General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFolks, without that min. wage hike, the Dems will most likely lose control of the congress in 2022.
We can all thank our special Democratic senators who worship at the alter of political moderation at a time when the Republicans have gone full Fascist.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,703 posts)FoxNewsSucks
(10,435 posts)If we can't vote for Democrats, republicons will just undo anything we manage to accomplish when they get their final and permanent seizure of power.
Bad as it might seem short-term, it's better to ensure Democrats can get elected, and in the majorities that reflect the actual voter desire. Then we won't need conservadems to get minimum wage and a lot of other good things.
Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)We have to be determined...stand in line and do what we can.
Bettie
(16,145 posts)No republican will vote for it nor will Machin or Sinema.
So, we won't have 50 votes, much less the 60 we need to break the filibuster.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,703 posts)The battle over HR1 is just beginning, likely to peak, Im guessing, around September- as more and more get vaccinated, there will be thousands marching in the streets.
Well see just how stubborn Manchin is after he goes home for the August recess and has to face mobilized constituents who are fed up with his obstruction.
He will ultimately have to choose between killing the filibuster (or at least modifying it so HR1 can pass in the senate) or killing his career.
So will Sinema.
Otherwise, Dems will be in the minority for a decade or more starting in 2022, and Republicans will install their candidate in the WH in 2024, regardless of the actual outcome of the election.
The People will not roll over and accept politics as usual on this one.
Bettie
(16,145 posts)Why? The Filibuster.
Some Republican will send the email to filibuster both of them.
There won't be 60 votes to take either to the floor.
Manchin, Sinema, and Feinstein will keep the filibuster intact, for whatever reason.
It's funny, I don't recall a single time Democrats successfully used it in recent memory.
Note: I've been stuck at home for a year now and am looking at many more months of it since I'm at the very bottom of the vaccine list and I live in a state with an idiot for a governor. I had some hope early on that things would go better, but I'm fast losing that.
I'm sick and tired of the whole game and probably more than a little depressed watching the world go to hell.
Ocelot II
(115,976 posts)There are other ways and I'm sure they will all be considered.
roscoeroscoe
(1,370 posts)eom
Yavin4
(35,454 posts)The Dems are judged by what they accomplish for people.
Cha
(298,010 posts)did you forget
I do not think this minimum wage is over.
No.. I'm taking about the OP.. very gloomy dire predictions that I think have no merit.
And, right.. the fight to raise the minimum wage will live on!
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)that republicans are going to take control in 2022. Not if we look at things strategically and vote.
If republican takes control in 2022, we can count on having to refight battles in 2024 that we have won. I blows my mind that a person here on DU isnt saying that he or she plans to support Democrats regardless of whether they get only part of what they want. What we have is people picking a single issue and making it a deal breaker, when there actually are a long list of important issues that we need to keep our eyes trained on, that oh, just give up mindset is both fucking infuriating and disgusting.
Cha
(298,010 posts)stated.
It's No Shite Life or Death that we continue to be the Majority in the Senate and House.
The Opposition is Full On Deadly Treasonous Fascism.
It's not brain surgery as they say!
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Some people are simply clueless.
Biden has been in office less than 2 months and is dealing, amazingly well, with so many issues. But, here we are, dooming and glooming and predicting Armageddon in 2022 because of one thing.
Not one word about all the accomplishments so far and all that might occur. Nope, today, March 5, we've lost the House because one aspect of a huge bill didn't go through.
Looks like DU is back to its Democrat in the White House mode.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)ZZenith
(4,136 posts)You are being defeatist.
moonscape
(4,676 posts)do nothing but obstruct over Democrats who do a lot? Im not seeing this. If we lose it will be because of voter suppression and increased gerrymandering.
treestar
(82,383 posts)a minimum wage hike is the definition of insanity. Or not voting, which is like voting for Republicans.
Yavin4
(35,454 posts)They vote for the party that they believe works best for them or do not vote at all. Scaring them with Republicans only goes so far.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)idiot...and I have more faith in our voters.
mcar
(42,465 posts)That will lift millions of children out of poverty, give unemployed people assistance, and many, many other things.
Why are you boiling this down to one issue? The minimum wage is important, but this bill is significant.
underpants
(183,007 posts)Blue_true
(31,261 posts)To me, it simply boils down to whether I want to live in a republican led USA or live in one led by Democrats. I realize there will be somethings that Democrats do that I wont be happy with, but having Democrats lead and move forward beats having republicans set the country back decades. The math is simple to me.
brush
(53,971 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 5, 2021, 05:30 PM - Edit history (1)
us the majority in the House. The republicans did attempt a coup, and investigations are going to be going on for a while as to whether republican reps/senators were communicating by cell phone with the insurrectionists before or doing the riot.
Let's not sign off on handing over the majority to them. Some of them may eventually be found to have worked with the seditionists.
Budi
(15,325 posts)In the end, he came away with 42 votes.
He'd have been far more successful had he legislated it as a stand alone bill.
brush
(53,971 posts)$15 an hour if it was in the relief bill. Was this a vote on a separate bill for fifteen an hour?
Budi
(15,325 posts)But somehow the blame was laid on VP Harris, Pres Biden, the Parlimentarian...
There's only one person who owns this failure.
It should have been pulled early on.
The votes were never there.
brush
(53,971 posts)bill so how was there a side vote, or whatever it was, on just the fifteen dollars an hour?
I agree we've never had the votes for that provision.
Spazito
(50,590 posts)to increase the minimum wage to 15 dollars an hour. The amendment failed.
brush
(53,971 posts)Not to mention all the republicans.
treestar
(82,383 posts)They would not vote as they do if they thought their voters would not like it.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)to ignore the Parliamentarian would likely have delayed the relief bill.
I do agree the $15 minimum wage is important legislation.
Fullduplexxx
(7,878 posts)Done before they're thrown out
Irish_Dem
(47,825 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Stop it.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)avoid dragging Manchin or Sinema.
Claire Oh Nette
(2,636 posts)How do you see that happening? Murkowski flipping? McConnell dropping dead and Beshear appointing a democrat?
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)by a federal grand jury. I think Ron Johnson is one of those senators. It appears Mitch McConnell is another one. He may be very sick. You gotta read this article https://theintercept.com/2021/03/04/kentucky-mitch-mcconnell-senator-replace/ McConnell is trying to strip the Dem gov from being able to appoint his replacement. However, using the state legislator to change the law will likely be declared a violation of the Kentucky constitution.
Claire Oh Nette
(2,636 posts)He's had some horrific bleeding and bruising recently. His attempt to hamstring Beshear just as his wife is under fire strikes me as getting ready to resign. He's not young, either.
I've been on blood thinners--those are hematomas. I had to stop plavix after my 2nd heart attack. I have a good golf swing, and was creating micro tears in my rib cage--I know from hematomas!
Johnson is part of the Moscow summer group, and since Biden's taken office he's stepped up as quite a boulder of stupid in the road toward recovery.
Hope you're right. I'd love Feingold to take his place. And for McGrath to replace McConnell.
liskddksil
(2,753 posts)but < 6 months?
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)and put in an Acting, which will blow up any obstacles and speed up the process. Once Merrick Garland steps in, ti will go much much faster. I think it will be a lot sooner than 6 months.
liskddksil
(2,753 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)It's going to come in through another mechanism.
msfiddlestix
(7,288 posts)Feels like we are already losing the Senate and it ain't got nothing to do with the minimum wage.
treestar
(82,383 posts)If it were still Republican lead, it would not seem like that. We barely have it and that is because of 2 Dem Senators from GA of all places. If we can get them from GA, in 2022 we can get more.
msfiddlestix
(7,288 posts)But the post did not include the suggested Senate seats. Didn't name which Rethugs are vulnerable.
Yes we read all the time a seat here, a seat there. but I hadn't counted this many for 2022. I allowed myself to be optimistic for a few minutes, until I couldn't find which states is in reference.
I just hope we hang on to what we have until then. I had hoped several weeks ago, like right after the insurrection that Lisa Murkowsky would defect to us. I even hoped Mittens would for a minute or two.
Unfortunately, chasing windmills once again.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)the filibuster stays up.
Democrats have been doing a much, much better job of strategizing over the last two years, so let's not give up hope just yet.
Just because we don't know about strategies being prepared behind the scenes doesn't mean that isn't happening.
Phoenix61
(17,025 posts)$15/hr min wage. The only single issue voters that are that hard core are the pro-lifers.
PatSeg
(47,741 posts)A lot can happen between now and the mid-terms. Saying one issue right now will cause us to lose in 2022 is not reasonable.
dutch777
(3,055 posts)this would have been a good one but Covid and other opportunities abound. I worry about the 2022 prospects as well because we only have a year or less before voters start firming up around candidates and policy support.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,512 posts)frazzled
(18,402 posts)And they are largely under 25 and/or part-time. Those are facts from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I doubt this will overwhelm an election.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2018/pdf/home.pdf
Lancero
(3,018 posts)How many more people would be making fed min if it wasn't for their states deciding to mandate their own wages to attempt to keep up with inflation, when DC has failed to do so?
It's a great talking point - The kind of one that overlooks key information, but sounds great on Fox.
MichMan
(12,002 posts)You think that someone getting a higher minimum wage at the state level feels cheated because it isn't based on Federal min wage? Does it spend different?
Lancero
(3,018 posts)Isn't really going to be impactful because of how few people it would affect.
It's a great Fox News soundbite. Democrats are lying about how many people would benefit from a minimum wage increase, because so few people actually make minimum wage. It overlooks the reality though that, if it wasn't for states increasing their own wages, the number of people making extreme poverty wages would be drastically higher.
Hell, that study is the exact thing a Republican would love to cite as proof that a federal minimum wage law is actually unnecessary. Something something, the free market pays people far more than minimum wage anyway, something something pointless regulation.
I support increasing the minimum wage - Do you?
MichMan
(12,002 posts)Mississippi can stay at $8 and California can make theirs $20
Lancero
(3,018 posts)Under that plan, Mississippi's minimum wage would be a big, fat... $0.00, since they lack a specific minimum wage and instead default to the fed wage.
We also have states like Georgia and Wyoming, where the minimum wage is currently $5.15 (Again, defaulting to the federal minimum...). Do you really think that COL variances support making that little?
MichMan
(12,002 posts)if it isn't going to pass, when the states could increase it themselves.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Were discussing the OPs contention about the effect on future elections.
Im all for a $15 minimum wage at the federal level (even though my state already has such a law). Im just saying it wont be the sole deciding factor in elections, necessarily.
Lancero
(3,018 posts)Your study doesn't account for state minimums (Which themselves would be raised to the federal minimum if it exceeds the state mins...), so saying that failing to raise the minimum wage won't hurt us because it only affects 2% of the population is disingenuous at best.
Despite the Fox News talking point you're echoing, increasing the minimum wage would help far more than just 2% of the population.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Youre not following.
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)Elessar Zappa
(14,131 posts)more that receive between $7.26 and $14.99 who would appreciate the raise. Not saying it will definitely cost us in 2022 but we do need to try and get it done.
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)Because that is what defines us. Other groups such as left wingers may not and that is what defines them.
DarthDem
(5,257 posts)No, we won't
Boydog
(718 posts)base and land us the same results. It's really a hard one to call. But one thing is for sure Dems will sink or swim as a result of OUR unity.
Budi
(15,325 posts)How do you predict that extreme threatening a statement, exactly?
The $15 never had the votes & never should have been promoted like it did. It ALWAYS should have been a stand alone..
So far the Parlimentarian, VP Harris, President Biden & now all these Senators have been blamed, when only one person is actually responsible for ramming it against a door that could never be opened.
He knew it too.
Actually, the majority of them voted against the procedure itself. Not 'aginst giving ppl a living min wage'.
Maybe address that point with those who are spreading this falsehood.
Thank you
leftstreet
(36,119 posts)Democrats are able to raise much more funding when they're in the minority
stillcool
(32,626 posts)our state legislated rising the minimum wage incrementally. Right now we're at $13.50 I think, so 2023 will be $15.00. Hopefully that will change sooner. I thank my Democratic Senators every chance I get. Shame you don't.
walkingman
(7,693 posts)Celerity
(43,733 posts)Just a shedload of voter suppression coming down the tunnel on a nationwide footprint from out of control State legislatures, plus the RW Rumpian turbocharged SCOTUS is likely going to shit all over us and the nation and strip out a large chunk of pre-existing protections.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)So, Schumer would need 10 republicans.
Instead of saying that something is going to handicap Democrats, why not figure out how to beat republican voter suppression like Stacey Abrams did in Georgia after getting harmed by it in 2018. Why not look at what Arizona Democrats are doing.
I just really dont like when people only see roadblocks and cant envision legal means of defeating them.
Democrat have shown that we can raise campaign money. What we have not been good at is setting up a powerful grassroots organization that burns shoe leather and defeat republican bullshit, like Abrams and others did in Georgia and I hope take to Texas and my state, Florida. If we get a strong grass roots effort, then all we have to worry about is not nominating a person that has been sending around dick or vagina photos, or has been busy having affairs.
Celerity
(43,733 posts)blockage of a filibuster on the Act.
I have posted possible work-arounds before.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/03/02/manchin-filibuster-never-sinema/
Instead of naming and shaming them, Democrats might consider looking at what Manchin and Sinema like about the filibuster. Sinema recently said, Retaining the legislative filibuster is not meant to impede the things we want to get done. Rather, its meant to protect what the Senate was designed to be. I believe the Senate has a responsibility to put politics aside and fully consider, debate, and reach compromise on legislative issues that will affect all Americans. Last year, Manchin said, The minority should Instead of naming and shaming them, Democrats might consider looking at what Manchin and Sinema like about the filibuster. Sinema recently said, Retaining the legislative filibuster is not meant to impede the things we want to get done. Rather, its meant to protect what the Senate was designed to be. I believe the Senate has a responsibility to put politics aside and fully consider, debate, and reach compromise on legislative issues that will affect all Americans. Last year, Manchin said, The minority should have input thats the whole purpose for the Senate. If you basically do away with the filibuster altogether for legislation, you wont have the Senate. Youre a glorified House. And I will not do that. If you take their views at face value, the goal is to preserve some rights for the Senate minority, with the aim of fostering compromise. The key, then, is to find ways not to eliminate the filibuster on legislation but to reform it to fit that vision. Here are some options:
Make the minority do the work.
Currently, it takes 60 senators to reach cloture to end debate and move to a vote on final passage of a bill. The burden is on the majority, a consequence of filibuster reform in 1975, which moved the standard from two-thirds of senators present and voting to three-fifths of the entire Senate. Before that change, if the Senate went around-the-clock, filibustering senators would have to be present in force. If, for example, only 75 senators showed up for a cloture vote, 50 of them could invoke cloture and move to a final vote. After the reform, only a few senators in the minority needed to be present to a request for unanimous consent and to keep the majority from closing debate by forcing a quorum call. The around-the-clock approach riveted the public, putting a genuine spotlight on the issues. Without it, the minoritys delaying tactics go largely unnoticed, with little or no penalty for obstruction, and no requirement actually to debate the issue. One way to restore the filibusters original intent would be requiring at least two-fifths of the full Senate, or 40 senators, to keep debating instead requiring 60 to end debate. The burden would fall to the minority, whod have to be prepared for several votes, potentially over several days and nights, including weekends and all-night sessions, and if only once they couldnt muster 40 the equivalent of cloture debate would end, making way for a vote on final passage of the bill in question.
Go back to the present and voting standard.
A shift to three-fifths of the Senate present and voting would similarly require the minority to keep most of its members around the Senate when in session. If, for example, the issue in question were voting rights, a Senate deliberating on the floor, 24 hours a day for several days, would put a sharp spotlight on the issue, forcing Republicans to publicly justify opposition to legislation aimed at protecting the voting rights of minorities. Weekend Senate sessions would cause Republicans up for reelection in 2022 to remain in Washington instead of freeing them to go home to campaign. In a three-fifths present and voting scenario, if only 80 senators showed up, only 48 votes would be needed to get to cloture. Add to that a requirement that at all times, a member of the minority party would have to be on the floor, actually debating, and the burden would be even greater, while delivering what Manchin and Sinema say they want more debate.
Narrow the supermajority requirement.
Another option would be to follow in the direction of the 1975 reform, which reduced two-thirds (67 out of a full 100) to three-fifths (60 out of 100), and further reduce the threshold to 55 senators still a supermajority requirement, but a slimmer one. Democrats might have some ability to get five Republicans to support their desired outcomes on issues such as voting rights, universal background checks for gun purchases or a path to citizenship for Dreamers. A reduction to 55, if coupled with a present-and-voting standard would establish even more balance between majority and minority. In a 50-50 Senate, and with the GOP strategy clearly being united opposition to almost all Democratic priorities, Biden and Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) need the support of Manchin and Sinema on a daily basis. They wont be persuaded by pressure campaigns from progressive groups or from members of Congress. But they might consider reforms that weaken the power of filibusters and give Democrats more leverage to enact their policies, without pursuing the dead end of abolishing the rule altogether.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Obviously a vote would be needed to change the rule, would that be a 60 vote or simple majority vote?
I believe that Senators should have to put on the work to block legislation. I remember reading accounts of the old days where minority party Senators brought in sleeping bags and bed carts to prevent the majority from getting a chance to vote to close the debate. I would like to see those days return, I Senator should be allowed to put a hold on a nominee or outright stop a bill without losing sleep over that act.
doc03
(35,442 posts)Lucinda
(31,170 posts)not because they dont support raising the min.
This was a very specific no vote - not a blanket rejection
treestar
(82,383 posts)as far as they can tell, and their constituents will be the same geographical area.
bdamomma
(63,960 posts)another bill.
Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)are unreasonable. We have a 50 50 majority...what will they get if we lose? More righty judges? Time to learn patience. We have done as much as possible
JI7
(89,286 posts)budkin
(6,725 posts)It always happens.
roamer65
(36,748 posts)gulliver
(13,205 posts)If at first you don't succeed don't try as hard?