with Schumer was deteriorating, with both sides questioning if the other could be trusted.
• A February effort to mend fences over Italian food didn't help them reset their relationship.

Democrats' Manchin rage

They're furious with him but privately take him at his word that he's still committed to lowering prescription drug prices.

www.axios.com

 

[GURPS]

Sanders Accuses Manchin of 'Sabotage' Against Biden Agenda​

“He has sabotaged the president’s agenda,” Sanders told ABC This Week anchor Martha Raddatz. “The problem was that we continued to talk to Manchin like he was serious. He was not. This is a guy who’s a major recipient of fossil fuel money.”


Thank goodness for Joe Manchin and fossil fuel money because they might be the only things saving us from the financial ruin of Biden’s Build Back Better agenda.

What’s left of it, that is:

On Thursday night, Manchin dealt a devastating blow to Democrats’ hopes for sweeping legislative action this year, telling Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and his staff “unequivocally” that he won’t support the climate or tax provisions of a Democratic economic package, two sources familiar with the talks told CNN.

“No matter what spending aspirations some in Congress may have, it is clear to anyone who visits a grocery store or a gas station that we cannot add any more fuel to this inflation fire,” Manchin said last week.

Against all expert predictions, inflation continues to accelerate, hitting yet another 41-year record last month at an annualized 9.1% rate. And if we still calculated inflation the way we did 41 years ago, the actual rate would be much higher.

 

[SamSpade]

Imagine touting your party as defenders of democracy but openly berating a member of your party because they disagree with all of the others who are all thinking alike.

But I’ll say it again - it never needs to happen if they simply propose a bill the opposition can get on board with. It’s really showing clear partisanship if the votes are always straight down party lines.

 

[stgislander]

I'm sure the Reps are kissing his a$$. I hear Mitch pays to have the Joe's boat hauled every year to have the bottom cleaned and painted.

 

[vraiblonde]

“He has sabotaged the president’s agenda,”

 

[GURPS]

NBC Panics Over Climate Change, Blames Manchin for Blocking Biden​

She then interviewed Dan Lashof of the leftist World Resources Institute about what Manchin blocking Biden's climate agenda and the Supreme Court striking down the EPA overstepping its authority to regulate "do to President Biden's climate agenda?"

Lashof bemoaned how "there's no sugarcoating it" and "they're major setbacks."

Thompson bemoaned the fact that "polls show a majority of Americans, 65 percent are worried about global warming, but only one percent of voters say climate change is the top issue facing the country. Among voters under 30 that number rises only to three percent."

Turning back to Lashof, Thompson fretted how "climate change always seems to be the issue that we can put off until tomorrow," asking "are we at the point that we can no longer put off acting on climate change?"

Lashof ludicrously claimed "30 years ago it was a problem for the future. It is a problem for now, now."

Nowhere in this report was there any feedback or interviews with clear-thinking experts who would've told Thompson that the planet goes through a series of warming and cooling phases and humans have no control over the climate. Lester Holt wasn't kidding when he said he thinks "fairness is overrated"

 

[GURPS]

Don't Count Your Chickens on Manchin-Schumer Deal: Sinema May Be the Wrench in the Plan​

From The Hill:

It would invest $369 billion in energy climate programs over the next 10 years and $300 billion to reduce the deficit. It would be added to legislation to lower prescription drug prices and extend expiring health care subsidies.
“After many months of negotiations, we have finalized legislative text that will invest approximately $300 billion in deficit reduction and $369.75 billion in energy security and climate change programs over the next ten years,” Schumer and Manchin announced in a joint statement. “The investments will be fully paid for by closing tax loopholes on wealthy individuals and corporations.” [….]
It would raise $739 billion in new revenue through a variety of proposals, according to a one-page summary provided by the negotiators: $313 billion through a 15-percent corporate minimum tax, $288 billion from empowering Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices, $124 billion from strong IRS enforcement of tax law and $14 billion from closing the carried interest loophole for money managers.

Let’s remember “invest” equals “spend” — the very thing he said we shouldn’t be doing because of the high inflation.

We’re already at the highest inflation in more than 40 years, and this news comes right on top of the Federal Reserve deciding to hike interest rates by 75 basis points. The news likely to come tomorrow that we are officially in a recession, with two consecutive quarters of negative GDP.

So, apart from calling the bill “The Inflation Reduction Act,” it sounds a lot like Manchin may have just caved big time.

Biden is already celebrating it.

But this may not be a done deal yet.

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) is not yet on board with this, and the deal raises issues that she’s had a problem with in the past. It’s a little astonishing that they didn’t get her on board before acting like this was a done deal.

 

[GURPS]

 

[GURPS]

Manchin: Why no, I didn't consult with Sinema, but ...​

Looks like Axios got this right in its snap analysis of Kyrsten Sinema’s reaction to the reconciliation deal announced late yesterday between Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer. No one bothered to consult Sinema on the deal, Manchin revealed a few minutes ago to CNN’s Manu Raju, and no one has heard from her yet, either. Manchin thinks she’ll go along, but he’s not going to budge if she continues objecting to one component of the deal:





For those unfamiliar with the carried-interest tax issue, the proposal will change the way income from investments get taxed. At the moment, carried interest gets taxed at capital-gains rates, which are significantly lower than income-tax rates. Carried interest income usually gets derived from economy-boosting capital investments, which had been the reason for taxing it at the capital-gains rate. The deal that Manchin and Schumer just cut will make that no different than ordinary income for tax purposes:

One of the tenets of the compromise is higher taxes on carried interest, which is a huge part of hedge fund managers’ pay but also applies to a performance fee for developers known as a “promote.” The senators’ plan would tax carried interest as ordinary income rather than as a capital gain, raising roughly $14 billion.
Other beneficiaries of carried interest include private equity and venture capital firms. A promote is a financial interest in the long-term capital gain of a development. Critics have long argued that income that does not result from risk-taking, such as the 2 percent of assets under management that hedge funders typically collect.
Manchin, citing inflation, has been balking at a package of climate change measures and tax increases, denying Senate Democrats the 50th vote they need to pass legislation without Republican support. In a statement, Manchin expressed support for eliminating the favorable tax treatment of carried interest, which is not a significant source of income in his state, West Virginia.

That might be true in West Virginia, but it’s probably not true in Arizona, where more of those investors may be living. Sinema has consistently opposed this change, whether because of its impact on constituents or just the overall impact of the economy. Given that the class of VC execs and hedge-fund managers tend to be more Democrat these days, it might well be a blend of both.

Taxing these functions at the income-tax rate will have a disincentivizing impact on those choices, although how much remains to be seen. That’s also true of the supposed revenue from this effort, which is almost certainly a static estimate. The people who benefit most from the current carried-interest tax policy likely have many options to shelter their capital from that kind of taxation, some of which will mean less capital for projects that stimulate economic growth. This policy change is curious at any time, but even more so as we enter a recession — where capital investment will be needed most. At any rate, a good portion of that ten-year revenue of $14 billion will likely be vaporware.

 

[GURPS]

The first thing to remember about the reconciliation bill Sens. Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer agreed to Wednesday is that, despite its utterly preposterous name, it has absolutely zero to do with inflation. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 is crammed with the very same spending, corporate welfare, price fixing and tax hikes that were part of Build Back Better -- long-desired progressive wish-list agenda items. Pumping hundreds of billions into the economy will do nothing to alleviate inflation. The opposite.

Let's also remember the Democrats' deflection on inflation last year -- claiming it was "transitory" and "no serious economist" is "suggesting there's unchecked inflation on the way," and so on -- was all part of a concerted political effort to ignore the problem long enough to cram through a $5.5 trillion iteration of their agenda. And when inflation suddenly became non-transitory, and politically problematic, the Biden administration argued that more spending would relieve inflation. They don't care about the economy, as long as dependency is being expanded.

The bill is far more likely to spike consumer prices than not. You can hate corporations with the heat of a thousand suns and grouse about the lack of fairness in the world, but it won't change the fact that businesses don't pay taxes, they collect them. The Dems' bill claims it raises $313 billion with a minimum 15% corporate tax rate. Democrats seem to be under the impression that corporations that pay less than 15% are evading taxes rather than using completely legal tools like accelerated depreciation or taking advantage of tax credits. Whatever the case, raising corporate taxes means fewer jobs or higher prices. Maybe both. What it won't do is lower inflation.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/07/29/the_dems_new_proposal_does_nothing_to_lower_inflation_147965.html

 

[WingsOfGold]

Minchin is in for a rude homecoming next month.

 

[SamSpade]

Minchin is in for a rude homecoming next month.

Why? He's not up for re-election and Democrat or not, he's still popular in his state.