Why isn't Biden just ramming everything through?

If there's one thing about Biden I find infuriating, it's his bullshit "unity" and "compromise" approach. When the Republicans were in power, they did numerous stupid and evil things without even bothering to listen to the Democrats. Now that the shoe's on the other foot, Biden wants to kum-by-yah with the Q Party and give them some voice in the process.

What for??? When they held complete power, they passed a $2 trillion tax cut for the rich, packed the Supreme and lower courts with Trumper judges, attacked and demonized immigrants, tried to destroy the environment, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. So why coddle them now? Why compromise with the party that tries to keep people from voting and is willing to shame America in the eyes of the world just so it can stay in power?

Re pandemic relief, we're hearing all these "fiscal prudence" arguments from the Q Party (they are now Republicans in name only, as they say), the same people who plunged us deep into debt via the Trump tax cuts. This isn't the time to skimp. Worrying about the costs of addressing the pandemic is like lowering the water pressure on a fire hose because of the cost of the water.

So screw 'em, I say. Use the majority (which may not last long) to force the issue. To hell with compromise and unity. Who wants to compromise or unify with the Q Party, anyway?

Well, he's rammed a lot through with executive orders so far, hasn't he?

As far as using reconciliation to avoid a Republican filibuster, my understanding is that it's a once a year thing and that it must be a fiscally related bill. Also, he needs 50 Democratic votes in the Senate, and that's not a given with Manchin and Sinema. So he's having to compromise with members of his own party.

The good news is that he's not falling for the crap that Obama did. You know, negotiating forever to try and make the Republicans happy, and then ending up with no support when it's time to take the votes. I think a pretty good Covid relief bill is going to pass, and then we'll see after that.

And one more thing. He's been President for less than a month.

Yeah, Obama totally blew it by trying to accomodate Republicans on Obamacare, with the result that a flawed plan was put into effect. Much better than nothing, but...

I actually agree with the Republican "suggestion" to pare back the stimulus check expenditures by tightening the income criteria. There's no sense in sending money to people who don't need it. The first round of stimulus was sent to everyone because there wasn't time to impose and verify criteria--or doing so would have slowed down the relief for the people who needed it most. Now, I think they should tighten that up.

Another thing I'm wondering is if a reversal of the Trump tax cuts can be put into the same reconciliation bill as the covid relief package. After all, if you do that, the entire relief bill is paid for. $1.9 trillion, woo hoo!

I read that Manchin is slowly coming around---probably because Chuck and Nancy figured out a way to put his balls in a vise. I don't know about Sinema. I think that the Democrats are going to form a united front on virtually every important issue, given the razor-thin nature of their majorities in both houses and a Supreme Court that is hostile to good, decency, and the Constitution.

Not much they can ram through without killing the filibuster - which I am all for.

They get two reconilliation bills this year because Republicans did not pass a budget last year.     The second one could conceivably be used for tax overhaul and infrastructure....but I'm sure Joe will want to meet with the Republicans on that too.     

Its a noble cause but it was also such in 2009 when Republicans played their little games to water down legislation only to not vote for it.    Screw 'em.   Let them  go look for  the Jews who started the laser-fires in California.   the Dems can govern.

Yes, it my understanding that is why they are putting things in like a minimum wage increase. They are afraid they won't get a vote later own.

Except that the determining income is necessarily based on 2019 income. Do you think a lot of families who did okay in 2019 got killed in 2020? I do. But the Republican suggestion - and yours - hang them out to dry.

Also, means-testing when it comes to any type of benefits is always needlessly complicated and ineffective. For folks who did well in 2021, how about just clawing it back in 2021 taxes? Much simpler.

I wasn't talking about "hanging anyone out to dry." For one thing, if someone "got killed" in 2020 but wouldn't have qualified based on their 2019 tax returns, they should be able to file for 2020 and get the stimulus based on if their income falls below the threshold for either 2019 or 2020. Given that there's no way the stimulus goes out before mid-March, there's plenty of time for such persons to file.

Also, the existing threshold is $75,000 annual income to get the whole enchilada, and a gradual lowering of the amount until, I believe, $150,000. Married couples get the whole thing up to $100,000 joint income. You can't convince me that anyone who made $75,000 or more in 2019 is really hurting all that badly; if they lost their job, they've been able to file for unemployment. I think that there are plenty of people whose incomes plummeted in 2020 but are still doing OK.

In any event, whatever criteria you use, it's obvious that a LOT of people who got the stimulus didn't need it before and/or won't need it now. If we could identify such people and not send them checks, there would be lots more money available for those who do need them.

The trouble with just saying that the benefits will be taxable and can therefore be recouped is that the government would only recover about a third of them from most taxpayers--very inefficient compared to not sending it in the first place.