General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDemocrats dangle billions of dollars in infrastructure earmarks in front of conflicted Republicans
Ahead of President Biden's next big piece of legislation, one Democrat says the party is "perfectly willing" to evenly divide spending earmarks with Republicans but if not, they'll happily take them just "on the Democratic side."
A Tuesday report from Bloomberg discusses the "heated debate" in the Republican Party about whether to take part in the return of spending earmarks as Biden prepares for a major infrastructure package, with fiscal hawks opposed to bringing them back and Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) arguing they "have been associated with excess and would represent a turn to the worst."
At the same time, Bloomberg writes that Democrats believe Republicans ultimately "will go along once they see billions of dollars set to flow" to their colleagues' Democratic districts.
"I'm perfectly willing to divide it equally between Republicans and Democrats, and so it will be up to them if they want it," Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said. "If they don't, we'll just have it on the Democratic side. But I think enough of them would like to have it on both sides."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrats-dangle-billions-dollars-infrastructure-164000527.html
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Just one among many goals we can all understand immediately, we want every American to have broadband internet access, 100% connectivity.
It's expected to be heavily oriented to climate initiatives; Biden's shown he's strongly committed to major actions on that front, which affects and involves everything.
Pelosi: "the list goes on and on. It's not just roads and bridges, mass transit and high-speed rail, it's also about water systems. Some of the water systems we have are over 100 years old."
Business Insider: "Biden campaigned for a $2 trillion infrastructure bill that would focus on climate change, energy reform, and expanding the middle class. But according to Politico, some Democrats are already privately discussing going as high as $4 trillion. It's a price tag that has the tentative support of Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a critical swing vote in an evenly-divided Senate."
"Just." Jobs, jobs, jobs. Expanding the middle class. International tech competitiveness. All involved.
brush
(53,778 posts)and republicans immediately see re-election and campaign donations and their fingers start itching to press the "aye" button.
And Manchin should certainly be on board with projects and jobs that will replace all the coal mining jobs lost forever in West Virginia.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Take the money and concede that government can do positive things, or refuse it and be known as the former elected official.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)FoxNewsSucks
(10,429 posts)Although, I'm not sure a pledge is enough. They'd tell their moronic voters that "dems changed___" or some other excuse for voting NO. The rubes would believe it.
They can't be trusted, their word is completely worthless.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)WarGamer
(12,444 posts)We won't see gridlock until HR1 comes to the floor.
Grins
(7,217 posts)You want to get the infrastructure $$$$, Republicans....? Pass HR1.
WarGamer
(12,444 posts)I'm confident that we can get THIS done now:
1) Infrastructure
2) Expanded Background Checks (Guns)
3) Tax Reform
I see ALL THREE of those passing without the need for VP to show up in the Senate.
Roll out HR1 now and those are probably out the window. And TBH... the chances that Barf, Handmaiden, Goodhair, Sleepy, Scalito and JR scuttling HR1 as unconstitutional is... rather high.
TheRealNorth
(9,481 posts)They are busy making it so hard to vote that only people that are really motivated will turn out (which is where Faux and the RW media come in). Add to that the active disinformation being spread on social media to dissuade liberal voters. Believe me, they have a plan to win elections, and it has nothing to do with building infrastructure.
WarGamer
(12,444 posts)The more people that vote... the easier it is to vote... the worse they lose.
Throw in obstacles to voting and they win.