Bipartisan Negotiations Progressive-Democratic Party Style

There is a bipartisan group of Senators who are close to agreement on a trillion-dollar infrastructure bill. Set aside, for the moment, whether the bill is good or bad. Consider, first, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D, NY) and his Socialist colleague Bernie Sanders’ (I, VT) position and planned move regarding that bill.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Budget Chairman Bernie Sanders have started the process of adding elements of Biden’s agenda to a large-scale budget reconciliation bill, regardless of the outcome of ongoing bipartisan negotiations on infrastructure.
Schumer has said the reconciliation bill will include the parts of Biden’s $2.25 trillion American Jobs Plan and $1.8 trillion American Families Plan that are not included in a potential bipartisan agreement on infrastructure spending.

The bipartisan negotiation is a sham, a decoy, an attempt at a shiny object. The Progressive-Democrats in that group are fully aware of this, and they’re enthusiastic participants in the distraction.

This is what Republicans and Conservatives have to deal with.

Yet More and Bigger Spending

The House Problem Solvers Caucus, with 29 Progressive-Democrats and 29 Republicans, are proposing their own “infrastructure” bill—to the tune of $1.25 trillion dollars, more than double the Senate Republicans’ original proposal of some $570 billion (and which, in their own abject meekness, they exploded into a nearly trillion dollar supplication).

The Republicans in this “problem solver” gang are engaged in their own surrender to the spending and taxing Party.

Of course President Joe Biden (D) and his Congressional Party leadership aren’t negotiating in good faith—they don’t need to. They can hold out for everything in their original demand because they know they’ll get it.

Not Such an Obstacle

The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Joe Biden’s (D) and his fellow Progressive-Democrats’ “infrastructure” bill can, indeed, be effected through reconciliation, if certain steps are taken in the process. The idea is that the bill can be passed as a modification of the existing reconciliation-passed Wuhan Virus “relief” bill passed earlier this year.

One of those steps is the Parliamentarian’s requirement that the infrastructure modification to that prior bill begin anew at the Budget Committee level. This would give the Republicans a chance to block the bill altogether by boycotting the committee, thereby denying Progressive-Democrats a quorum and a vote, thus preventing the bill from being passed out of Committee to the Senate as a whole.

R Street Institute Resident Senior Fellow for Governance James Wallner, though, says that there are workarounds (unidentified by Wallner or the Fox News cite at the link) to the Committee-level blockage.

The other step is forcing the Senate into a vote-a-rama on the bill, during which lots and lots of amendments can be proposed by any Senator and each amendment must be given a roll-call up-or-down vote. Chad Pergram has written—and he’s serious—that

A “vote-a-rama” is a lengthy, arduous process which sometimes consumes an entire calendar day or more.

Wow. A whole day. Worse (here, Pergram isn’t the only one claiming this is an impediment), the vote-a-rama votes would put Progressive-Democrats on the record as supporting this spendiforous bill. Never mind that they do support it, and they’re proud of their support.

What’s missed altogether in this hand-wringing about a vote-a-rama for this bill is the shenanigan the Progressive-Democrats pulled with the vote-a-rama run on that prior Wuhan Virus relief bill. The Senate Majority Leader gets to go last on the amendment proposing and voting-on process.

It didn’t matter how many of the Republicans’ amendments to that relief bill actually got voted up. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D, NY) amendment, the last of them all, was to withdraw all of those approved Republican amendments and restore the relief bill to its original, un-Republican-amended form. Of course, that amendment was voted up strictly unilaterally, along party lines—all those supposedly vulnerable Progressive-Democrat Senators proudly voting on the record with Schumer—with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tie breaking vote.

Schumer and Harris will do that with this so-called infrastructure bill. The Parliamentarian’s ruling is no obstacle at all.

“Merely as Districts”

Recall the spendiferous $1.9 trillion bill enacted in March that President Joe Biden (D) and his fellow Progressive-Democrats have been pleased to call their “American Rescue Plan.” This enactment included funding explicitly for the States. Recall further that this…plan…seeks to bar recipient States from reducing their own tax rates as a condition of receiving the money.

…can’t use their share of the funds to “directly or indirectly offset a reduction” in “net tax revenue.”

Ohio demurred from that Federal intrusion into State prerogatives, as those prerogatives are made explicit in our Constitution’s 10th Amendment.

It’s possible that the Biden administration will lose on Constitutional grounds, as the Editors noted at the end of their piece, which centered on a Federal trial judge’s ruling allowing Ohio’s suit to go forward:

[I]n a preliminary opinion last week, federal Judge Douglas Cole found the state has a “substantial likelihood of success on that [Spending Clause] argument.”

But this is just an early skirmish in the Progressive-Democrats’ war on our federal republican system of governance. After all, this is the position of Biden and his brethren:

It is my first wish to see the United States assume and merit the character of one great nation, whose territory is divided into different States merely for more convenient government and the more easy and prompt administration of justice, just as our several States are divided into counties and townships for the like purpose.

And

…one of the first wishes of my heart, viz., to see the people of America become one nation in every respect; for, as to the separate [state] legislatures, I would have them considered, with relation to the Confederacy, in the same light in which counties stand to the State of which they are parts, viz., merely as districts to facilitate the purposes of domestic order and good government….

No, wait—that was John Jay, both times, regarding the power he wanted in our then nascent central government prior to the Constitutional Convention.

Biden is just bent on reviving that. Americans successfully defeated Jay in those early days. We Americans need to defeat the Progressive-Democrats’ assault today.

Bipartisanship Progressive-Democrat Style

President Joe Biden (D) and his Co-President Kamala Harris (D)—it is, at Biden’s behest, the Biden/Harris administration—held an infrastructure meeting last Wednesday with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, KY), and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R, CA) in which he pushed for acceptance of his $2.3 trillion version of an infrastructure bill along with his commensurately large tax increase plan with which he claims he’ll pay for his infrastructure plan.

Shortly after the meeting, Biden gave an interview to MSNBC, in which he said,

I want to know what we agree on and let’s see if we can get an agreement to kick start this, and then fight over what’s left, and see if I can get it done without Republicans if need be[.]

Since he’s going to pass his stuff along strictly party lines, anyway, what was the point of the meeting?

Plainly, Biden Bipartisanship—Progressive-Democratic Party Bipartisanship—means Republicans go along quietly or be kicked to the curb.

It’s Party’s version of republican democracy: Progressive-Democracy.