Some background on how PAYGO actually functions in the House, for those interested badnews.substack.com/p/paygone
One thing I didn't mention is that practically speaking PAYGO often acted as a *disincentive* to actually enact smart tax increases on the rich, close loopholes, or cut genuinely bad spending. Because if you do that, then you can't use it as a payfor for the next bill!
It covers anything climate related, which is basically everything, and also covers the needed public health response to the consequences of Covid, which everybody here would agree covers M4A, since that's the whole argument for why to hold the vote now
They can fight to expand it next term, but Republicans are extremely confident they're going to win back the House, which if that happens, they get to write the rules and this is all moot

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ryan Grim

Ryan Grim Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ryangrim

3 Jan
These are not the even the worst quotes.

Demands for civility are often just a way to shut down dissent. And then there are people who exploit that fact to do this. Thus isn’t “tone,” and it’s beyond just uncivil. Don’t be fooled into apologizing for it
And the thing is, getting a vote on the House floor could indeed be a good organizing device. And people can keep pushing for it. But if you wanted to use this moment to fight for it, the planning should’ve started months ago, before the CPC went in on their PAYGO strategy
In 2019 when AOC and Ro fought against paygo, they were late, disorganized, and slapped together a symbolic pushback. They got crushed. So they started planning for the next round, and this time broke through. Twitter/youtube energy is great but sometimes it takes legwork too
Read 6 tweets
1 Jan
Progressives in the House have won a rules change that would allow Medicare for All, a Green New Deal or other big ticket agenda items to be exempted from paygo. This was a necessary step in opening the way for it.
Paygo is short for “pay as you go,” which Democrats proposed in the 80s to get clever with Reagan, whose tax cuts and defense spending drove up the deficit. Since then it has been used to hamstring progressive policy. Last time Pelosi won this fight theintercept.com/2019/01/02/nan…
The value of changing the rules, even though they don’t yet have the votes for M4A, is that it is easier to defend the rules as they are than fight for changes.

Also it applies to things this term that can actually pass, like more checks, Medicaid and Medicare expansion etc
Read 5 tweets
30 Dec 20
Might as well call McConnell’s bluff. They’re not actually gonna let Facebook go under. Pocket the $2k and let them sort section 230 out later.
Yes, like this one, which would also have a hilarious time defending 10,000 libel suits a day. But sadly they’re not gonna let twitter shut down either
Read 6 tweets
29 Dec 20
In 2004, this guy’s dad, a Chicago machine politician, announced abruptly he wouldn’t run for re-election to Congress. It was too late for anybody else to run, but he had arranged to put his son, a professor living out of state, on the ballot. He won unopposed. /1
In 2018 @Marie4Congress challenged him, lost a close race, and people and groups who supported her were put on the Dem establishment shit list. When nearby Illinois Rep. Bustos took over the DCCC next cycle, she formalized that into a blacklist. Newman ran again anyway.
She smoked him the second time. He’s done, and this vote against $2,000 checks will be one of his last votes ever.
Read 6 tweets
19 Dec 20
I’ve kept thinking about this argument over the M4A floor vote because while the debate itself doesn’t mean much, it divided people in a useless way. So maybe this’ll help make more sense of it:
Consider the fact that the left basically has no power rn. Right? Ok.

You can’t maneuver your way out of powerlessness. There’s no clever trick that abolitionists could have pulled in 1820 that would’ve ended slavery, even tho there were a few members of Congress against slavery
That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t debate tactics and maneuvers. You absolutely should. Some maneuvers are dumb, some are smart. Argue that out. But understand that that’s all you’re talking about. Your opponent in those debates is not your enemy. You might even be wrong.
Read 5 tweets
13 Dec 20
Real question that will help me engage with folks on here who I do think are coming from a good place: Why is a vote on the House floor for M4A considered so obviously better than other demands? What’s so useful about the floor? We already know who backs it and who doesn’t...
Ok I think I get it: people think the cosponsor list is fake but a vote would be real.

Sorry to say but that’s wrong: A vote on a bill that won’t pass the Senate is just as symbolic as the act of cosponsoring. They’re both posturing. So if you have leverage, get something real.
Biden could give everyone who had Covid Medicare by executive action. That could end up being 30 million people or more. They could try to extract a commitment from Pelosi to demand that in exchange for govt funding bills. Whatever. Real things are possible.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!