Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Ivanstone]

Corporate stooges are corporate stooges.

The opinion is a fucking stupid once since wages DIRECTLY CORRELATES with how much money the government gets.

Unelected person blocking the will of millions of voters. Stop licking that corporate dem boot.

Explain how she's a corporate stooge. Why is her opinion wrong?

She's an appointee of Obama. He was elected by millions of voters to make decisions like this. Do you not understand how the bureaucracy is selected?

What if all the dipshit taker states sue the Biden administration over this?

[beanman12345]

Capable bureaucrats versus podcasters ... I mean, Cenk Uyghur was supposedly a lawyer 20 odd years ago.


Anyways, my money is on Bernie folding <again>. The March 12 cliff is coming.

Since there is no reason I can even think of for him not to do what he is proposing to do, i'll take the bet, how much?

[Breccia]

Hmf...Republicans Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the ranking member of the committee, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina joined all Democrats on the panel in supporting the nomination.

Cornyn doesn't surprise me. Graham kinda did. but he's been a coin flip lately...and I guess this wasn't technically a vote against Trump. Grassley doesn't strike me as the type to be threatened by the nomination. I don't know Tills enough to comment except by saying "I don't know Tills enough to comment".

- - - Updated - - -

Bernie Sanders quote was btw

“I regard it absurd that the parliamentarian, a senate staffer elected by no one, can orecent a wage increase for 32 million workers.”

[url=https://www.npr.org/2021/02/25/970637190/senate-cant-vote-on-15-minimum-wage-parliamentarian-rules]The parliamentarian ruled that the $15/hr wage increase "does not fit the complicated rules that govern budget bills in the Senate". Which I believe means it has to be passed as a non-budget bill.

I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she's not saying "no" but instead "not this way". However, I can't seem to find anything specific on that. Like, which rule is violated. For example, we know from the tax cut for the rich that there's a maximum amount a bill can add to the deficit...but, raising the minimum wage doesn't seem to do that, becaues the wages wouldn't be paid for by the US government.

I'd like to see another shot at this, in its own merits (i.e. outside of a budget bill, since that's against Senate rules). Until then, the parliamentarian will be using my tagline.

[Milchshake]

Since there is no reason I can even think of for him not to do what he is proposing to do, i'll take the bet, how much?

I only make rhetorical wagers.

But .... I have this commerative coin for being #3 on Tulsi's Enemy List.

PS It also comes with three message board stalkers. That call you a neoliberal shill every other hour.

[Themius]

Cornyn doesn't surprise me. Graham kinda did. but he's been a coin flip lately...and I guess this wasn't technically a vote against Trump. Grassley doesn't strike me as the type to be threatened by the nomination. I don't know Tills enough to comment except by saying "I don't know Tills enough to comment".

- - - Updated - - -



[url=https://www.npr.org/2021/02/25/970637190/senate-cant-vote-on-15-minimum-wage-parliamentarian-rules]The parliamentarian ruled that the $15/hr wage increase "does not fit the complicated rules that govern budget bills in the Senate". Which I believe means it has to be passed as a non-budget bill.

I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she's not saying "no" but instead "not this way". However, I can't seem to find anything specific on that. Like, which rule is violated. For example, we know from the tax cut for the rich that there's a maximum amount a bill can add to the deficit...but, raising the minimum wage doesn't seem to do that, becaues the wages wouldn't be paid for by the US government.

I'd like to see another shot at this, in its own merits (i.e. outside of a budget bill, since that's against Senate rules). Until then, the parliamentarian will be using my tagline.

Saying “ not like this” the isn’t a rule but just more opinion

You damn well know it wouldn’t pass standalone so what’s the point?

[Bodakane]

Explain how she's a corporate stooge. Why is her opinion wrong?

She's an appointee of Obama. He was elected by millions of voters to make decisions like this. Do you not understand how the bureaucracy is selected?

What if all the dipshit taker states sue the Biden administration over this?

The problem is she was appointed and making decisions based on a political lifetime ago.

This is sadly a new reality, where the other side will and has literally done anything they can to impose their will. Including storming the capitol, after letting 500k people die. We will never keep this country from turning into a facist hellscape, if we have to play by made up rules the Repubs are never going to play by.

Who cares if the states sue? Trump doesn't even get in trouble for blackmailing Ukraine and working with Russia to subvert an election then fomenting an insurrection. Going high when they go low, got us 4 years of Trump, and half million people killed along with untold businesses folding. The rules of the fight have changed, like it or not.

Yes, its a slippery slope...but we're already halfway down it.

[Breccia]

Saying “ not like this” the isn’t a rule but just more opinion

I'm just going to assume the parliamanetarian wasn't expressing an opinion when she said "the rules don't allow this". After all, the minimum wage has been raised before, so we know it's possible.

[Themius]

I'm just going to assume the parliamanetarian wasn't expressing an opinion when she said "the rules don't allow this". After all, the minimum wage has been raised before, so we know it's possible.

Parliamentarians role is to give advisory opinions... which don’t have to be followed to begin with yet so many democrats seem ready to let die something over the opinion of one person after running on this shit for years.

“But a president appointed them” so the fuck what.
That doesn’t change shit. Presidential appointments frankly are stupid.

[Breccia]

That’s exactly what the parliamentarian does. Gives opinions that are simply advisory and in no way binding.

Okay, let me rephrase: she wasn't just making shit up. There was a specific rule she can/did point to, that backs what she said.

[Themius]

That’s exactly what the parliamentarian does. Gives opinions that are simply advisory and in no way binding.

Which makes democrats look stupid to not do it.

“There’s no rule broken and it’s only an advisory opinion but we have disagree with an opinion!!! Sorry guys better luck in two decades”

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, let me rephrase: she wasn't just making shit up. There was a specific rule she can/did point to, that backs what she said.

Oh? What rule?

First it was it doesn’t affect the budget and therefore can’t count but we all know it does.

[Draco-Onis]

Oh? What rule?

First it was it doesn’t affect the budget and therefore can’t count but we all know it does.

Think he is referring to the Byrd rule.

[Bodakane]

Okay, let me rephrase: she wasn't just making shit up. There was a specific rule she can/did point to, that backs what she said.

I don't think she's being nefarious or anything. I think she is giving her honest opinion based on the rules. The problem is, law isn't cut and dried. If it was, there'd be no need for lawyers. Its an opinion, from a lawyer.

Now could she be right? Sure. But we live in a world where a president can incite a terrorist insurrection and suffer zero consequences.....let's roll the dice on increasing minimum wage.

[Draco-Onis]

I don't think she's being nefarious or anything. I think she is giving her honest opinion based on the rules. The problem is, law isn't cut and dried. If it was, there'd be no need for lawyers. Its an opinion, from a lawyer.

Now could she be right? Sure. But we live in a world where a president can incite a terrorist insurrection and suffer zero consequences.....let's roll the dice on increasing minimum wage.

Biden could just fire her just like republicans have and just shove it anyway or ignore her but he doesn't have the kind of backbone needed to make power moves like that.

[Bodakane]

Biden could just fire her just like republicans have and just shove it anyway or ignore her but he doesn't have the kind of backbone needed to make power moves like that.

He’s not a coward. He’s an ideologue behind the times. The political landscape has changed and he still believes old fashioned awe shucksness will win the day. Biden is a good man, but it is precisely this approach that I feared from him.

[Breccia]

Oh? What rule?

As I posted before, I wish she'd been specific. But considering this is literally her whole job and the result is unpopular, I'm still giving her credit that she's not just making shit up. But if I had to guess...

First it was it doesn’t affect the budget and therefore can’t count but we all know it does.

...that would be it. Specifically, that something was being put into a budget bill, that wasn't about the budget. If the Democrats, for whatever reason, had said "We want $1.9 trillion in COVID relief and also we're outlawing orange" I'm guessing she'd have said the same.

[Ivanstone]

Biden could just fire her just like republicans have and just shove it anyway or ignore her but he doesn't have the kind of backbone needed to make power moves like that.

America already has a huge problem with people who ignore expert opinion because it hurts their feelings. We just had 4 years of that. Do you really want 4 more years of that?

Also you would need all 50 senators to agree. Which is probably what's happening here.

[Themius]

Biden could just fire her just like republicans have and just shove it anyway or ignore her but he doesn't have the kind of backbone needed to make power moves like that.

Only for neera

[Paranoid Android]

YEAH! Let's hire capable individuals and throw them to the curb when they're inconvenient. I'm looking forward to the Dems becoming as ignorant as the GOP.

In 2001 the Republicans fired the Senate parliamentarian over Bush tax cuts. The Senate was 50/50.

I will link this Twitter just for reference.

https://twitter.com/nicopitney/statu...885572099?s=19

[Breccia]

America already has a huge problem with people who ignore expert opinion because it hurts their feelings.

Indeed. Generally speaking, especially after the last four years, I am against firing people who did their job. I'm not going to change my mind just because I don't like the results this time.

That said, I would appreciate if she took a more detailed explanation into public. "It breaks the rules" is pretty vague, and the bill can't be fixed without more information. (If it can be fixed at all)

[Themius]

Indeed. Generally speaking, especially after the last four years, I am against firing people who did their job. I'm not going to change my mind just because I don't like the results this time.

That said, I would appreciate if she took a more detailed explanation into public. "It breaks the rules" is pretty vague, and the bill can't be fixed without more information. (If it can be fixed at all)

It doesn't break rules, it is bullshit.

"you can only do things that affect the governments budget" apparently billions of extra tax dollars used for the government budget has nothing to do with the budget now? In fact wasn't the argument AGAINST the minimum wage itself a justification to be in the bill as the CBO said it negatively affected the budget, ergo affected the budget?

At the end of the day it is a god damn advisory opinion, not law, not rule, it can be ignored