The House Democrats just put together a pretty solid COVID 4 response package. Is it the bill I would have written? No. Do I think they could have done more? Absolutely. But this is the best COVID response bill so far. Some pros and cons:
Pros for people:
-More unemployment support & food stamps
-Some student debt cancellation
-Support for renters & moratorium on some evictions
-Expands paid leave to all workers
-Pays for COVID-related health care
-Many good provisions for immigrants regardless of status
Pros for democracy:
-$$$ for election security, vote by mail, and USPS
-Same day and online voter registration
-Expanded early voting
-$1 trillion for state & local governments (important for democracy + people)
And the cons:
-No paycheck guarantee - just a little one-off tax credit
-No earmark for PPE for frontline staff
-Doesn't rein in Big Pharma, & MIA on corp accountability
-Allows some of Trump's xenophobic policies to continue unchecked - e.g. wall building and public charge regs
Overall, I'd give it a B+. Many solid components that progressives should like, and room for improvement in some key areas.
Two caveats: 1) This is a 1815-page bill, so more details will be discovered & debated (maybe good or bad). 2) This is the HOUSE bill. After it passes, it'll go to McConnell's senate. The danger is this B+ bill becomes a D or F through that process. That's the next fight.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's what happened. Early this year, @IndivisibleTeam began arguing that our only shot at winning the midterms was to force public attention on GOP extremism. This wasn't a popular opinion, but we weren't alone. Some appreciation for the folks who fought for this strategy...
.@anatosaurus, @jenancona, & @WayToWinAF: message makers for the movement. They offered invaluable messaging guidance for us and movement leaders on how to land the blow against MAGA extremism and for protecting our freedoms.
Navin Nayak at @CAPAction: We were trying to figure out how to succinctly describe "GOP extremism" which was just a mouthful. Navin's smart research made a solid case for the phrase "MAGA Republicans." We immediately adopted this approach in all messaging.
Some folks think Indivisible started in response to Trump - but that’s only half true. We really decide to start Indivisible in response to feckless Dem leadership at the outset of an authoritarian surge. Here's why that’s still needed... thehill.com/homenews/senat…
After shelving BBB this week, Biden and Senate Dems said they were going to pursue voting rights “aggressively” for the rest of the year. And then just about 24 hours later, we learned they were going to go on vacation.
The only good news from this garbage week is that we're closer to filibuster/democracy reform than we've ever been. In the Senate, there was real progress - three holdouts endorsed filibuster reform: Warner, Hickenlooper, and Hassan. More have done so privately. We're close.
Two must-read articles this #FilibusterFriday with the good/bad of where we stand on democracy reform. 1) The Good: @Grace_Segers on how congressional leadership is actively working to get to the finish line on filibuster reform and democracy. newrepublic.com/article/164582…
Trump packed the court with anti-choice zealots explicitly for this purpose. Short thread on what Dems *could* do in response... nymag.com/intelligencer/…
Trump wasn't coy about it - he told the public (and GOP senators like Susan Collins) exactly what he was doing.
The court has been packed, politicized, and perverted. The solution to this problem is not just "win elections," or "replace retiring justices," or even "pass democracy reform." You have to reform the institution itself or the answer to Sotomayor's question is clearly "No."
Everybody who is not Sinema/Manchin should be FURIOUS now. We can have fights on policy - that’s normal. That’s NOT what’s happening here. Sinema/Manchin AGREED to the reconciliation top-line. THAT AGREEMENT is what got the BIF 69 votes in the Senate. Short angry thread...
Without that agreement on reconciliation, the BIF would never have gotten through the senate. We know this because 11 Senate Democrats signed a letter saying passing BIF without the reconciliation bill would be QUOTE “in violation of that agreement.” thehill.com/policy/finance…
This is easy math. Take out those 11 senate votes and what do you get for BIF? 58 votes - not enough to clear the dumb filibuster hurdle of 60. BIF is DEAD without those 11 votes. And the way Sinema/Manchin GOT them was by promising a reconciliation bill along with BIF.
In July, we set a deadline for democracy for the senate to pass the For the People Act before August recess. They just blew past it. Here's my read on what that means and what our options are. Three points to pull out: [short thread] indivisibleteam.medium.com/we-blew-past-t…
1) Missing this deadline means that the anti-gerrymandering provision in the bill is more likely to fail an inevitable court challenge. So the GOP is more likely to succeed in rigging maps next year. That is an unavoidable consequence of missing the deadline. This simply sucks.
2) The bill at large and even the gerrymandering provision isn't dead. All Dems voted for it early this morning, and Schumer committed to taking it up as soon as recess is over. If the Senate Dems eliminate the filibuster and pass the bill, there is a ton of good it can still do.