US Politics: 2 Fash 2 Impeach

[Mindwalker]

So... no "witness fights" (meaning no witnesses?) and they want to wrap up within a week. Oh well. Wouldn't want to drag this out, would we? (NYT)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

29 minutes ago, Week said:

Cut the checks and claw back on high earners in taxes. Make the money machine go brrrr!

The only legitimate reason to consider phasing out checks by income is if you were going to go hard -- $4000 checks or something like that. Not going to happen (not even on the table) - so cut 'em and move on to new business.

It's almost like you're saying it was bad to give over $2T largely to the rich in good times but it's good to give just under $2T to everyone in bad times.

Is my math correct?

[Week]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's almost like you're saying it was bad to give over $2T largely to the rich in good times but it's good to give just under $2T to everyone in bad times.

Is my math correct?

Yes the first is bad and the second is barely acceptable is my answer.

That does bring me to a question though - under reconciliation, could they repeal the $2T tax cut and further boost stimulus and other programs? The cuts were absolutely terrible policy and will be difficult to roll back - tying it to broad stimulus would (partially) defang some of the backlash.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, Week said:

Yes the first is bad and the second is barely acceptable is my answer.

That does bring me to a question though - under reconciliation, could they repeal the $2T tax cut and further boost stimulus and other programs? The cuts were absolutely terrible policy and will be difficult to roll back - tying it to broad stimulus would (partially) defang some of the backlash.

They could, as far as I can tell, but they would be mistaken to repeal all of it. And stimulus funding is always possible with reconciliation. You just have to get moderately creative with the math at times. 

[Zorral]

What is the biggest lesson learned from the pandemic? The financial market and the economy aren't the same.  Big sections of the economy have been, at best, decimated, if not outright destroyed, but the market, babeee, o the market.

 

[Fez]

So this seems tangentially politically related (in that politicians need to act in response to how bad US cyber-security is failing)...

The Hollywood version of hacking from 15+ years ago is starting to become true.

[GrimTuesday]

Just now, Fez said:

So this seems tangentially politically related (in that politicians need to act in response to how bad US cyber-security is failing)...

The Hollywood version of hacking from 15+ years ago is starting to become true.

Someone call Crash Override.

If anyone wants to see the devastating consequences of becoming a Q-psycho for pretty white women.

Why is the world so cruel.

[Mindwalker]

Re: minimum wage... I thought the VP can overrule?

[Fez]

8 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Re: minimum wage... I thought the VP can overrule?

No. The VP could break a tie if 50 senators wanted to overrule the parliamentarian. But there's probably even less support for that than there is for abolishing the filibuster. Very few Democratic senators want the senate to be a purely majoritarian body like the House is.

[Fragile Bird]

55 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

They could, as far as I can tell, but they would be mistaken to repeal all of it. And stimulus funding is always possible with reconciliation. You just have to get moderately creative with the math at times. 

Biden has already said he won’t repeal all the tax cuts.

[The Anti-Targ]

5 hours ago, Fez said:

Rep. Ron Wright (R-TX) has died of COVID. He was one of the bad ones, re: trying to overthrow American democracy. Republicans have held his suburban seat for decades, and Wright won re-election by 9% in November. But Trump won the district by less than 3%, and it has been trending Democratic. The trendlines in the special election that occur this year will be a good early bellweather for how the political winds are going.

 

In other news, the CBO has scored a minimum wage hike to $15, and found it would cost the federal government $54 billion over 10 years. That's very little in the grand scheme of things, but probably means the wage hike is dead for reconciliation purposes. The CBO found that the hike would raise 900,000 people above the federal poverty line, but also increase unemployment by 1.4 million people. And that increase in unemployment would result in an increase in use of federal assistance programs.

 

5 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I dont buy the unemployment number just because the CBO says so, but perhaps a case can be made to at least incrementally increase the federal wage, since that 1.3 million would be lower for a lower increase (I believe closer to 0.5 mil per the CBO in 2014 for hike to $10).

The thing is, a minimum wage increase does not cause job losses over a 10 year timescale, it is going to be stimulatory, and it also increases tax receipts for the govt. This tells me the CBO is using the wrong economic modelling to assess the impact of a minimum wage increase. Though I wonder if $10 immediately, then $12.50 in year 3, then $15 in year 5 might make the maths work out better under the prevailing economic theory.

Over the last 5 years our minimum wage has gone up by 6.2% per year, on average. It has also increased every year since 2000 with the exception of 2013. At 6.2% per year it would take 13 years to get to $15, which is a tad longer than it ought to take. A 10%/year increase would take 8 years, which is slightly better, and could be done and not reversed if you are confident in getting Biden in a second time, or Harris a first time. A 20%/year increase would take 4 year, so that means you'd get to $15 before the next president is inaugurated.

[Zorral]

Defense -- private citizen, cannot be tried for impeachment; did not incite crowd by howling I WON!  However:

 

[Mindwalker]

Yeah, that's not contradctory at all.

I always call him "the former president" now. I hope it spreads!

 

 

[SpaceChampion]

Fetterman interview / announcement:  (ignore the McConnell still shot, idk why that's there).
 

 

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Mindwalker said:

So... no "witness fights" (meaning no witnesses?) and they want to wrap up within a week. Oh well. Wouldn't want to drag this out, would we? (NYT)

I'm totally fine with a very short trial.  My issue is they should've had the very short trial immediately.

2 hours ago, Mindwalker said:

Re: minimum wage... I thought the VP can overrule?

In addition to what Fez said, MacDonough's two immediate predecessors show that the office used to be considerably more politicized.  In 1981, when the GOP took the Senate, they instituted Robert Dove as the parliamentarian.  When the Dems retook the Senate in 1987, they ousted Dove and put in Alan Frumin.  Then, when the GOP took back the Senate in 1995, they put Dove back in.  Then, in 2001, Dove made a couple rulings that pissed off Trent Lott.  So the GOP ousted him and put Frumin back in.

While that is rather pointless information that is only interesting to insanely dorky people like me, the point is none of this back and forth significantly changed the rulings on salient/controversial bills.  The nonpartisan nature of the office right now is for the best - as long as the filibuster remains.

[Zorral]

39 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Yeah, that's not contradctory at all.

I always call him "the former president" now. I hope it spreads!

 

 

Or -- you could call the single-term, twice-impeached, seditionist former president under investigation for more crimes than can be named here, including an attempt to overthrow the government of the United States?  I mean, I'd  to that!

[Mindwalker]

Well, we've got to be careful lest it become more like a litany of titles., like in, "Danaerys, mother of dragons, ..." Many attributes in a row would make him feel important again.

OK, hapless ex-president? America's obnoxious embarrassing ex? The former president who's too afraid to speak at the trial ? (You know you want to!)

[Martell Spy]

Inside Bidenworld’s plan to punish the GOP for opposing Covid relief
A robust sales job will follow passage (should it happen) as the president and his allies want to avoid the missteps of the Obama years.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/08/biden-gop-covid-relief-punish-466995

Quote

 

Over the first weeks of the new administration, White House officials stressed that they are singularly focused on moving the “rescue” legislation and unprecedented response to the pandemic through Congress.

Biden and advisers insist they would prefer Republican cooperation on the $1.9 trillion legislation, which calls for direct checks, money for school reopenings and funds for a robust vaccine effort. But their eyes have also started to drift toward what comes after the package becomes law: a major political undertaking to cement the bill’s popularity among voters.

The effort will include a giant outreach effort touting the package’s benefits as well as pledges from the Democratic House and Senate campaign arms to promote it in their own messaging. The Democratic National Committee, working with state parties across battlegrounds, is mobilizing to highlight Biden’s legislation as helping to save lives and create jobs, which officials expect to ramp up in the coming months.

White House officials are sorely aware of past administrations’ track records in their first midterms and view the Covid relief measure as foundational in a two-year battle that will determine the fate of Democrats’ slim majorities, as well as the other elements of Biden’s ambitious agenda on Capitol Hill.

A raft of public polls has bolstered the belief inside the White House that they have a mandate to act and that those who oppose the package will struggle to justify their stances come November 2022.

 

 

[DMC]

Looking at the field, Fetterman should be quite a formidable nominee if he gets out of the primary (where he should be the frontrunner unless Wolf changes his mind).  The GOP bench in PA is not that great right now.  Charlie Dent would be a difficult opponent but I don't see how he gets out of the GOP primary (if he even runs - he seems pretty satisfied with the occasional talking head retirement).  Even if 2022 is a down cycle for Dems, I can still see Fetterman picking up that seat.

[The Anti-Targ]

Just saw a youtubes saying that a survey found 64% of Republicans and 15% of Democrats would possibly switch allegiance to a D. Trump MAGA party.

Not entirely sure which number is more surprising, I'm leaning the 15% of registered Democrats.

Assuming this poll is legit.

An other question is, if such a party was formed, would sitting members of congress keep an eye on MAGA party registrations in their district / state and switch their membership accordingly if it seemed like it would help get them re-elected at the next election?