USCE Summer 2022: You can't change the crisis settings.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE Summer 2022: You can't change the crisis settings.

«‹›279 »

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

Gerund posted:

The only way the SCOTUS blows a hole in this is if they argue that the structure of "do this or we withold funding" that holds together the entire federal system is unconstitutional.

Considering that these days we're seriously weighing the possibility of dissolving the administrative state and eliminating the direct election of presidents, I don't know if I'd take a bet they wouldn't do that

# ? Jul 14, 2022 20:22

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 17:11

bird food bathtub: Aug 9, 2003; College Slice

Gerund posted:

The only way the SCOTUS blows a hole in this is if they argue that the structure of "do this or we withold funding" that holds together the entire federal system is unconstitutional.

That's maybe not as much of a threat to them as it may sound. They're pretty specifically gunning to destroy "the administrative state" as a decades long goal.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 20:26

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

Republicans posted:

LOL they'll dump it as soon as the chuds catch wind.

"The chuds" are the ones organizing this outreach; did you miss the earlier stories about the GOP establishing community centers in Hispanic areas & getting voters to switch party registration?

I'd reckon this approach might be more popular among immigrants than sending the First Lady to Hispanic groups to deliver paternalistic tortured similes & pronunciations, but I haven't seen any polling among Hispanic voters post-Dr. Jill's speech the other day.

PT6A posted:

A lot of conservatives are adamant that immigration is okay if people do it The Right Way (the Right Way being only extended to people they like, in general) it's just all those MS-13 caravans that are the problem; that's a sufficient fig leaf for them to feel their racism is excused and try to fish a new pool of voters.

Surprisingly, there are surveys that show similar sentiment among earlier-generation immigrant voters about legal immigration.

PT6A posted:

Just look at all those sufficiently pale fuckers who "lost their family farm in Cuba" and had no choice but to flee to Cuba. They fit right in! Your large adult son could even become a senator for Texas, with that kind of plucky, upstart background.

Again, from the story I posted:

quote:

The RNC said as of January 2021 there were more than 9.2 million lawful permanent residents who are eligible to become citizens and vote but have not been naturalized, almost 2.5 million of whom are from Mexico.

Is there a parallel outreach effort among Democratic leaders & the DNC toward naturalized citizens?

Nelson Mandingo posted:

That worked out so well for them after 2012.

Actually, the 2020 vote-split vs. the 2016 vote-split among Hispanic voters shows that something is working as far as being wooed by the right, as does the GOP flipping a House seat this year in a Texas special election.

Whether it'll hold, much less accelerate, is another story--but I'd caution anyone paying attention to party politics to spurn caricaturing & ventriloquizing on behalf of "the chuds" (all 70 million of them!) in favor of heeding how the GOP is doing outreach this year, especially as part of an effort toward the long term.

Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jul 14, 2022

# ? Jul 14, 2022 21:13

Mr Hootington: Jul 24, 2008; I'M HAVING A HOOT EATING CORNETTE THE LONG WAY

Yinlock posted:

I thought the $~~2000~~1600 cheques is where the whining started about all the WASTEFUL SPENDING(ignoring the trillion+ just handed out to corporations).

But yes you're absolutely correct that it's about suppressing workers. Workers are(slowly) rediscovering their actual power in the labor/capital relationship and the ruling class aren't a fan of that at all.

They did whine about spending when the stimulus happened, but nobody in power gave a poo poo about high inflation until wages started rising. We had like 6 or 7 of steadily growing inflstion before wages started increasing.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 21:23

Mooseontheloose: May 13, 2003

Mr Hootington posted:

They did whine about spending when the stimulus happened, but nobody in power gave a poo poo about high inflation until wages started rising. We had like 6 or 7 of steadily growing inflstion before wages started increasing.

I mean high inflation IS eventually a bad thing its just that we've had years of no to very low inflation.

Similarly, if Jamie Dimon hates what the government is doing, I imagine its probably the actual right thing to do.

quote:

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon didn�t mince words when it came to the regulatory process that forced his bank to suspend its stock buybacks.

Asked by veteran banking analyst Betsy Graseck of Morgan Stanley on Thursday about the Federal Reserve�s recent stress test, Dimon unleashed a series of critiques about the annual exercise, which was implemented after the 2008 financial crisis nearly capsized the world�s economy.

�We don�t agree with the stress test,� Dimon said. �It�s inconsistent. It�s not transparent. It�s too volatile. It�s basically capricious, arbitrary.�

JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank by assets, is scrambling to generate more capital to help it comply with the results of the Fed test. Last month, steadily increasing capital requirements within the test hit the biggest global financial institutions, forcing the New York-based bank to freeze its dividend. While Citigroup made a similar announcement, rivals including Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo boosted investor payouts.

Under the exam�s hypothetical scenario, JPMorgan was expected to lose around $44 billion as markets crashed and unemployment surged, Dimon said. He essentially called that figure bunk on Thursday, asserting that his bank would continue to earn money during a downturn.

After JPMorgan released second-quarter results, it disclosed a raft of other measures it is taking to husband capital, including by temporarily halting share repurchases. That move, in particular, wasn�t welcomed by investors, as the stock hasn�t been this cheap in years.

Shares of the bank fell as much as 5%, hitting a fresh 52-week low.

Big changes
CFO Jeremy Barnum added to the conversation, saying that while regulators give plenty of information about the contours of the annual exam, a key element of the so-called stress capital buffer doesn�t get released to banks, making it �really very hard at any given moment to understand what�s actually driving it.�

�We feel very good about building [capital] quickly enough to meet the higher requirements,� Barnum said. �But they�re pretty big changes that come into effect fairly quickly for banks, and I think that�s probably not healthy.�

Other steps the bank has been forced to take: JPMorgan is pulling back the capital devoted to volatile trading operations called �risk-weighted assets,� as well as reducing some forms of deposits and dumping mortgages from its portfolio, according to Dimon.

A consequence of these moves is that JPMorgan, a massive institution with a $3.8 trillion balance sheet, is forced to withdraw credit from the financial system just as storm clouds gather on the world�s biggest economy.

The actions happen to coincide with the Fed�s so-called quantitative tightening plans, which call for a reversal of the central bank�s bond-purchasing efforts, including for mortgages, which could further roil the market and drive up borrowing costs.

�Making it worse�
The upshot is that the bank has to act at �precisely the wrong time reducing credit to the marketplace,� Dimon said.

The moves will ultimately impact ordinary Americans, particularly lower-income minorities who typically have the hardest time obtaining loans to begin with, he said.

�It�s not good for the United States economy and in particular, it�s bad for lower-income mortgages,� Dimon said. �You haven�t fixed the mortgage business and then we�re making it worse.�

During a media call Thursday, Dimon told reporters that while JPMorgan isn�t exiting the business, the capital rules could force other banks to recede from home loans entirely. Wells Fargo has said it would shrink the business after surging interest rates caused a steep drop in volume.

Instead, JPMorgan will originate mortgages, then immediately offload them, he said.

�It�s a terrible way to run a financial system,� Dimon said. �It just causes huge confusion about what you should be doing with your capital.�

Sure we almost cratered the economy a few times and have been running fraudulent schemes for years but TRUST US this is actually bad.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 21:27

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

VideoGameVet posted:

This is a nicely done tweet

https://twitter.com/jojofromjerz/status/1547281431591878659

�Hey look everyone - Brandon is gonna secure the southern border and he got Mexico to pay for it.�

President Biden has negotiated with Mexico to pay $1.5b toward U.S. southern border security and infrastructure.

Utilizing the language of fascists to try and own them online just promotes their language.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 21:28

-Blackadder-: Jan 2, 2007; Game....Blouses.

Willa Rogers posted:

Whether it'll hold, much less accelerate, is another story--but I'd caution anyone paying attention to party politics to spurn caricaturing & ventriloquizing on behalf of "the chuds" (all 70 million of them!) in favor of heeding how the GOP is doing outreach this year, especially as part of an effort toward the long term.

On top of this, there's really zero excuse for the Dems to not be doing waaay better at outreach, both national and local, to every potential voter demographic. It's actually really embarrassing, especially given our access to top level Hollywood talent. If the GOP wants to put on a fundraiser or something they basically get Kid Rock, a few country singers, and James Woods or Jon Voight. We can get pretty much everyone else.

Abrams and her cadre are basically carrying this party on their backs right now.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 21:42

Mr Hootington: Jul 24, 2008; I'M HAVING A HOOT EATING CORNETTE THE LONG WAY

Mooseontheloose posted:

I mean high inflation IS eventually a bad thing its just that we've had years of no to very low inflation.

The inflation that is happening at the moment is bad.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 21:43

Sir Kodiak: May 14, 2007

Gerund posted:

The only way the SCOTUS blows a hole in this is if they argue that the structure of "do this or we withold funding" that holds together the entire federal system is unconstitutional.

The Medicaid expansion portion of the ACA was supposed to be driven by states losing their existing Medicaid funds if they didn't do the expansion. The Supreme Court ruled this as unconstitutionally coercive, which is why a number of states haven't expanded while still keeping their Medicaid funding. The court felt no need to blow up the entirety of that general structure in doing so.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 22:49

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

Ivana Trump is dead, has the Big Guy made a classic ~~tweet~~ Truth about it yet?

E: RIP to a lady who really loved pizza

https://twitter.com/JAHeale/status/1547670269656850434?t=STF7qryjV1lMl5gMhE9emw&s=19

Failed Imagineer fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Jul 14, 2022

# ? Jul 14, 2022 23:29

TheDisreputableDog: Oct 13, 2005

Willa Rogers posted:

Actually, the 2020 vote-split vs. the 2016 vote-split among Hispanic voters shows that something is working as far as being wooed by the right, as does the GOP flipping a House seat this year in a Texas special election.

Not just Hispanics - most minorities gained ground with the GOP in 2020.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 23:44

Nelson Mandingo: Mar 27, 2005

Willa Rogers posted:

Actually, the 2020 vote-split vs. the 2016 vote-split among Hispanic voters shows that something is working as far as being wooed by the right, as does the GOP flipping a House seat this year in a Texas special election.

Oh absolutely. I'm just saying that it was funny how one of the takeaways from 2012 from their own internal postmortem was the GOP has to do minority outreach with a focus on latinos because they're the biggest growing bloc and as black adder pointed out, tend to be socially conservative. But then Trump comes out the gates in 2016 with They're Not Sending Their Best stuff.

And now it's 2022 and it's back to wanting latino outreach again.

# ? Jul 14, 2022 23:48

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

TheDisreputableDog posted:

Not just Hispanics - most minorities gained ground with the GOP in 2020.

Trump did worse among black voters in both elections than any modern Republican except the guy who ran against the first black President. He improved from an incredibly low amount in 2016, but was still lower than George W. Bush. He only got 8% of the black vote and "improved" from 6.5%.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 00:52

Push El Burrito: May 9, 2006; Soiled Meat

Failed Imagineer posted:

Ivana Trump is dead, has the Big Guy made a classic ~~tweet~~ Truth about it yet?

E: RIP to a lady who really loved pizza

https://twitter.com/JAHeale/status/1547670269656850434?t=STF7qryjV1lMl5gMhE9emw&s=19

https://twitter.com/mitchellreports/status/1547677629066530818

# ? Jul 15, 2022 00:59

nine-gear crow: Aug 10, 2013

Push El Burrito posted:

https://twitter.com/mitchellreports/status/1547677629066530818

It's time for the Donald J. Trump My First Ex-Wife Is Dead Celebration Extravaganza Luncheon!

Book your tickets now, only $500 _{_{and a continuing $150/month per-authorized recurring donation}} a head!

BE THERE!

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:14

skylined!: Apr 6, 2012; THE DEM DEFENDER HAS LOGGED ON

Failed Imagineer posted:

Ivana Trump is dead, has the Big Guy made a classic ~~tweet~~ Truth about it yet?

E: RIP to a lady who really loved pizza

https://twitter.com/JAHeale/status/1547670269656850434?t=STF7qryjV1lMl5gMhE9emw&s=19

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/14/nyregion/ivana-trump-dead.html

quote:

The New York City police were investigating whether Ms. Trump fell down the stairs at her townhouse on the Upper East Side, according to two law enforcement officials with knowledge of the matter. One of the officials said that there was no sign of forced entry at the home and that the death appeared to be accidental. A spokeswoman for the city�s chief medical examiner�s office said it would investigate the death.

wtf

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:34

Mr Interweb: Aug 25, 2004

can somebody clarify something for me with the 10 year old abortion story?

so the girl lived in ohio, and saw a doctor, who then referred her to another doctor in indiana, because in indiana they have rape exceptions for abortions. but at the same time, the AG in indiana is also planning on criminally investigating the doctor for...what exactly?

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:43

some plague rats: Jun 5, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

Mr Interweb posted:

can somebody clarify something for me with the 10 year old abortion story?

so the girl lived in ohio, and saw a doctor, who then referred her to another doctor in indiana, because in indiana they have rape exceptions for abortions. but at the same time, the AG in indiana is also planning on criminally investigating the doctor for...what exactly?

Political points, I'd guess

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:46

Twincityhacker: Feb 18, 2011

I wish I could explain, but that would send me into a murderous rage again.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:46

ryde: Sep 9, 2011; God I love young girls

Mr Interweb posted:

can somebody clarify something for me with the 10 year old abortion story?

so the girl lived in ohio, and saw a doctor, who then referred her to another doctor in indiana, because in indiana they have rape exceptions for abortions. but at the same time, the AG in indiana is also planning on criminally investigating the doctor for...what exactly?

They claimed it was because the doctor did not properly disclose the rape as she was required to do. Her lawyer says she did. We all know why they *really* are investigating her.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:47

Mr Interweb: Aug 25, 2004

ryde posted:

They claimed it was because the doctor did not properly disclose the rape as she was required to do. Her lawyer says she did.

wait what? why...wouldn't she report the rape?

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:50

Lemming: Apr 21, 2008

Mr Interweb posted:

can somebody clarify something for me with the 10 year old abortion story?

so the girl lived in ohio, and saw a doctor, who then referred her to another doctor in indiana, because in indiana they have rape exceptions for abortions. but at the same time, the AG in indiana is also planning on criminally investigating the doctor for...what exactly?

They want to make sure that all women, doctors, and anyone who helps any woman get an abortion in any capacity is afraid they'll be charged with crimes. Everything is just an excuse to fulfill that goal, so they're going to make up random nonsense based on whatever they make up that sounds the most plausible at the time (first it was that the story was fake, then it was that it was a HIPAA violation to talk about how the child got an abortion, then it was child abuse to leave the state because it's perfectly legal in Ohio, then it was that they broke the law by not reporting, etc. They just make up random poo poo to make people afraid they're going to get targeted by the law)

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:52

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

nine-gear crow posted:

It's time for the Donald J. Trump My First Ex-Wife Is Dead Celebration Extravaganza Luncheon!

Book your tickets now, only $500 _{_{and a continuing $150/month per-authorized recurring donation}} a head!

BE THERE!

don't be ridiculous

they'd do the full $500/mo recurring

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:54

Lemming: Apr 21, 2008

Mr Interweb posted:

wait what? why...wouldn't she report the rape?

Do not be confused about the reality of the situation. They have no idea if she did or not, and they don't care. In fact, it even helps their goal if she did report. Their goal is to make it as legally frightening as possible to give this health care. They want doctors scared that if they do right by their patients, they could lose their license and go to jail, EVEN IF they do everything correctly and legally. There is no rational basis for any of the accusations that are being made. They are literally just making poo poo up to make it as scary as possible.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:55

ryde: Sep 9, 2011; God I love young girls

Mr Interweb posted:

wait what? why...wouldn't she report the rape?

Well she claims she did so its a moot point in this case, buuuuuut....

In our brave new world if a 10 year old girl goes to see a doctor who then reports a rape, then it's not too difficult to figure out why the 10 year old girl saw that doctor in the first place. Basically, doctors have to choose to report rape and subsequently paint a target on their patients' backs, or avoid reporting it and leave it up to the victim (who is similarly disincentivized to report, lest the authorities start asking questions about why they visited a doctor 4 weeks after being raped).

# ? Jul 15, 2022 01:58

Mr Interweb: Aug 25, 2004

ryde posted:

Well she claims she did so its a moot point in this case, buuuuuut....

right, i didn't mean to imply she didn't. i was wondering why republicans would think what possible reason she would have to NOT report a rape

Lemming posted:

Do not be confused about the reality of the situation. They have no idea if she did or not, and they don't care. In fact, it even helps their goal if she did report. Their goal is to make it as legally frightening as possible to give this health care. They want doctors scared that if they do right by their patients, they could lose their license and go to jail, EVEN IF they do everything correctly and legally. There is no rational basis for any of the accusations that are being made. They are literally just making poo poo up to make it as scary as possible.

Lemming posted:

They want to make sure that all women, doctors, and anyone who helps any woman get an abortion in any capacity is afraid they'll be charged with crimes. Everything is just an excuse to fulfill that goal, so they're going to make up random nonsense based on whatever they make up that sounds the most plausible at the time (first it was that the story was fake, then it was that it was a HIPAA violation to talk about how the child got an abortion, then it was child abuse to leave the state because it's perfectly legal in Ohio, then it was that they broke the law by not reporting, etc. They just make up random poo poo to make people afraid they're going to get targeted by the law)

now these make a lot more sense

# ? Jul 15, 2022 02:02

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

ryde posted:

Well she claims she did so its a moot point in this case, buuuuuut....

In our brave new world if a 10 year old girl goes to see a doctor who then reports a rape, then it's not too difficult to figure out why the 10 year old girl saw that doctor in the first place. Basically, doctors have to choose to report rape and subsequently paint a target on their patients' backs, or avoid reporting it and leave it up to the victim (who is similarly disincentivized to report, lest the authorities start asking questions about why they visited a doctor 4 weeks after being raped).

She is required to do so within 3 days.

Her lawyer says she did after two days.

The AG says he is verifying, but hasn't gotten the documentation from the state HHS yet.

He says that, if she didn't follow the law, then he would be prosecuting her. But, he doesn't have the documentation yet and is basically just speculating publicly to show how pro-life he is/intimidate people.

It's the equivalent of saying, "Look, if Bob had sex with that goat, then he would go to jail. I have no evidence that he did engage in carnal pleasure with that goat, but I want everyone to know that I am looking in to what Bob did with that goat and will do what is needed if it turns out he hosed that goat. Which, again, nobody has accused him of and I have no evidence that he did. But, I am going to check that he didn't sleep with that goat and confirm. And he is going to prison if he did."

# ? Jul 15, 2022 02:08

Ghost Leviathan: Mar 2, 2017; Exploration is ill-advised.

Nelson Mandingo posted:

Oh absolutely. I'm just saying that it was funny how one of the takeaways from 2012 from their own internal postmortem was the GOP has to do minority outreach with a focus on latinos because they're the biggest growing bloc and as black adder pointed out, tend to be socially conservative. But then Trump comes out the gates in 2016 with They're Not Sending Their Best stuff.

And now it's 2022 and it's back to wanting latino outreach again.

They've been doing it the whole time, and it's been successful, because they have fuckall competition. Democrats just sit firmly believing in Demographics Are Destiny, and dismantled ACORN because Republicans obviously lied about it.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 02:56

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

Mooseontheloose posted:

Supply chain logistics on the other hand, are harder to solve.

National Port Authority patterned on the state level ones like GPA or Virginia Port Authority. Then have far inland rail ingating to ocean marine terminals. Also pool chassis.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 03:37

bird food bathtub: Aug 9, 2003; College Slice

There's not just the threat of bullshit legal actions they're targeting the doctor with. There is a very, very long and active history of these doctors getting murdered. They know it, the doctors know it, and it is absolutely intentional.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 04:06

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Lemming posted:

Do not be confused about the reality of the situation. They have no idea if she did or not, and they don't care. In fact, it even helps their goal if she did report. Their goal is to make it as legally frightening as possible to give this health care. They want doctors scared that if they do right by their patients, they could lose their license and go to jail, EVEN IF they do everything correctly and legally. There is no rational basis for any of the accusations that are being made. They are literally just making poo poo up to make it as scary as possible.

And

bird food bathtub posted:

There's not just the threat of bullshit legal actions they're targeting the doctor with. There is a very, very long and active history of these doctors getting murdered. They know it, the doctors know it, and it is absolutely intentional.

Are both extremely true and what is happening here.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 04:40

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

It seems like Manchin called the White House�s bluff on that pipeline thing

https://twitter.com/tonyromm/status/1547750192325136384?s=21&t=Licy2ARVBQgoNlNpk7QasQ

# ? Jul 15, 2022 04:53

Sir Kodiak: May 14, 2007

Here's the full article:

quote:

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) told Democratic leaders Thursday he would not support an economic package that contains new spending on climate change or new tax increases targeting wealthy individuals and corporations, marking a massive setback for party lawmakers who had hoped to advance a central element of their agenda before the midterm elections this fall.

The major shift in negotiations � confirmed by two people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the talks � threatened to upend the delicate process to adopt the party�s signature economic package seven months after Manchin scuttled the original, roughly $2 trillion Build Back Better Act, which President Biden had endorsed.

But Manchin told Democratic leaders he is open to provisions that aim to lower prescription drug costs for seniors, the two people said. And the West Virginia moderate expressed support with Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), the party�s chief negotiator, for extending subsidies that could help keep health insurance costs down for millions of Americans, one of the sources said.

�Political headlines are of no value to the millions of Americans struggling to afford groceries and gas as inflation soars to 9.1 percent,� said Sam Runyon, a spokeswoman for Manchin. �Senator Manchin believes it�s time for leaders to put political agendas aside, reevaluate and adjust to the economic realities the country faces to avoid taking steps that add fuel to the inflation fire.�

A spokesman for Schumer declined to comment.

The stunning setback late Thursday came despite weeks of seemingly promising negotiations between Schumer and Manchin in pursuit of a broader deal that would have delivered on the promises that secured Democrats control of both chambers of Congress and the White House in 2020. Without Manchin, the party cannot proceed in the narrowly divided Senate, since Democrats need all 50 votes in the caucus, plus Vice President Harris�s tiebreaking vote, to use the special process known as budget reconciliation to overcome Republicans� expected filibuster.

To win over Manchin, Democrats already had agreed to surrender their most prized spending proposals, from offering paid family and medical leave to providing child care, free prekindergarten and tax benefits to low-income Americans. But their cuts still proved insufficient for the austerity-minded moderate, who in recent days grew ever more skittish amid reports of record-high prices. This week, new data showed that inflation rose at its highest rate in roughly 40 years, prompting Manchin to tell reporters Wednesday that he would be �cautious� about any new federal spending.

Without a wide-ranging economic package, party lawmakers for months have warned the costs would be great � leaving families in a financial bind while imperiling Democrats� ability to retain the House and Senate in November. Many Democrats also have felt they might be squandering a generational opportunity to address climate change in the event that the balance of power in Washington shifts.

But Manchin�s new opposition leaves Democrats in a difficult political bind: They must decide between pressing him after months of false starts or accepting what would still be significant changes to the law lowering health care costs. A package addressing health care, for example, could spare roughly 13 million people from higher insurance costs in January if lawmakers act swiftly. Manchin has endorsed a two-year extension.

Similar trade-offs previously prompted Biden�s top aides to deliver a stinging rebuke of Manchin, though the White House late Thursday did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

On climate, Democrats once thought they had a historic opportunity to radically transform the country, reduce pollution, incentivize cleaner, greener energy and put more electric vehicles on the road. They had hoped to seize on their rare majorities to deliver the investments necessary toward fulfilling Biden�s goal, reducing carbon emissions to half of their 2005 levels come 2030. Their push had taken on added urgency when gas prices spiked after Russia�s invasion of Ukraine.

But Manchin, who represents coal-heavy West Virginia, initially opposed their most audacious ideas, including efforts to punish the worst polluters. In more recent talks, Schumer and his colleagues set about trying to woo the longtime holdout over a scaled-back approach � including tax credits to spur clean energy, incentives to encourage the purchase of electric vehicles and limited penalties on the producers of harmful methane gas. But the approach, which The Washington Post first reported, soon fell apart, surprising Democrats who for days thought they were close to a resolution.

�I�m not going to sugarcoat my disappointment here, especially since nearly all issues in the climate and energy space had been resolved,� said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which had helped craft some of the package.

�This is our last chance to prevent the most catastrophic � and costly � effects of climate change,� he said in a statement. �We can�t come back in another decade and forestall hundreds of billions � if not trillions � in economic damage and undo the inevitable human toll.�

On taxes, meanwhile, Democrats already had to forgo their original campaign to unwind the tax cuts implemented under President Donald Trump in 2017 after another moderate in their ranks, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), objected to the idea.

Yet Manchin long had called for significant changes to the tax code. Only days ago, he signed on to one of many Democratic-backed plans to raise more revenue from the wealthiest taxpayers: a policy that would have helped extend the solvency of Medicare by closing a loophole that allows high earners to shelter income, one of the people familiar with the matter said. But the senator by Thursday appeared to change course. And he expressed new resistance to some of the party�s other proposals targeting wealthy individuals and corporations, the source added.

However, Manchin told business executives this week in a closed-door meeting that he would support a package focused on a combination of lowering health-care costs and raising money toward deficit reduction. That would include a new proposal that empowers the government to negotiate drug prices on behalf of Medicare recipients, as well as a second effort to extend existing tax subsidies that reduce insurance costs for millions of Americans who buy coverage through state and national exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act.

Manchin told the group he was eyeing roughly $200 billion in deficit reduction as part of the package. It was not immediately clear how that could be achieved if tax hikes were off the table.

As the article mentions, the healthcare stuff Manchin's still talking about (Medicare drug negotiation and extending ACA subsidies) is something he's been pushing in association with $200 billion in deficit reduction, which seems hard to square with not increasing taxes, so even that is looking iffy.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 04:56

nine-gear crow: Aug 10, 2013

FlamingLiberal posted:

It seems like Manchin called the White House�s bluff on that pipeline thing

https://twitter.com/tonyromm/status/1547750192325136384?s=21&t=Licy2ARVBQgoNlNpk7QasQ

President Manchin strikes again.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 05:06

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

The hard truth is nothing works with Manchin/Sinema. Nothing would have worked with these numbers. Like I said a year and a half ago, they needed 52-53 seats and didn�t get it. Seems that all that�s left now is confirming judges and waiting to see how much Republican overstepping the country can take after either 2024 or 2028.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 05:08

Bugsy: Jul 15, 2004; I'm thumpin'. That's
why they call me
'Thumper'.; Slippery Tilde

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

She is required to do so within 3 days.

Her lawyer says she did after two days.

The AG says he is verifying, but hasn't gotten the documentation from the state HHS yet.

He says that, if she didn't follow the law, then he would be prosecuting her. But, he doesn't have the documentation yet and is basically just speculating publicly to show how pro-life he is/intimidate people.

It's the equivalent of saying, "Look, if Bob had sex with that goat, then he would go to jail. I have no evidence that he did engage in carnal pleasure with that goat, but I want everyone to know that I am looking in to what Bob did with that goat and will do what is needed if it turns out he hosed that goat. Which, again, nobody has accused him of and I have no evidence that he did. But, I am going to check that he didn't sleep with that goat and confirm. And he is going to prison if he did."

Yep, the ag is trying to intimidate everyone involved to show how chuddy he is.

https://twitter.com/rachelolding/status/1547779208369213447

Bugsy fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Jul 15, 2022

# ? Jul 15, 2022 05:18

WAR CRIME GIGOLO: Oct 3, 2012; The Hague
tryna get me
for these glutes

Ah yes manchin the guy who got the countrys credit rating to DROP because he wouldn't support the BBB.

Great stuff he definitely has our econimic interests in mind.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 05:22

RandomUserString: Jul 1, 2022; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

yronic heroism posted:

The hard truth is nothing works with Manchin/Sinema. Nothing would have worked with these numbers. Like I said a year and a half ago, they needed 52-53 seats and didn�t get it. Seems that all that�s left now is confirming judges and waiting to see how much Republican overstepping the country can take after either 2024 or 2028.

During his campaign for the Presidency, Biden campaigned on his experience in the Senate and as Vice-President in the Obama administration, and promised that he would be able to get support from "three, four or five Republicans".

quote:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-president-biden-bet-on-a-senate-that-no-longer-exists

�All you need,� he told me in an interview that summer, �is three, or four, or five Republicans who have seen the light a little bit.� He added, �I don�t think you can underestimate the impact of Trump not being there. The vindictiveness, the pettiness, the willingness to, at his own expense, go after people with vendettas.�

Furthermore, prior to the Senate wins of Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in 2021, the Democrats had 48 seats in the Senate.

At the time of Warnock and Ossoff's Senate campaigns, Biden had said that "By electing Jon and the Reverend, you can break the gridlock that has gripped Washington and this nation". This is an implicit promise that 48 + 2 = 50 votes in the Senate is sufficient to pass his legislative goals.

quote:

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-president-elect-joe-biden-georgia-senate-drive-rally-atlanta-georgia

If you send Jon and the Reverend to Washington, those $2,000 checks are going out the door, restoring hope and decency and honor to so many people struggling right now.

If you send Senators Perdue and Loeffler back to Washington, those checks will never get there.

It's just that simple.

The power is literally in your hands.

By electing Jon and the Reverend, you can break the gridlock that has gripped Washington and this nation.

With their votes in the Senate, we'll be able to make the progress we need to make on jobs and health care and justice and the environment and so many other things.

The voters duly came out and voted Warnock and Ossoff into the Senate, and brought the Democrats to 50 seats in the Senate.

So was Biden:

(i) Lying about (a) being able to persuade Republican senators to vote for his agenda, and/or (b) 50 Democratic Party Senators being sufficient to pass his agenda; or

(ii) Merely incompetent in being unable to deliver on his promises?

And whether it is Biden lying or being incompetent, how can voters trust that 52 - 53 Senate seats will now be magically sufficient?

# ? Jul 15, 2022 05:47

some plague rats: Jun 5, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

RandomUserString posted:

So was Biden:

(i) Lying about (a) being able to persuade Republican senators to vote for his agenda, and/or (b) 50 Democratic Party Senators being sufficient to pass his agenda; or

(ii) Merely incompetent in being unable to deliver on his promises?

And whether it is Biden lying or being incompetent, how can voters trust that 52 - 53 Senate seats will now be magically sufficient?

My personal take is that you can combine the two options and form (iii) Biden, who has been getting his wallet inspected by the GOP since BEFORE his brain turned to soup, honestly believed he could get republicans on side because he genuinely doesn't seem to realise that the presidency would put him in a position where they want different things than he does.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 06:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 17:11

Koos Group: Mar 6, 2013

RandomUserString posted:

During his campaign for the Presidency, Biden campaigned on his experience in the Senate and as Vice-President in the Obama administration, and promised that he would be able to get support from "three, four or five Republicans".

Furthermore, prior to the Senate wins of Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in 2021, the Democrats had 48 seats in the Senate.

At the time of Warnock and Ossoff's Senate campaigns, Biden had said that "By electing Jon and the Reverend, you can break the gridlock that has gripped Washington and this nation". This is an implicit promise that 48 + 2 = 50 votes in the Senate is sufficient to pass his legislative goals.

The voters duly came out and voted Warnock and Ossoff into the Senate, and brought the Democrats to 50 seats in the Senate.

So was Biden:

(i) Lying about (a) being able to persuade Republican senators to vote for his agenda, and/or (b) 50 Democratic Party Senators being sufficient to pass his agenda; or

(ii) Merely incompetent in being unable to deliver on his promises?

And whether it is Biden lying or being incompetent, how can voters trust that 52 - 53 Senate seats will now be magically sufficient?

To be very precise, he didn't say he himself would persuade the Republican senators, but that they would have an "epiphany" after Trump left, perhaps due to a lack of Trump's "vindictiveness" toward those who displeased him. He was still wrong or lying of course.

To answer your question, if there are 2 senators who regularly fail to vote with the Democrats, and 52-53 Senators were Democrats, there would be no magic necessary for Democrats to be able to pass legislation. However, this does assume that the new Democratic senators elected were not similar to Manchin and Sinema. If we assume, based on the Senate's current makeup that Democrats have a 2/50 chance of being like Manchin and Sinema, then the probability of neither of the new senators being like them would be 92%.

some plague rats posted:

My personal take is that you can combine the two options and form (iii) Biden, who has been getting his wallet inspected by the GOP since BEFORE his brain turned to soup, honestly believed he could get republicans on side because he genuinely doesn't seem to realise that the presidency would put him in a position where they want different things than he does.

It may be a case for Hanlon's razor, yes.

# ? Jul 15, 2022 06:40

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE Summer 2022: You can't change the crisis settings.

«‹›279 »