Infrastructure Bill

Reuters wrote:Pelosi confident $1 trillion U.S. infrastructure bill will pass this week

By Humeyra Pamuk

WASHINGTON, Sept 26 (Reuters) - U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed confidence on Sunday that the $1 trillion infrastructure bill will pass this week but said she may not bring it to the floor on Monday as she previously pledged.

In an interview with This Week's George Stephanopoulos on ABC, Pelosi also said that the final value of President Joe Biden's larger $3.5 billion reconciliation bill involving social spending might end up being smaller.

"Let me just say that we're going to pass the bill this week," Pelosi said, referring to the smaller of the two measures that would help fund road, bridge, airport, school and other construction projects. The Senate passed that bill with bipartisan support on Aug. 10.

But she indicated the bill may not be brought to the floor on Monday, which was the timeline she told reporters on Friday. "I'm never bringing a bill to the floor that doesn't have the votes," she said, but then added that it may still be on Monday.

Democrats have so far failed reach a consensus on the timing of the bills, which are key to the success of Biden's economic agenda. Moderate Democrats are at odds with more progressive members of their caucus of the price tag of the bigger bill.

A large group of progressive lawmakers insist that the $1 trillion infrastructure bill be held back until the $3.5 trillion bill is ready. Moderates want the $1 trillion bill enacted no matter the progress on the larger measure.

The larger bill includes provisions for expanding healthcare for children and the elderly and for investing in steps to drastically reduce carbon dioxide and other emissions blamed for climate change.

Asked if the final number on that package might be smaller, Pelosi said: "That seems self-evident."

Reporting by Humeyra Pamuk; editing by Grant McCool and Ross Colvin

The Bill has been split in two: one Bill, everyone is in favor of because it deals with hardware (roads and bridges, etc.); the other Bill, two, deals with rebuilding social infrastructure (eg, daycare, education and training, environment, minimum wage, etc.)  Legislators all favor the first Bill, but conservatives oppose the second Bill.  (Republicans refuse to participate, but Democrats have slim margins to go it alone.) Indeed, the first bill seems to be the conservative wish-list.

However, it takes three votes in the House, or one vote in the Senate, to break up the majority.  Senator Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) refuses to vote for the second Bill.  Manchin is from a coal producing state, and doesn't like the environmental provisions of the second Bill.  Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) has been taking money from big Pharma, and doesn't like provisions to lower drug costs.  Also, Senator Sinema doesn't want to disturb/tax the wealthy, who are enjoying the immense tax break that Trump and the Republicans gave them.  Both say they won't support second Bill.

However, the Progressive caucus in the House says it won't vote for Bill no. one, until Bill no. two passes, thus assuring that both Bills pass.  So, one thing, nothing, and/or everything could possibly happen.

Everything is infrastructure now.

Maddog wrote:Everything is infrastructure now.  

As we get more comprehensive with infrastructure, the scope gets larger, yes.  Eg, as we try to increase availability of labor to do the work required, we must have pre-school daycare in order to free workers from other demands and obligations.  The same goes for training.  The more comprehensive the infrastructure task, the more other obligations are incorporated.

This is a fact of life: the higher the price of steel, the greater the cost of building that office building, the greater the rents charged by landlords, the greater the costs of services provided by the office workers.  The greater the cost of petrol, the higher the cost of transportation, the greater the cost of shipping furniture to fill-out offices, the greater again, the cost of services provided by the office workers.

It's Economics 101.  We have a huge task in front of us: we must repair and rebuild the long neglected projects we should have been tending to all along.  We have already seen our infrastructure begin to collapse:



The same thing is happening to our airports, trains, our electrical grids (as in Texas), and our water distribution network...and on and on.  Plus, we must deal with changing climate conditions, on top of simple 'wear-and-tear' demands.  Face it: because we have skated for so long, we must undertake a bigger list of tasks.

Excellent. We can make up new definitions for words when we want to.

As long as it's relevant. Apropos of southerners, you don't like to go into too much detail or analysis, as it over-taxes your mental abilities. But others of the northern persuasion favor the extended version as it connects the issue to their RL world.

Also, southerners are generally wrong, as they were on slavery. Now, here you are, showing edginess at connecting up the idea of infrastructure to causes of it's demise. Self-doubt...fearful, once again, you'll be wrong.

The reason why southerners, in particular, don't like analysis is they haven't got the intellectual patience for it. Face it, they are not good at it. Their collective intellectual response to any disagreement is anger...guns...war! You saw an example in 1861...repeated precisely in the January 6th insurrection/storming of the Capitol building.

Amexit!

The hardware bill is up for a vote today in the House.  Pundits say it will fail, as the progressive caucus is steadfast: no sense buying machines that no one can operate.

This reminds me of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) Act, back in the 70's.  Again, the emphasis was on hardware, as police departments bought tons of ex-military equipment that either had no use, or no one could operate.  Now all that hardware sits on the third floor of the underground garage, collecting dust.  But WTF, departments all over the country have a military-grade, Hum-Vee personnel carrier that can crash into brick buildings.

The fact that they have no use for it, is not incidental. America has lost any mission to look forward to.  Truth is, it doesn't want to rebuild, because who wants a bridge or highway to nowhere?  Back in the 50's, when the feds built the Interstate Highway System, there were places to go, people to see.  Now, there are only drunken fights by passengers on airplanes, or opportunities to use your gun to shoot the guy who cut you off on I-35, in Oklahoma City.

In a deeper sense, maybe that’s why we follow gurus like Trump, and cults like MAGA – searching amidst the rubbish of the past for any semblance of a purpose.  The quest for infrastructure is a search for, as Victor Frankl said, meaning.

Both bills are pulled, while negotiations take place with Sinema and the West Virginia coal miner vs. the President.  "It will happen," said Biden.  I just hope he's as good of a negotiator as he says, and he doesn't end up giving away the farm.  Nobody needs a barn full of D-9 Caterpillars that nobody can operate.

Meanwhile, Sen. Joe Manchin refuses to talk about what he wants to 'leave out' out of the package.  Does he want to toss childcare, in which case women will be left out of the work market, or does he want to toss the education component, in which case we can't retrain coal miners to be architects and engineers.  It seems he is just bitchin' about the cost, and the meaning of infrastructure - hey Joe, get real, you need the education in how slack we have let things get!

Manchin is like a Reagan Republican, cryin' about how much public works will cost his plans for income redistribution and lining the pockets of the wealthy.

Maddog wrote:Excellent.  We can make up new definitions for words when we want to.  

It's not actually a new definition of a word, it's simply including the support needed to improve infrastructure. When you define the word "army," you probably don't think about chefs and doctors, but the U.S. Army employs thousands of doctors and hundreds of cooks, for the same basic reason that people working on infrastructure need childcare support and training.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:Excellent.  We can make up new definitions for words when we want to.  

It's not actually a new definition of a word, it's simply including the support needed to improve infrastructure. When you define the word "army," you probably don't think about chefs and doctors, but the U.S. Army employs thousands of doctors and hundreds of cooks, for the same basic reason that people working on infrastructure need childcare support and training.

People like Sinema and Manchin - and Republicans, who won't even participate - are bringing forth visions of thousands of Caterpillar tractors and road graters sitting in idle rows because they won't pass the education component, teaching people how to operate them.







Or, because they didn't pass daycare, freeing people up to go to work.  Conservatives can be sooo stupid.

ALL PREPARED TO REBUILD AMERICA, and nobody to drive the tractor.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:Excellent.  We can make up new definitions for words when we want to.  

It's not actually a new definition of a word, it's simply including the support needed to improve infrastructure. When you define the word "army," you probably don't think about chefs and doctors, but the U.S. Army employs thousands of doctors and hundreds of cooks, for the same basic reason that people working on infrastructure need childcare support and training.

So everything can be infrastructure. Won't be cheap paying for everything. Luckily we can just print more money.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

It's not actually a new definition of a word, it's simply including the support needed to improve infrastructure. When you define the word "army," you probably don't think about chefs and doctors, but the U.S. Army employs thousands of doctors and hundreds of cooks, for the same basic reason that people working on infrastructure need childcare support and training.

So everything can be infrastructure. Won't be cheap paying for everything.  Luckily we can just print more money.  

If you're a productive person - if you want to get things done - you look to what is keeping it from getting done, and fix that.  When the Greeks wanted sustaining power, someone invented the water mill.  When Robert Fulton wanted a more reliable source of power than a single horse, he invented a steam engine.  When Henry Ford wanted to make cars faster, he invented the assembly line.  That's how great entrepreneurs have always accomplished things.  As Henry Kaiser once said: Find a need and fill it!

The full infrastructure bill has many, many needs, and in order to do a complete job, they must "fill it".  If you need skilled workers, you've got to give them the skills.  If you want to free up workers, you got to take care of other things (like childcare) that preoccupy them.  In pre-pandemic days, we were already dealing with a short supply of labor.  "Help wanted" signs were everywhere.  Now, when we face a huge project like infrastructure, we've got to recognize the need and fill it.

The rebuilding of infrastructure task demands it.

Innovation and invention happens outside of government.

You're acting like all of the corporations in the US need this bill to continue to provide the goods and services we want .

No doubt they are licking their chops at the idea of more taxpayer money filling their accounts. Its why they support this bill. It's just another spin on the military industrial complex.

Maddog wrote:Innovation and invention happens outside of government.  

Innovation and invention happen wherever humans are involved.  I suspect that private contractors will be involved alongside the other workers.  But the point is that the breadth of the endeavor will require that the left and right hands be helping each other.  That’s why skills training and childcare are a necessary part of the package.

The government/private-industry distinction is irrelevant.  Innovation is a basic human trait, regardless of where it happens, and on whose behalf.

Maddog wrote:You're acting like all of the corporations in the US need this bill to continue to provide the goods and services we want.

American infrastructure needs the bill.  Corporations work for profit…if the bill doesn’t include money for training and freeing up workers, the concrete and machinery will back up, or sit in storage, as there will be no one to do the work.

Maddog wrote:No doubt they are licking their chops at the idea of more taxpayer money filling their accounts.  Its why they support this bill. It's just another spin on the military industrial complex.  

Nonsense.  The Bill provides for its own payment.  The taxpayer money that will be spent will involve the same taxpayers who were favored by the Trump tax bill, aimed at redistribution of wealth that favors the top 1%.  Now the top 1% has to suspend its free ride, that’s all.  They can take solace in their great contribution to the beautiful works.

Lastly, it has nothing to do with the military-industrial complex — it’s money going to the upkeep of the civilian side of the economy.  Once upon a time we built the great Interstate Highway System...now we need to spiff it up a bit, that's all.  Same with airports, sea ports, dams and lead in our drinking water.  It's spring-cleaning time.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:Innovation and invention happens outside of government.  

Innovation and invention happen wherever humans are involved.  I suspect that private contractors will be involved alongside the other workers.  But the point is that the breadth of the endeavor will require that the left and right hands be helping each other.  That’s why skills training and childcare are a necessary part of the package.

The government/private-industry distinction is irrelevant.  Innovation is a basic human trait, regardless of where it happens, and on whose behalf.

Maddog wrote:You're acting like all of the corporations in the US need this bill to continue to provide the goods and services we want.

American infrastructure needs the bill.  Corporations work for profit…if the bill doesn’t include money for training and freeing up workers, the concrete and machinery will back up, or sit in storage, as there will be no one to do the work.

Maddog wrote:No doubt they are licking their chops at the idea of more taxpayer money filling their accounts.  Its why they support this bill. It's just another spin on the military industrial complex.  

Nonsense.  The Bill provides for its own payment.  The taxpayer money that will be spent will involve the same taxpayers who were favored by the Trump tax bill, aimed at redistribution of wealth that favors the top 1%.  Now the top 1% has to suspend its free ride, that’s all.  They can take solace in their great contribution to the beautiful works.

Lastly, it has nothing to do with the military-industrial complex — it’s money going to the upkeep of the civilian side of the economy.  Once upon a time we built the great Interstate Highway System...now we need to spiff it up a bit, that's all.  Same with airports, sea ports, dams and lead in our drinking water.  It's spring-cleaning time.

Those clowns in Washington have enough fucking money as it is. They don't need any more to spiff things up.

Maddog wrote:Those clowns in Washington have enough fucking money as it is. They don't need any more to spiff things up.

It's not for them. It's to clean the rust off of the infrastructure.

Senator Joe Manchin clings to an economic argument:

CNN wrote:(CNN)Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin said Sunday he will not support the $3.5 trillion price tag for the economic bill that would expand the nation's social safety net and that "there's no way" Congress can meet the timeline set by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to pass it.

"(Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer) will not have my vote on $3.5 (trillion) and Chuck knows that, and we've talked about this," the West Virginia senator told CNN's Dana Bash on "State of the Union."

Manchin's stance underscores the challenge facing Democratic leadership as they work to advance the sprawling spending bill proposed by President Joe Biden and his allies in the narrowly divided Congress. And he's not the only Democrat expressing reservations, potentially imperiling the bill, which leadership hopes to pass with just Democratic votes.

Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia said in a statement Sunday evening that he believes the spending bill "falls short" because there is not enough funding for housing assistance.

"We have an obligation to use this historic investment to address longstanding inequities of power and opportunity that have left Black families with an average net worth one-tenth the size of their white counterparts," Warner said.

Democrats need every vote in their caucus to get the bill through the Senate along straight party lines, and multiple moderates have raised red flags, with Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona indicating they do not support spending $3.5 trillion.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/12/politics/joe-manchin-democratic-bill-3-trillion-climate-provisions/index.html.

Since the Infrastructure bill is already paid for (albeit: by raising taxes on the wealthy), Manchin and Sinema seem to be critical of how it's paid for, not whether or not it's paid for.  They don't like taxes on the wealthy.

But the wealthy are already involved in redistribution of wealth: transfer of ownership of all earthly goods to the top 1% of the world!

This is a common theme among Republicans, as it's written into their selfish, inhumane ideology.  But it takes some ferreting out to understand why a Democrat would adopt this philosophy.

Either Manchin and Sinema are institutional Reaganites – DINO’s (Democrats in Name Only) – or they have fallen prey to specific special interests along the way.  Take a look at their constituencies.  Both come from states with weak economies.  Both come from states that, because of their economic frailty, have fallen prey to singular industrial interests: Coal in the case of West Virginia; Copper in the case of Arizona.

Even more significant...both those industries are suffering criticism from Climate Change activists.  One gets the feeling that, were it not for the environmental provisions of the Infrastructure Bill, both Manchin and Sinema would be all in.

Both are hiding the fact of their cave-in by touting broader economic arguments: “I just don’t like entitlement thinking,” sings Joe Manchin.  What he really means is, he want’s the coal industry to go on polluting the air of the northeastern United States, and spreading dingy gray all over God’s creation, but just doesn’t want to admit it.  It’s less sooty to cloak one’s purposes economic argument.

The problem is, this is just one more area where the petticoats of capitalism are revealing themselves to be dirty. Coal is entrenched wealth in West Virginia, and entrenched money is whence capitalism gets its bad reputation.  It also shows what a drag on progress that capitalism can be.  Here we have the new technology, ready to go, but old money wants old investments to stick around so we can drain every last drop of value out of the dying horse – to mix metaphors.

We’re going to face this argument again, soon – in a much greater wave.  Coal only fires furnaces.  Wait until we get to what fuels automobiles and airplanes.

But, Manchin's argument is a macro-economic argument...he will only give out macro limits, beyond which he will not spend. When asked for what it is he doesn't want to spend ON, he says: "I don't want to negotiate in public."  But, in a democracy like this, is the public not entitled to know? Aren't the taxpayers the ones who will write the check?  Why hide it?

This, conveniently - for him - reveals no detail about what he would eliminate in the Bill.  (Hint to journalist students: Look for what a respondent wants to keep hidden!)  What good are macro figures?  If you want to know what he opposes, or favors, it's in the details as to what he will spend money on.

So...MANCHIN IS HIDING SOMETHING!  This helps us focus.  What Manchin doesn't want us to know is, how he is protecting the Coal industry.  Coal is the worst industrial polluter in history - worse even than oil.  Manchin want's to eliminate all environmental protections in the Infrastructure Bill.

This is your take home lesson, kids: Watch to see if he doesn't scratch out all environmental protection provisions in the Bill.  He will complain about macro-economics, but he will find his 'savings' in and around uniquely pollution-limiting, clean-air measures.  He doesn't really care about economics or debt limits - Hell!  He voted against the tax-cut bill.  Now he protests he is concerned about entitlements???  I think not.

He's got special interests in mind.