The House advanced the $3.5 partisan trillion infrastructure bill 220-212 after Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi made a deal with the nine moderate Democrats who stood in the way.
That’s odd. I thought the moderates wanted to pass the $1 trillion bill first. I had to double-check all of the headlines because I thought for sure they’d vote on the bipartisan legislation.
Hhhhmm…
Tensions had flared as a band of moderate lawmakers threatened to withhold their votes for the $3.5 trillion plan. They were demanding the House first approve a nearly $1 trillion bipartisan package of other public works projects that’s already passed the Senate.In brokering the compromise, Pelosi committed to voting on the bipartisan package no later than Sept. 27, an attempt to assure lawmakers it won’t be left on the sidelines. It’s also in keeping with with [sic] Pelosi’s insistence that the two bills move together as a more complete collection of Biden’s priorities. Pelosi has set a goal of passing both by Oct. 1.Easing off the stalemate will shelve, for now, the stark divisions between moderate and progressive lawmakers who make up the Democrats’ so-slim House majority. But as the drama spilled out during what was supposed to be a quick session as lawmakers returned to work for a few days in August, it showcased the party differences that threaten to upend Biden’s ambitious rebuilding agenda.
There has to be more to the story. The nine Democrats have spent weeks threatening to withhold this bill, which is more about “human” infrastructure than actual infrastructure.
The Democrats did not object to the bill. They wanted the House to process the bills separately.
However, to me, it seemed the moderates wanted to take on the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill before the partisan bill.
They authored a passionate op-ed in The Washington Post about their want to pass the $1 trillion bill.
“Across this country, far too many communities are struggling with crumbling roads and structurally unsound bridges, outrageous congestion, lead-coated pipes and no broadband access,” the Democrats wrote. “You don’t hold up a major priority of the country, and millions of jobs, as some form of leverage. The infrastructure bill is not a political football.”
I thought the moderates found the bipartisan bill more important than the “human” infrastructure bill.
September 27th is over a month away. How much would you like to bet something happens that somehow forces Pelosi to move the date?
Not like this matters, though. Moderate Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) already declared she is still a no on the $3.5 trillion bill.
Sinema described the bipartisan bill as “a historic win for our nation’s everyday families and employers and, like every proposal, should be considered on its own merits.”
“Proceedings in the U.S. House will have no impact on Kyrsten’s views about what is best for our country – including the fact that she will not support a budget reconciliation bill that costs $3.5 trillion,” stated her spokesman John LaBombard.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY