President Trump Demands More Cowbell

Andrew Donaldson

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home.

Related Post Roulette

87 Responses

  1. Avatar Michael Cain
    Ignored
    says:

    I’m wondering if it’s a big FU to McConnell and his “our people are getting hammered” remarks on the Georgia runoffs, planned by one of Trump’s remaining advisers who can do basic arithmetic. Congress approved the bill on Dec 21. Ten days (plus a Sunday) is Jan 1. So Trump vetoes it then and sends it back, to the House first, I believe. The House, sitting irritably on New Years Day overrides the veto and sends it to the Senate. In an equally irritated Senate, McConnell fails to get unanimous consent and his motion to proceed is filibustered. Filibuster is broken and then 30 hours of debate ensues. Bill is moved on the floor, filibustered, busted, and another 30 hours of debate. Before that is finished, Congress is adjourned as the new Congress must convene on Jan 3. No stimulus is approved before the Jan 5 elections.

    Once the runoffs are over on Jan 5 and the EC votes are certified on Jan 6, it’s an open question as to whether McConnell has any interest in passing a stimulus bill.Report

    • Avatar Philip H in reply to Michael Cain
      Ignored
      says:

      It’s a definite FU to what the president sees as disloyal congress critters in both houses. But it’s a return to his “only I can fix it” schtick for the start of his presidency. He wants it to be all about him. It’s also a great distraction from his pardons of war criminals yesterday.Report

      • Avatar Oscar Gordon in reply to Philip H
        Ignored
        says:

        And the lovely crop of pardons today. He’s not even trying to lipstick the pig.Report

        • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Oscar Gordon
          Ignored
          says:

          A handful of amateur lawyers on on the twitters saying that this could be good, actually.

          Like, the pardoned can be compelled to testify now.

          Is that true?Report

        • Avatar Chip Daniels in reply to Oscar Gordon
          Ignored
          says:

          And people wonder why I have such contempt for those who support this person.Report

          • Avatar Oscar Gordon in reply to Chip Daniels
            Ignored
            says:

            I don’t wonder, I just think you paint with too broad a brush.Report

            • Avatar Chip Daniels in reply to Oscar Gordon
              Ignored
              says:

              Fair point, I’m in the “damn ’em all, let God sort ’em out” mindset.

              But I also know that every awful thing in history has relied on people who support the awful thing, if only through their silence and acquiescence.

              The thunderous silence of the Trumpists when he pardons child murderers and war criminals doesn’t really even need my words; It speaks for itself.

              This is the flip side of all our prattle about how we are free citizens of a republic, and “here Sir, the People govern” that every child learns in school.

              When the President commits an atrocity, the responsibility falls on every citizen who selected him and voted to retain him.Report

    • Avatar North in reply to Michael Cain
      Ignored
      says:

      It’s a whole lot of mess for sure. I’m not entirely sure what to think about it myself.

      That said, it’s a real leg sweep for the GOP. Pelosi and Schumer pounced on it immediately and pledged Dem support for increased checks. Now I don’t know that the GOP will let themselves be rolled but being on the no side of increasing the stimulus checks is not where they want to be on the eve of the GA elections.Report

  2. Avatar Marchmaine
    Ignored
    says:

    It’s pretty interesting in that clearly McConnel and Pelosi had moved into a Post-Trump mode and it turns out the king isn’t quite dead yet.

    Also interesting because while Trump is doing this to screw a) McConnel, b) Pelosi, c) Congress, d) Post-Trump Republicans, e) Post-Trump Democrats, and f) Yes, a big ‘F’ to all’y’all… He’s doing it from the “High-Ground” of giving people *more* money. Heh.

    I mean… he loses nothing… if they don’t pass anything, its because Post-Trump Dem/Repubs are just the same as Pre-Trump Dem/Repubs… never doing enough for the little guy… always buying off their sponsors and making you grateful for scraps… etc. etc. And if they *do* turn around and increase the grant to $2k… well who did that?

    The Presidency in the hands of a competent President who wasn’t also part of the take* would be a fascinating thing to behold.

    *I recognize that Trump is doing this purely for Trump and *his* Take/Grift… but its still interesting to see McConnel/Pelosi with their underwear around their ankles – just because Trump is playing a solo grift doesn’t end the collective grift that’s the status quo.Report

    • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Marchmaine
      Ignored
      says:

      its still interesting to see McConnel/Pelosi with their underwear around their ankles

      Damn you. Now I can’t un-see that.Report

    • Avatar InMD in reply to Marchmaine
      Ignored
      says:

      It pains me to say it but every once in awhile Trump comes in with a legitimate gut check. None of it is actually based on any kind of acumen or decency or giving a damn about anyone and yet I absolutely love that he’s doing this. There’s no legitimate reason to attach all this crap to the bill. It’s utterly indefensible and yet this is exactly what everyone expects of the government.

      For some reason it takes this bloviating ignoramus to call them on the stunningly obvious. The reasons may be utterly petty but the real interesting question no one in the chattering classes want to touch with a 39.5 ft pole is why that is.Report

      • Avatar Jaybird in reply to InMD
        Ignored
        says:

        I don’t know if Trump is an indicator of the mortar crumbling or Biden is an indicator of the Masons being able to patch stuff up on the fly.

        If it’s the latter, we’ll never see another Trump for a generation.
        If it’s the former, 2024 is right around the corner… and there is room for a weird alliance with some of the weirder lefties.Report

        • Avatar InMD in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          The bottom line is there are certain orthodoxies that need challenging. Whether that can be packaged in a way capable of large electoral success is an open question. It’s entirely possible that there’s too much inertia to overcome.

          Even if that’s the case everyone should be able to laugh at the embarrassment of people who deserve to be embarrassed. People who like the establishment should embrace it too. It keeps the goobers on their toes.Report

        • Avatar North in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          The weirder lefties don’t have the votes. It’ll need to be another wacko from the right. It could happen from that direction. After Biden’s victory I don’t see the fuel being present for it to even try to kindle on the left. Biden would have needed to lose first.Report

          • Avatar InMD in reply to North
            Ignored
            says:

            I agree that the weirder lefties don’t do politics well. They aren’t reliable and even when they have a point they fail to message or advance concrete goals.

            I do get the sense though that there’s a strange defensiveness about adapting in the center left. Until that changes I think we will keep seeing preventable defections on the ends of the coalition and electoral under performance. Followed up of course by blue city pundits with furrowed brows wondering why the numbers are always a little off.Report

            • Avatar North in reply to InMD
              Ignored
              says:

              Centrists like me have no cause to be smug. The left predicted vast turnout of youth voters and that simply didn’t materialize. The Dems are not currently going the way of the GOP. The left remains saner than the right. But this is basically a default win. We’re not crazy so we get the ball. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

              Yet, the center left- by dint of being the only sober game in town, is calcifying. The leadership is old and the centrist answers may be right but they aren’t inspiring. The utter blockage in the body politic that the rights disfunction is causing isn’t resolvable from the center left alone. Every corporate and monied interest is focusing on the center left because it’s the obvious strong horse and all the more sensible center righties and pure centrists are squeezing in and that means enormous incentives to comfort the comfortable and stick with what works (barely).

              But the left still does its thing and it gets piped directly into the veins of the right. The “mainstream” media has no way to block it and so the cycle of the wings feeding each other keeps repeating. And the right wing is strong and the left wing is restless. Biden barely eked out a win against Donald Fishing Trump as the incumbent. I shudder to think about what could happen when the cyclical left wing purity dragon arises from its slumber after a 4 year term of Biden. Eric Trump could get fishin elected. Or worse, someone malevolent AND competent!Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to North
                Ignored
                says:

                I’ve started seeing the Democratic party as having a lot of similarities to the things I read and hear about national unity coalitions in Germany. They meet the minimum level of sanity and administrative competence but no one is happy with them. They struggle to advance coherent goals, suffer infighting, and end up owning a disproportionate share of unpopular entrenched interest baggage. The things they do well tend to be overshadowed by the things they don’t.

                I keep hoping for someone to come along and break out from the mold but maybe that’s not possible when the right has lost its mind.Report

              • Avatar Oscar Gordon in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                It’s interesting that we want to be happy and inspired by our political leaders, rather than merely satisfied that they are competent.

                As I’ve said before, we place too much in our leaders. This comes, I think, from pundits making every issue a crisis. We have a public fantasy that a crisis demands a competent and inspiring leader, so every potential leader must be so, because there are many crisis’s.Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to Oscar Gordon
                Ignored
                says:

                I’m all for people (read voters) checking their expectations somewhat. Our system is designed to make it very hard for any side to win in a way that satisfies anyone, much less people with hard partisan loyalties or ideological stances. At the same time we shouldn’t let our leaders off too lightly even if they can’t all be inspirational.

                Take this very situation. Everyone knows the deal and what’s at stake with the stimulus/covid package. But when is the last time anyone in Congress made the case to voters for billions in aid to Egypt? This is our money right? It goes out the door regularly without question or fanfare but how many of the representatives voting for it can explain it? And hey maybe there is some convincing justification. I’m skeptical but it’s possible.

                We’re at a point where it’s fair to wonder whether the people making the decisions are actually thinking about these policy decisions that on their face don’t have much to do with legislative sausage making. At any rate I think it’s completely fair to expect leaders to be able to justify the assumptions they’re operating under and at a certain point to stop taking hand-waving and eye-rolling about ‘the way things are’ for an answer.

                I know I’m rambling but this is where the establishment really fails. It isn’t that they need to be be perfect but when they can’t even acknowledge these kinds of tensions… well suddenly doors are opened for people who will.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                There are a lot of people who are pleased that we won’t have to deal with fact-checking the president anymore and we can just go back to brunch.

                But 2021 is going to make 2020 look like 2019.Report

              • Avatar Stillwater in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Nah. 2021 will look almost identical to 2015.Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                And we should all be very worried about that. There’s this pervasive idea that combating the worst tendencies in our polity and culture doesn’t take any work.Report

              • Avatar North in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Maybe it’s the Christmas spirit but I think you’re not just wrong on this one but ludicrously wrong Jay. 2021 has a lot of potential to be a feel good kind of year.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to North
                Ignored
                says:

                Depends on when the lockdowns end.

                Have you checked to see where you are in line to get the shot?Report

              • Avatar North in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Like all able bodied healthy individuals who aren’t working frontline jobs it’s looking like I’ll get access late March-Early May. Which suggests pent up demand could be unleashed at the same time that weather in the US moves into the “bad for Covid transmission” phase. Which means things could be roaring by June.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to North
                Ignored
                says:

                Fingers crossed.Report

              • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Yesterday I got e-mail from Kaiser Permanente telling me that I don’t have to worry about understanding the rules, they will notify me as soon as I’m in an eligible group.Report

              • Avatar North in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                I sympathize but I can’t see how a 1.5 party system can produce any other outcome. We really need at least 2 functional parties.Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to North
                Ignored
                says:

                Oh I agree. And to be clear, while my griping about this comes off as directed at Democrats, the reasoning behind it is that I want them to win enough that the GOP has an incentive to correct. Talk of permanent majorities and demographic advantages are IMO a mirage. But they could certainly knock the Republicans around for 2 or 3 cycles.

                Anyway enough of all this political stuff. I hope you (and everyone else on OT) have a wonderful Christmas!Report

              • Avatar North in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                I agree, I think that it’ll take at least 4 unambiguous thumping’s at national elections to knock the GOP out of their rut. So far the Dems have not managed more than 2.Merry Christmas to you and yours InMDReport

      • Avatar greginak in reply to InMD
        Ignored
        says:

        And because it’s based on nothing, just a toddler temper tantrum it won’t change anything in any way. So even if he is the proverbial blind squirrel who found a nut all he is going to do is shove it in his mouth and claim he crapped gold.Report

        • Avatar InMD in reply to greginak
          Ignored
          says:

          That’s right of course but I am of the ‘Trump is a symptom’ school of thought. What’s baffling to me is when people look at him and think the solution is a return to what gave his schtick traction as opposed to learning a few lessons. It’s a lot to ask but maybe some humility would be good too.Report

  3. Avatar Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Mistermix at Balloon Juice has a good explainer of the what and the why of omnibus bills:

    She hates Trump, but also ended up wondering why that shit was in a stimulus bill.

    Good question, and one that the press really doesn’t cover much (so the job falls to people like AOC, who has a good Twitter thread on it, starting here). I take that back — the press covers it, but they use a “gridlock” both-sides template, which is almost worse than saying nothing at all. My answer is simply that legislators found that voting for individual funding bills, with all the debate and press coverage that it entails, got them too close to responsibility, and it turned out that if all the shit that they didn’t want anyone to know about was rolled into a giant turd that had to be passed in one sweaty, straining, unpleasant event, they would get less flack about it. Report

    • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      That trick worked really good!

      Until it stopped working.Report

      • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        Who says it has stopped working? My guess is the voters who care about this kind of process issue are neither numerous nor passionate.Report

        • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
          Ignored
          says:

          Under most circumstances, absolutely.

          During a pandemic lockdown when it’s too cold to go outside and be part of a protest? There might be a fair number more.Report

          • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            I’ll be looking forward to the catchy slogans.Report

            • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
              Ignored
              says:

              “I NEED TO MAKE RENT AND YOU’RE GIVING MONEY TO EGYPT?!?”

              Stuff like that, probably.

              “I LOST MY SMALL BUSINESS DUE TO LOCKDOWNS AND YOU WANT TO GIVE ME $600?!?” will probably be popular among a subset.Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Funny you should mention foreign aid. It is one of the first items many people want to cut, at least in the abstract. But if you ask them what percentage of the budget ought to go to foreign aid they come up with a number much larger than we actually spend.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                Yeah, as a percentage, it’s pretty tiny.

                That person who is complaining about not being able to make rent should really have much more of a big picture view.Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I’ll give the guy who can’t make the rent a pass. The slogan-mongers, not so much.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                I don’t understand why poor people can’t understand that they benefit from the influence that our money buys them.Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                They don’t have to. It’s the slogan-mongers who should know betterReport

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                We just need to establish whether someone has standing to complain, I guess.

                We don’t have to even look at the complaint until we establish whether they’re someone able to make it.

                Like Nestle’s slaves, I guess.Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Who’s complaining? You’re the one who came up with a silly slogan, the silliness of which you’ve admitted. And then you brought in the people who don’t know your slogan is nonsense as if they were to blame for being taken in. Tell them why you’re pushing nonsense and hiding behind their excusable ignorance.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                The slogan is silly, I guess. The sentiment behind the slogan is something that probably needs to be addressed with more than asking the person to hand in a recent resume and DNA test to establish whether we actually have to deal with the issue causing the sentiment to manifest.

                But, hey. Biden won. I guess we don’t have to think about this stuff anymore. We can look at 2012-16 and have, like, a do-over.Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Asking which person — the suffering person who has been fed lies, or the one who served them up?Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Ask which person, the sufferer who has been fed lies or the one who served them up?Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                Well, I’m not certain that we agree with what the lies would be. I mean, the Omnibus bill is a horrible bill and a horrible way to do things.

                There are a lot of people who haven’t been paying attention until recently and their wakeup call is always something like “WE’RE SPENDING MONEY ON SHRIMP TREADMILLS?” and the response is always some eye-rolling and explaining “it’s always been this way” with an implied “and you didn’t complain then” and a sub-implied “so you can’t complain now”.

                We’re only spending a *LITTLE* bit of money on stuff that I shouldn’t have to defend because it’s so little.

                Like, if I found out that somebody spent $75 bucks a month on rohypnol. “What in the hell are you spending $75 a month on rohypnol for?”

                “I make so much money and $75 bucks a month is negligible, I don’t know why you care.”Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                The lie is that the guy who can’t make his rent can’t make his rent because we’re sending money to Egypt. The lie is that he isn’t getting help because Congress uses omnibus bills to fund the government. There may be reasons to dislike that procedure, but the number of people who even know about it, let alone care about it, is minuscule.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                Oh, of course.

                But the sentiment is that “we’re sending this money to Egypt with no problem, we’re bailing out the banks with no problem, when the time comes for *ME* to get a check, suddenly there’s a freakin’ problem!”

                the number of people who even know about it, let alone care about it, is minuscule.

                I daresay that more people know about it today (even as a percentage) than knew about it in 2010.

                And more people knew about it in 2010 (even as a percentage) than knew about it in 2000.

                This stuff is growing more transparent, like it or not.

                Even if it remains relatively small, it’s growing.Report

              • Avatar DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                [T]he sentiment is that “we’re sending this money to Egypt with no problem, we’re bailing out the banks with no problem, when the time comes for *ME* to get a check, suddenly there’s a freakin’ problem!”

                And, more than that, it’s not that there’s a problem with me, I’m told when I ask why there’s a problem. There’s never a problem with me, it’s always with some other dude, who doesn’t deserve to get help, who doesn’t deserve money, and I need to be patient and wait for just a little bit longer so that they can make sure that other dude doesn’t get one red cent more than he deserves. (unlike all those dudes in Egypt, who can get money right away.)Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to DensityDuck
                Ignored
                says:

                The real answer that a defender of the status quo would give is that the bulk of the federal budget is compromised of social security and Medicare/Medicaid. Plus defense of course (don’t you dare call it an industrial-ideological boondoggle). From their perspective there’s already boatloads of money going to the hoi polloi.

                The counter-point of course is to wonder why we’re relying on systems designed for a post-war economy based around heavy industry and agriculture. Maybe it’s something Congress could find time to work on. Seems like a worthy endeavor for whenever tbey can take a break from trying to remember why it is we send money to Egypt.Report

              • Avatar DensityDuck in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                Who’s complaining?

                Well, the President just vetoed a stimulus bill because it had a bunch of stuff that wasn’t stimulus spending, so, I guess he is.

                Maybe we need better arguments for this than “shut up” or “well you have to understand”.Report

              • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to DensityDuck
                Ignored
                says:

                The President is confused. Congress sent him a bill that is authorization for much of the federal government’s discretionary spending for this fiscal year, that has some stimulus spending tacked on. Of course there’s other stuff in there.

                If he wanted the two types of spending in separate bills, he needed to tell Mnuchin that months ago.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Michael Cain
                Ignored
                says:

                But if he got a stand-alone stimulus bill from congress months ago, that would have given him a “win” before the most important election of our lifetimes.Report

              • Avatar CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                “Congress” includes both the House and the Senate. The Democratic House passed a bill months ago. It was more generous than what the Republican Senate eventually accepted and, though far from pure, much less larded with special-interest stuff. Who knew that Mitch McConnell was sabotaging Trump’s re-election campaign?Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                …*I* knew that McConnell was sabotaging Trump’s re-election campaign. Well, not *SABOTAGING*, but certainly not doing anything to help him that wasn’t judges or pro-corporate giveaways.

                He didn’t really care for the rest of Trump’s populist agenda and didn’t really do anything to help.

                Which is good, I guess, even though he was also a brick wall against Obama and will be one against Biden.

                (But less of one than he was against Obama. Old Senate buds, you know how it is.)Report

              • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                …much less larded with special-interest stuff.

                Understandably so, since it was a stimulus bill and didn’t include the $1.4T discretionary budget funding that’s in the bill Trump is now holding.

                I’m not sure when the two bills got combined, but I think recently. Necessary to allow some guaranteed vote trading — “I’ll vote for the $300 UI benefit but only if I get the three-martini lunch tax adjustment. Possibly necessary to get around how slow the Senate can be without unanimous consent — there might not have been time to debate two bills.

                Quite a bit of stuff would proceed more smoothly if the Senate rules weren’t heavily biased towards “individual Senators must have great power to gum up the works.”Report

      • Avatar Stillwater in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        “Until it stopped working.”

        It’ll *never* stop working.Report

    • Avatar Brandon Berg in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      That aside, the federal government is simply doing so much micromanagement that it isn’t really possible to deliberate on every individual piece of legislation. If we want to do that, then Congress is going to have to choose its battles and do much, much less legislation. That’s fine with me, but I don’t think it’s an outcome that either Ocasio-Cortez or the folks at Balloon Juice want.Report

  4. Avatar Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Maybe none of us here, but for a lot of people the refusal of the Republicans to accept the $2,000 deal has real consequences:

    Families on brink of eviction, hunger describe nightmare Christmas as $900 billion relief bill hangs in limbo

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/24/trump-congress-stimulus-unemployment-reaction/

    Trump has, in fact, been a very consequential President. But not everyone is experiencing the same consequences.Report

    • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      Here’s something I saw in the CNN article:

      Republicans countered the Democratic effort today with a proposal to strip out a piece of the spending package that included foreign aid — an area Trump attacked after Congress cleared the bill. Those provisions, however, were largely in line with Trump’s own budget request and were supported by the vast majority of Republicans. That effort was rejected by Democrats.

      I hope that they can figure something out and get money to the American people.Report

      • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        Some good news, maybe:

        Cross your fingers.Report

        • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          Wait, wait, wait.

          Ugh.

          Friggin’ games.Report

        • Avatar Brandon Berg in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          We have the enhanced unemployment. Why, given the staggeringly high debt we already have, should the government borrow half a trillion dollars to send $2,000 to employed adults? Personal income stats do not suggest any particular need for stimulus at this point.Report

          • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Brandon Berg
            Ignored
            says:

            Hey, have you seen Reason’s new video with Remy? Good stuff!

            Report

            • Avatar Brandon Berg in reply to Jaybird
              Ignored
              says:

              I’ve been caring all along. I’m pretty stoked about having a Democratic President and a (fingers crossed!) Republican Senate, because that’s historically been a great combination for restraining spending. Honestly, I kind of wish Democrats would be blindly partisan and oppose spending hikes with a Republican in the White House.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Brandon Berg
                Ignored
                says:

                Well, there are enough folks out there who are noticing that Matters of Principle only matter under certain circumstances.

                How many times have banks been bailed out in the last 20 years or so?

                Well, you have to understand… usually begins the explanations of why stuff like the TARP is absolutely necessary.

                Should we send checks to people during a global pandemic?

                This is a Matter of Principle!, comes the answer. Hell, add a rule that it’s 100% taxable in Fiscal Year 2022 for households making more than $100,000. No problem. Have a sliding scale from, oh, $75,000 or whatever for the stuff under that.

                That way the people who need it will get it and the people who don’t need it will give it back.Report

              • Avatar Mike Schilling in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                If Republicans sincerely believe that Trump won and will have another term, why did they start to worry about deficits again?Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Mike Schilling
                Ignored
                says:

                The ones in office, apparently, did.

                It’s the ones out there in the field who are yelling about wanting money because their businesses closed.Report

          • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to Brandon Berg
            Ignored
            says:

            I’m thinking the spending authorization plus stimulus bill is going to suffer a pocket veto. No one is saying when the ten-day clock expires, so I assume no one knows because the properly enrolled 5,500-page bill hasn’t been delivered yet. If the clock started today, Congress would be forced to adjourn before it expires.

            If I’m right, then enhanced unemployment ends tomorrow and a partial shutdown begins on Monday. And sometime in January the House starts over on a new bill.Report

            • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to Michael Cain
              Ignored
              says:

              According to congress.gov, the bill was presented to the President on Dec 24. Depending on how you interpret “excepting Sundays” that makes the tenth day either Jan 4 or Jan 5. This Congress adjourns at noon Jan 3, so a pocket veto is possible.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Michael Cain
                Ignored
                says:

                Getcher Veto Counts Here!

                Dubya had 12 vetoes, 4 overridden.
                Obama had 12 vetoes, 1 overridden.
                Trump has had 9 vetoes, none overridden.

                The last president to go with the old pocket veto was, appropriately enough, William Jefferson Clinton.

                Holy crap, Reagan had 39 pocket vetoes.
                Holy crap! Eisenhower had 108 pocket vetoes!
                HOLY CRAP! ROOSEVELT HAD 263 POCKET VETOES!!!

                Ford had 12 overridden vetoes and tied that number with Truman.

                The only president with more overridden vetoes was Johnson. (No, the other one.)Report

              • Avatar Brandon Berg in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                What makes FDR’s veto count even more surprising is that his whole administration was one-party rule. Every single bill he vetoed was passed by a Congress with both houses controlled by Democrats.Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to Brandon Berg
                Ignored
                says:

                I’d be curious to see an analysis that accounts for legislative activity. Did Congress used to do more? Maybe it used to bundle less.Report

              • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                Yes, Congress used to pass many more bills. They used to work more days. They used to bundle less. They used to leave less to the regulatory agencies and the departments (and the courts).

                Then there’s one I’m not sure what to call. Consider the Clean Air Act. Passed in 1963 (mostly toothless), amended in 1970 and 1977 to add teeth, amended in 1990 mostly to add new methods for dealing with SO2 emissions. Since then, in the face of climate change (purported climate change, if you prefer) Congress has done nothing. It’s all the EPA, the states, and the courts. Hence the truly twisted outcome of Massachusetts v. EPA on regulating fixed sources of greenhouse gases in 2007.

                As I see it, neither side can assemble actual majorities in Congress to do either of (a) provide a structure for regulating greenhouse gases or (b) declare greenhouse gases non-pollutants.Report

              • Avatar InMD in reply to Michael Cain
                Ignored
                says:

                That’s seriously fascinating. Someone needs to write a book about it if they haven’t already.Report

              • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to Brandon Berg
                Ignored
                says:

                Including a large number of southern Democrats who opposed much of the New Deal. Johnson had the same problem 30 years later.Report

              • Avatar Brandon Berg in reply to Michael Cain
                Ignored
                says:

                Ah, right. The parties were less polarized back then, so that makes sense.Report

  5. Avatar Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    I’d be interested in hearing what the Republican voting base wants.

    Do the Fox / OAN viewers want a stimulus bill, COVID relief?
    Or do they want restrained fiscal spending?
    Judging from a scan of the headlines, they seem to be silent about this whole thing.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *