Patience in the White House — and in many corners of the Democratic Party — is wearing thin.
— Politico
More broadly, Democrats are feuding over how to squeeze their priorities into a smaller price tag. Mr. Manchin has said the bill shouldn’t spend more than $1.5 trillion, even if its cost is offset by other revenue, while Mr. Biden has told House Democrats the package might spend around $2 trillion.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.), who leads a nearly 100-person caucus of liberal House members, said the majority of her group would rather shorten the duration of programs to lower costs, rather than cutting some programs.
“If we need to cut some of them back to fewer years, we would be willing to do that,” she said. “Why is that? Because we are not going to put child care against climate change, we’re not going to pit housing against paid leave, we’re not going to pit seniors against young people.”
Rep. Conor Lamb (D., Pa.), a centrist, said creating short-term programs risks cutting off support for low-income Americans.
“I’m interested in things that can last and that people will trust and they’ll believe are there for them,” he said.
****
Sunday’s Wide World of News, which included both a “fake” “Ron Klain” memo laying out the dimensions of the apparently stalled Biden agenda and a “real” “reader survey” asking you if you wanted to see more or fewer such “fake” “Ron Klain” memos, produced a torrent of reader reactions and reporting.
On the second matter, well over 90% spoke up loud and proud in favor of more such “fake” “Ron Klain” memos.
But, fragile soul that I am, I lasered in on the few of you who expressed disdain for the device, such as this Twitter user:
****
If you would like more “fake” “Ron Klain” memos, or, just more of Wide World of News in general, please consider supporting the extensive work this daily effort requires by becoming a voluntary paid subscriber or contributor right now.
You can subscribe or become a Founding Member here:
To contribute: Send an email to markhalperintalk@gmail.com and ask how you can give any amount of your choice.
For those of you have contributed in the past, thank you – and please consider making another contribution if it has been awhile since you kicked in.
All my best,
Mark
****
In hearing from and reaching out to wicked smaaat strategists in both parties over the last few days (both Beltway savants and others positioned around real America….), I have heard many ideas for how Joe Biden & Co. could switch from doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result to shaking up the board with various dramatic gambits.
For many of you, reading the elements of this reported list will simply produce head shakes, as you explain to yourself and your breakfast partner why each of the various moves would be useless, counterproductive, or politically suicidal.
But others of you might see in one or more of these ideas a path forward, over, under, or around the current malaise.
STUFF JOE BIDEN COULD DO NOW
* Demand House votes by Halloween on the infrastructure and China competitiveness bills that have already passed the Senate with broad bipartisan support – and then put every ounce of presidential prestige and muscle on the line to whip support to get both packages to 218 votes and his desk.
* Boldly and decisively announce a top line reconciliation figure with specific programs (with dollar amounts) underneath it for a bill that he then demands be passed.
* Call in House Republicans whose votes on infrastructure are gettable and get them.
* Call Democratic stakeholders in for marathon negotiations on reconciliation, metaphorically locking the doors until a deal is reached.
* Call in Senator McConnell for a series of negotiations around areas of shared concern and either get a deal or make the Republican leader the one who walks away from the table.
* Call in ten Republican Senators (Romney, Collins, etc) for negotiations around areas of shared concern (minimum wage, immigration, etc) and either get a deal or make the Republicans the ones who walks away from the table.
* Call in the nation’s governors, including Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott, and have it out very publicly on pandemic mandates and the economy.
* Go all out openly attacking Senators Manchin and Sinema from the populist left, ending the efforts to win them over with sugar and going with a torrent of vinegar.
* Pull a few Sister Soulja moments against the left, on critical race theory, unions, immigration, etc.
* Temporarily drop the rest of the current agenda and turn his emphasis to showing the U.S. can “WIN” – “whip inflation now.”
* Give a series of high-profile speeches and interviews explaining what he fundamentally believes in and what he will fight for, with specificity and passion.
* Fire some people and bring in heavy weights with private sector business experience, a history of working across the aisle, and the proven capacity to get stuff done.
What else could the president try?
Let me know.
****
ESSENTIAL READING
* The New York Times’ David Sanger on the U.S.’s competition with China and whether to call it a “Cold War” or not, a topic that will fascinate or bore you.
* The New York Times on Donald Trump’s hold on the Republican Party and apparent desire to make the 2022 midterms about the 2020 election, including this kicker:
[R]adicalization comes at a cost, said David Jolly, a former Republican congressman from Florida who is critical of the former president. At a time when the larger political trends are pointing toward trouble for the Democratic Party in 2022, he said, Mr. Trump’s actions risk interfering with what should be a good environment for Republicans.
“This should be a 100 percent, straight-up referendum on Biden,” Mr. Jolly said. “Instead, you have Trump the narcissist trying to inject himself into what should be a glide path for Republicans to an incredibly successful election, by making it all about him.”
* The Washington Post on what foreign policy bigs in allied capitals think about Biden vs. Trump.
****
For all the latest news all the time, check out the 24/7 website the Walking Duck.