The Bipartisan Infrastructure Tightrope

Some Republicans hope—and progressive Democrats suspect—that a bipartisan infrastructure deal will make it harder for Democrats to stay united on a bigger, party-line package.

By and
27

Happy Friday! Let’s get to the news. 

Another Hurdle Cleared in Senate Infrastructure Deal

In the fairy tale, the boy who cried wolf eventually got eaten after one too many false alarms. But after weeks of negotiations and many false starts, the senators who cried “infrastructure deal!” are on track to have a happier ending. 

“We have reached agreement on the major issues,” Sen. Rob Portman told reporters outside of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office on Wednesday. He was flanked by the other key Republicans who have worked on the bill—Sens. Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Mitt Romney. 

The Democratic side, helmed by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, also included Sens. Joe Manchin, Jeanne Shaheen, Mark Warner, and Jon Tester. The group—referred to as the “G-10” senators on the Hill—worked tirelessly to come to a deal in recent weeks, sometimes working past midnight. 

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
27
By and
Comments (27)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Jason Gibson

    My former senator...........he was a very influential figure even though I never voted for him and didn't agree with him about much of anything

    RIP Senator Levin

    Collapse
  2. Andie S

    I actually read the most recent version (there are 5 so far) and to my surprise, it was all infrastructure related. The 2 issues I see are 1) that Blue states are getting a lot more. I am stunned by the list of projects in the cities of California. It is a long ass list and there are some really piddly projects, which leads me to 2) there is a lot that could wait for better economic times. They are not urgent tasks such as crosswalk signage, bike lanes and trails. Yes, many of these are needed but hardly essential. In the end, I was impressed there wasn't a ton of non-infrastructure BS in it (virtually nothing) but it truly strikes me as legacy legislation for Biden.

    Collapse
    1. tla

      When you say better economic times are you referring only to the deficit? In as much we do have a real economic downturn, it would be right time to spend infrastructure money.

      Collapse
      1. Andie S

        Actually I am referring to both the fact it's mostly unfunded, which means debt financing and the existing national debt. Deficit on an annual basis isn't bad but at this point, adding more debt is not wise. Whether you see it as a (not the only) cause of the current inflation or as a potential for ongoing or future inflation, is up to you. Small 🤏 inflationary pressure isn't bad but what we have now is. If there is another crisis in a five years, we will have not just an empty chest but no place to store it.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Jason Gibson

          well said andie.........nice to see you reappear!

          Collapse
  3. learnin4life

    Nice status overview. It's helpful to me to zoom out just a bit to get the lay of the land on these dynamic political issues.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Victor Clairmont

    Goodness we’re screwed in the deficit.

    Collapse
    1. GregS

      Sure the deficit is rising, but it's not clear that this is caused by human activity, and the economic costs of lowering it are too great, so we should do nothing.

      Collapse
      1. B Phillips

        lol, nice one. We should sign a Paris Deficit Accord, that'll solve it

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Victor Clairmont

        Wait, if it’s not cause by human activity how on earth do you have a deficit? ??????

        I mean, do we humans as part of institutions not borrow money or print money or something?

        Or am I missing a joke in here?

        Collapse
        1. GregS

          :)
          Sorry Poe's law strikes again.
          Replace "deficit" with "climate change."

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Victor Clairmont

            No worries bro. I have mistakes like that all the time.

            Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Synchronize Your Dogmas (Bill B)

    Question is will they lose more votes with the reconciliation bill than they gained by passing infrastructure bill? My guess would be yes. I'd happily vote for Democrats on an infrastructure bill and happily vote against any of them who push for the reconciliation bill. Sinema has it right - it's too much.

    Collapse
  6. Mark Holmlund

    Harvest and Ryan, has there ever been a post mortem done on the 2009 infrastructure bill? Did it accomplish its goals? Was the money spent wisely? Were taxpayers informed about how the money was spent? Has anyone ever cited specific projects or infrastructure improvements that resulted from that bill? Was there any waste or fraud associated with the legislation? Did all states benefit in roughly equal measure? Seems like these would be basic questions any congressman would want answers to before voting to spend another trillion-+ dollars of taxpayer money. Everyone focuses on the politics of getting the bill passed, no one focuses on what happens after it’s passed, as if the only objective is the former.

    Collapse
    1. DJ

      Lots of articles about it here: https://www.google.com/search?q=results+of+2009+infrastructure+bill&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS899US899&oq=results+of+2009+infrastructure+bill&aqs=chrome..69i57.11876j0j7&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#ip=1

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Matt J

    And now we get to the horse trading. This is gonna be boring stuff, and that's exactly what this country needs right now. Make Politics Boring Again!

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Jen

    As a limited government conservative I can only hope the House torpedos all of this. Make me proud, Nancy!

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Jason Gibson

      you are rooting for nancy to be nancy and screw things up for the left? lol

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Jen

        I’m rooting for the far left in the House to save the Republicans from themselves. Unfortunately I think there are enough moderate/centrist Republicans in the House to get this over the finish line to offset the far left members who don’t support it.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Matt J

      Not all spending is bad or unwarranted. We still have over 45,000 structurally deficient bridges in this country.
      https://www.uhpcsolutions.com/structurally-deficient-bridges?gclid=CjwKCAjwxo6IBhBKEiwAXSYBs0WxksjTq9HR0qAyJZT3rfvlbo3UQU99Z3CZCGxZxg9Q7ErS-Np7HhoCg4sQAvD_BwE

      Collapse
  9. tla

    I think this is the right take. By passing the bipartisan bill, it takes a lot of pressure off centrist democrats from being forced to vote on completely partisant reconciliation bill that would not only include what is contained in the current bipartisan bill but a whole lot more. Mitch McConnell is a very smart tactical operator and his vote tells me all I need to know on this.

    Both the hard left and hard right operate under different mandate. It's always better to get no loaf than half a loaf as long as you made sure the other side didn't get it.

    Collapse
    1. GregS

      I don't know that it's a smart move for McConnell. I'd bet he could get more mileage out of tanking this and either forcing a large reconciliation bill or hoping that that bill gets tanked by Manchin as well. I'm betting he does his best to kill this bilartisan thing when push comes to shove.

      Collapse
      1. tla

        Yes, he could take the chance that he could tank a larger reconciliation bill but surely by tanking this current bill he decreases his chances of being able to so. While allowing this bill which is only few hundred billion bad to pass significantly increases the chances of tanking a reconciliation bill that is a few trillion bad. If he were Josh Hawley he might get more mileage to serve his personal ambitions, but he is not and mostly cares about advancing conservative policy not running for higher office or becoming a demagogue.

        While I have been very disappointed by McConnell's further erosion of the regular order of the Senate, and IMO strategic blunder of not impeaching Trump the 2nd time, the man has always been very good at doing what needs to be done to advance conservative policy at that moment.

        Collapse
        1. GregS

          "mostly cares about advancing conservative policy"
          Even if I grant that, the way this goal manifests itself is in working to have Rs in the majority in Congress , and in control of the WH.
          So my point is, I think a bipartisan bill helps Republican chances of winning the majority less than either a solo giant reconciliation infrastructure bill, or no infrastructure bill at all.
          Hence my prediction that he tries to kill it.
          Not convicting Trump at the second impeachment is actually a perfect example of his thinking - I believe he thought conviction would hurt R election chances.

          Collapse