Sinema's vote on climate may hinge on her opposition to tax hikes on her donors (WSJ)

[Herx]

Sinema promised certain donors that she would fight against tax hikes on their money.
It looks like she's using this as leverage.

Ms. Sinema, unlike Mr. Manchin, doesn’t regularly speak to reporters in Washington, and other Senate Democrats have at times learned of her policy views from lobbyists that she speaks to, according to a person familiar with the matter. But in public statements, she has repeatedly said that she has opposed tax increases that she thinks would harm U.S. economic growth. Business groups in Arizona, a swing state where Ms. Sinema has tried to present herself as a moderate, have also encouraged her to oppose the tax hikes.

Ms. Sinema has received roughly $2.2 million in donations since 2017 from individuals and committees in the securities and investment industries, more than from any other sector, according to an analysis of Federal Election Commission data by OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan campaign finance tracker.

On other matters in the Senate, she has also stood apart from her party, opposing efforts to alter the filibuster rule requiring 60 Senate votes for most legislation, for example.

Still, after so much struggle for Democrats to try to unify behind elements of President Biden’s agenda, she will face intense pressure to line up in favor of the bill. A political-action committee called “Primary Sinema Project” quickly blasted out a statement calling on her to support the package, saying “All eyes on Kyrsten Sinema.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/kyrsten-sinema-is-critical-vote-on-manchin-schumer-climate-and-tax-deal-11659110971?mod=mhp

[mucifer]

1. I worry that her ego regarding not being included in the talks will screw us. I'm not sure

why she wasn't included. I wish I didn't have to care about her.

[Herx]

2. I think Schumer didn't imagine she could be so screwed up

That's my take.

[jimfields33]

10. Her one issue is no increase in taxes.

They probably hoped she wouldn’t notice it in the bill.

[marble falls]

3. What? Sinema is willing to take money instead of at least making a principled stand?

[H2O Man]

4. This is why

I only donate to politicians who refuse to take corporate/business money. People work for who pays them,or i8n these cases, pays for their ability to win office.

[TheBlackAdder]

29. Hmm. . .

.



.

[TheBlackAdder]

30. Hmm. . . Hmm. . .

.



.

[TheBlackAdder]

5. Yep. It's not about her constituents. It's not about the country. It's about her bank accounts.

[walkingman]

6. It would be so dramatic if she came out at the last minute and opposed

the bill - she would then become the new power broker in the Party. This is what you get when you have a 50/50 senate - unknowns become the new patron in town.

[jimfields33]

11. McCain did that one bill. Shocked the world!

[lapucelle]

7. Rupert Murdoch says what?

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wall-street-journal/

-----------------------------------------------------

Welcome to DU!

[Herx]

15. Your own link says WSJ reporting is "low bias"

It is the editorial (opinion) department that is considered crap, not the news side.
Here's the part your found inconvenient to include:

[lapucelle]

16. Your title doesn't match the WSJ headline. N/T

[orleans]

18. what's up with the attitude? someone welcomes you to du and

you attack their posts?

you sound like you're getting a bit prickly for no reason that i can tell; you're new here--maybe i just don't understand you but.... it seems impolite to snap at the hand that welcomes you when there doesn't even appear to have been any reason for snapping

[lapucelle]

21. The title is an opinion, not a "report", and it is attributed to the WSJ.

The claim is that the WSJ "reported"

Sinema's vote on climate may hinge on her opposition to tax hikes on her donors (WSJ)

when it actually reported

Kyrsten Sinema Is Critical Vote on Manchin-Schumer Climate and Tax Deal

Where in the article does the WSJ "report" the opinion attributed to it?

[lapucelle]

23. It's not "reporting" by the WSJ, and it's not "analysis" by the WSJ. It's not analysis at all.

It's an assertion based on an assumption, and for some reason, it's attributed to the WSJ.

Sinema's vote on climate may hinge on her opposition to tax hikes on her donors (WSJ)

[sheshe2]

24. You have the patience of a saint.

[sheshe2]

27. You're back!

Bye.

[enough]

8. I have never said anything like this in my more than 20 years on DU

Fuck her

[Scruffy1]

20. I wouldn't.

Even with someone Elses penis.

[brush]

9. Manchin complained he was ostracized for scuttling...

the BBB so many times, which I imagine is one reason he finally worked with Schumer to do the right thing. Now if Sinema shoots this bill down again after screwing the party so many time before, she may as well leave Washington because she'll persona non grata of the highest order from now on.

[Bettie]

12. No, she'll be beloved by Senate Republicans

because she will have proven her loyalty.

They will encourage her to stay a Democrat and report everything back to her boss, Mitch. They get to run the show while complaining about them being in the minority.

[brush]

13. Didn't think I had to say she would be persona. non grata...

to Democrats.

Fuck what the republicans think.

[UTUSN]

14. K&R, does MANCHIN talk to her?