General Discussion

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)

43. They did the right thing.

Reply to onenote (Reply #40)

Fri Mar 5, 2021, 03:37 PM

Mar 2021

A reconciliation bill is not the right place for this. That is what they voted against.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

47 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

C-Span sometimes has incorrect subtitles, but it looks like the $15 min wage was voted down 42-58. [View all] George II Mar 2021 OP

Wonder what the net worth of those 58 is n/t leftstreet Mar 2021 #1

A hell of a fucking lot more than anyone making $15 an hour. nt Autumn Mar 2021 #2

Or $2.13 an hour MoonlitKnight Mar 2021 #10

Is that 58-42 against raising the minimum wage, or 58-42 failing to limit debate? gratuitous Mar 2021 #3

Good question. lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #6

42-58 to allow it in the bill, I just added a screen shot of C-Span's subtitle. I always suspected.. George II Mar 2021 #7

So two more votes (not sayin' whose) gratuitous Mar 2021 #8

No, 18 more votes. 42 voted Yes, 58 voted No. George II Mar 2021 #9

Maths is fundamental. NurseJackie Mar 2021 #12

Thanks for the screenshot - makes it clear that the list of Conservadems needs to be expanded. lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #11

Or what? NurseJackie Mar 2021 #13

Or we hand hand control of the country to the GQP permanently. lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #14

That'll show 'em mcar Mar 2021 #15

I'll never understand why groups like "Our Revolution" and "Justice Democrats"... NurseJackie Mar 2021 #17

They should be attacking Republicans mcar Mar 2021 #19

Or promoting the "Dems don't care about you" LIE NurseJackie Mar 2021 #24

Some do seem more intent on tearing down the Democratic party mcar Mar 2021 #27

It wouldn't be our choice - it would be the unfortunate consequence of dereliction of duty. lagomorph777 Mar 2021 #31

They're not opposed to the $15 minimum wage, they're opposed to the gimmick of including it.... George II Mar 2021 #23

They always knew there is no way it would pass as a standalone jcgoldie Mar 2021 #4

It was expect - but it gets them on the record opposing - there will also be a lot Lucinda Mar 2021 #5

So let me get this straight. jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #16

That's a ridiculous interpretation. It's insulting. NurseJackie Mar 2021 #18

Explain jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #21

No explanation is needed. NurseJackie Mar 2021 #32

No, you don't have it straight mcar Mar 2021 #20

Oh? jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #22

See my post #23. George II Mar 2021 #25

I think that's a cop out. jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #26

It's not a cop out - if it's included outside of the normal rules and procedures of the Senate.... George II Mar 2021 #28

If we have 50 democratic votes who support it, it will pass if it is on the bill jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #29

This has been debated for a week or so, that amendment does not belong in the reconciliation bill... George II Mar 2021 #30

"It violates the rules of reconciliation, and everyone knows it." NurseJackie Mar 2021 #33

The CBO already concluded it has more budgetary relevance than the gop tax bill jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #34

She was appointed Parliamentarian in 2012, when the Democrats held a 51-47 majority with.... George II Mar 2021 #36

I stand corrected jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #38

.... George II Mar 2021 #46

Also I just hope we can somehow get rid of the fillibuster to see how many of the eight would jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #35

There's only one way to find out, do the work and introduce/lobby for that standalone bill. George II Mar 2021 #37

Absolutely agreed. jorgevlorgan Mar 2021 #39

+1 leftstreet Mar 2021 #41

It's a ridiculous description. It ignores facts. NurseJackie Mar 2021 #42

No, it's succinct n/t leftstreet Mar 2021 #44

Succinct is not a synonym for "correct." It's succinct all right... and WRONG! NurseJackie Mar 2021 #47

agreed with jorgevlorgan. no explanation needed for my agreement nt msongs Mar 2021 #45

Here are Democratic Senators who voted against the amendment onenote Mar 2021 #40

They did the right thing. NurseJackie Mar 2021 #43