BREAKING UP IS HARD TO DO — It's the arranged marriage that promises to ruin Democrats' year. But nearly three months ago, the Senate majority leader described the match in glowing terms. Centrists and liberals "need each other," Chuck Schumer told our reporters back in August. "The moderates couldn't pass a bipartisan bill without the more progressive wing of our caucus," Schumer said, referring to the $550 billion infrastructure bill that's idling in the House after its Senate passage. "And the progressives couldn't get a big, bold bill without the moderates," Schumer added. That "bold bill" is the roughly $1.75 trillion social spending framework that could get a House vote as soon as this week. Occasionally shorthanded as the "two-track strategy," what Schumer described was the bet that Democratic leaders have repeatedly raised in order to advance their and the president's agenda: Get progressives to back an infrastructure bill shaped with GOP input (i.e. not as liberal as they'd like) and, in exchange, get centrists to back a party-line social spending bill shaped with no GOP input (i.e. too liberal for their tastes). This strategy likely would have worked a lot better had both bills been ready for action at the same time. But as it stands, the infrastructure measure is mired in the House awaiting an elusive consensus on the social spending measure. And the longer that both bills sit in the House, the more those centrist and liberal wings forget why they got engaged in the first place. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) today bluntly told the House that "it's time to pass" the infrastructure bill. Days after they balked at exactly that vote, progressives now sound ready to heed his instructions — even as the social spending bill they wanted to wait for is no closer to quick passage than it was last week. Before today, progressives, as much as Schumer, were insistent on sticking to the two-track strategy. Both party leaders and the left seemed to have decided that the only way to lock in centrist votes for their social spending vision was to hold up the infrastructure bill at the altar in the House, awaiting its promised legislative spouse. But the nuptials may have finally been called off, as Democratic confidence that weeks of delay on infrastructure would help pass the social spending framework looks increasingly misplaced. Manchin referred to the bipartisan Senate-passed measure as a "hostage" today. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), looking at a home-state gubernatorial race where his party's nominee is floundering, is getting increasingly vocal in his criticism of the holdup. And while that duo are as centrist as two Democrats might come, progressives are sounding more eager to pass infrastructure as they get more evidence that they've pushed the rest of their party about as far as possible on social spending. It's entirely possible that both bills will make it to lawful bliss on Biden's desk – though less and less likely that they'll stay connected, given that House passage of the social spending package will presage a much longer Senate consideration. From the start, Democrats never quite agreed on timing for these bills even as they set and missed repeated deadlines. Now we're seeing their time — as well as their political capital — run short. Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@politico.com. Or contact tonight's author at eschor@politico.com or on Twitter at @eschor.
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment