McConnell's Legislative Graveyard Continues

[Cope]

They are explicitly meant to be a living wage, claims to the contrary are propaganda.

For THEMSELVES, maybe.

Besides, the poster I am talking to explicitly chose this as a metric.

And when the metric is shown to be on a faulty assumption?

 

[Cope]

But Lucky, no matter how you serve it up, it's still pie-in-the-sky. The Republicans are never going to sign off on $15/hour. So the choice now is either to let the bill fail and keep it at $7.50/hour or meet the Republicans halfway and try to get something around $11/hour.

I'm willing to work from the Census Bureau estimates to arrive at the $11/hour figure. I think it's justifiable given the poverty threshold numbers... and I think with a little finagling, there'd be enough Republicans who could sign off on that.

What they should have done a long ass time ago was tie the minimum wage to inflation and let it go on down the road, if they are going to have one at all (which is a separate thing altogether because it can and should be argued that the minimum wage law hurts more than it helps)

 

[Cordelier]

What they should have done a long ass time ago was tie the minimum wage to inflation and let it go on down the road, if they are going to have one at all (which is a separate thing altogether because it can and should be argued that the minimum wage law hurts more than it helps)

Well, let's face it... no minimum wage at all would just mean that single mom with 2 kids would be making more just sitting at home and collecting welfare. Personally, I'd rather have her out in the workforce and working her way up the ladder and trying to make a better life for herself than just living in limbo.

But aside from that, I fully agree with you that the minimum wage should be indexed.

 

[Luckyone]

But Lucky, no matter how you serve it up, it's still pie-in-the-sky. The Republicans are never going to sign off on $15/hour. So the choice now is either to let the bill fail and keep it at $7.50/hour or meet the Republicans halfway and try to get something around $11/hour.

I'm willing to work from the Census Bureau estimates to arrive at the $11/hour figure. I think it's justifiable given the poverty threshold numbers... and I think with a little finagling, there'd be enough Republicans who could sign off on that.

I am not going to comment on whether a compromise can be achieved or not. Compromises that don't address the minimum need are not compromises, they are defeats.

If a person works for 8 hours at $15 a day, he will make $600 in a week. If that $600 is multiplied by 4.23 (monthly), it comes out to $2538 per month. In a year, that is $30,456 per year.

Lets just say we are talking about 1 person (not a family). The average rental price for a 1-bedroom apartment in the U.S. is $1098 per month (that is $13176 in a year). The average expenditure for food for 1 person per month is $342 (that is $4104 per year). Average cost of utilities for 1 person per month is $256 (that is $3070 per year). Auto insurance for 1 year is $1929. Health insurance costs per year $1122. Cable and internet is $1122.

That comes out to a total of $24,523. Those expenses are all necessary to live. This means that if he is making $30,456 per year and pays $24,523 for absolute necessities, it means he has $5,930 for everything else, meaning he has $494 per month for clothing, entertainment, gasoline (at $5 a gallon), and for dating. That is an extra $16 per day to spend on anything not considered a need.

As such, giving in to making a compromise with the Republicans, means accepting failure of doing the absolute minimum for an American citizen to live.

No, no compromise should be accepted.

 

[Cordelier]

I am not going to comment on whether a compromise can be achieved or not. Compromises that don't address the minimum need are not compromises, they are defeats.

If a person works for 8 hours at $15 a day, he will make $600 in a week. If that $600 is multiplied by 4.23 (monthly), it comes out to $2538 per month. In a year, that is $30,456 per year.

Lets just say we are talking about 1 person (not a family). The average rental price for a 1-bedroom apartment in the U.S. is $1098 per month (that is $13176 in a year). The average expenditure for food for 1 person per month is $342 (that is $4104 per year). Average cost of utilities for 1 person per month is $256 (that is $3070 per year). Auto insurance for 1 year is $1929. Health insurance costs per year $1122. Cable and internet is $1122.

That comes out to a total of $24,523. Those expenses are all necessary to live. This means that if he is making $30,456 per year and pays $24,523 for absolute necessities, it means he has $5,930 for everything else, meaning he has $494 per month for clothing, entertainment, gasoline (at $5 a gallon), and for dating. That is an extra $16 per day to spend on anything not considered a need.

As such, giving in to making a compromise with the Republicans, means accepting failure of doing the absolute minimum for an American citizen to live.

No, no compromise should be accepted.

To me the worst defeat would be letting the bill fail and just keeping the minimum wage at $7.50/hour.

$11/hour is a 46% raise above that. It's nothing to be sneezed at, and it's long overdue. Not only that, but an increase in the minimum wage will also put upward pressure on the people making more than minimum wage as well. If you're making $9.50 now, odds are pretty good you'll make something around $13/hour when the minimum wage is increased... so there's that to be considered as well.

 

[Deuce]

Cut the deck however you want, Deuce, but to get this discussion back on track... you're never going to get the Republicans to sign off on $15/hour. It'd be a hard enough challenge to get them to sign off on $11/hour.... but to me, that figure is justified by Census Bureau estimates and it is also in the middle ground between $7.50/hour and the proposed $15/hour. If there's a deal to be done, it's going to be in that neck of the woods.

So far I have identified all of two Republicans willing to vote for $10/hour. Again: there is no deal to be done. We've already tried. You're asking for something purely hypothetical. To get things back on track to the real world instead of the one you wish existed: there is no actual compromise with the GOP. They are quite open about this.

 

[Deuce]

For THEMSELVES, maybe.

And when the metric is shown to be on a faulty assumption?

Your assumption is faulty. "Living wage" was an exact phrase used to justify the first minimum wage laws.

That poster's assumptions about supporting a family of three are also faulty, as I've already shown mathematically. The logical conclusion then is that $11/hour is not high enough.

Your personal opinion is obviously different, but I never asked for your opinion and I'm terribly uninterested in the opinion of people who want human beings to live in poverty and require MY TAX DOLLARS to subsidize your cheeseburger being 80 cents cheaper.

 

[Deuce]

To me the worst defeat would be letting the bill fail and just keeping the minimum wage at $7.50/hour.

Would be? This already happened. None of this discussion is hypothetical. The GOP already rejected raising the minimum wage.

 

[Luckyone]

To me the worst defeat would be letting the bill fail and just keeping the minimum wage at $7.50/hour.

$11/hour is a 46% raise above that. It's nothing to be sneezed at, and it's long overdue. Not only that, but an increase in the minimum wage will also put upward pressure on the people making more than minimum wage as well. If you're making $9.50 now, odds are pretty good you'll make something around $13/hour when the minimum wage is increased... so there's that to be considered as well.

A defeat may actually accomplish something of importance because a defeat will clearly show that the Republicans do not care about the people of the nation and that will be clearly evident in the elections.

A compromise that does not solve the problem as it will be seen as a defeat by the Democrats and a win for the Republicans (as they were willing to compromise). If that occurs, more of the same will continue, and continue, and continue.

Some wars need to be fought in spite of the costs involved. To give you a "way out there example" of what I mean. What if the allies had been willing to compromise with Hitler and allow "some" Jews to continue to be killed and "some" nations to be taken over by Hitler. Would that have been a compromise that resulted in any positives?

This minimum wage battle is one that needs to be won because if it is not won, the war will be lost.

 

[Cordelier]

So far I have identified all of two Republicans willing to vote for $10/hour. Again: there is no deal to be done. We've already tried. You're asking for something purely hypothetical. To get things back on track to the real world instead of the one you wish existed: there is no actual compromise with the GOP. They are quite open about this.

It's not like it's a straight up-or-down proposition, Deuce. There's give and take on the actual number.... plus, there's always the option to logroll. For example, Senator Portman has 60 bills in Committee right now... how many of those do you figure we let come to a vote on the floor will get him to agree to $11/hour?

 

[Cordelier]

A defeat may actually accomplish something of importance because a defeat will clearly show that the Republicans do not care about the people of the nation and that will be clearly evident in the elections.

A compromise that does not solve the problem as it will be seen as a defeat by the Democrats and a win for the Republicans (as they were willing to compromise). If that occurs, more of the same will continue, and continue, and continue.

Some wars need to be fought in spite of the costs involved. To give you a "way out there example" of what I mean. What if the allies had been willing to compromise with Hitler and allow "some" Jews to continue to be killed and "some" nations to be taken over by Hitler. Would that have been a compromise that resulted in any positives?

This minimum wage battle is one that needs to be won because if it is not won, the war will be lost.

Please... in light of what is going on in the world right now, let's not cheapen the significance of war crimes and genocide by comparing it to Congressional negotiations.

You can wave the flag all you want, but the plain and simple fact of the matter is that minimum-wage earners are about the lowest percentage voting segment in the country. I don't see that kind of ambivalence changing much because things don't change for them.

 

[Cope]

Your assumption is faulty. "Living wage" was an exact phrase used to justify the first minimum wage laws.

That poster's assumptions about supporting a family of three are also faulty, as I've already shown mathematically. The logical conclusion then is that $11/hour is not high enough.

Your personal opinion is obviously different, but I never asked for your opinion and I'm terribly uninterested in the opinion of people who want human beings to live in poverty and require MY TAX DOLLARS to subsidize your cheeseburger being 80 cents cheaper.

When all the cheeseburgers are .80 MORE, who are you hurting more?

 

[Cope]

Your assumption is faulty. "Living wage" was an exact phrase used to justify the first minimum wage laws.

One more time, for THEMSELVES. (I made it big so you could see it)

That poster's assumptions about supporting a family of three are also faulty, as I've already shown mathematically. The logical conclusion then is that $11/hour is not high enough.

Correct, once again, for a family of three. It was never designed for that.

Your personal opinion is obviously different, but I never asked for your opinion and I'm terribly uninterested in the opinion of people who want human beings to live in poverty and require MY TAX DOLLARS to subsidize your cheeseburger being 80 cents cheaper.

 

[Deuce]

It's not like it's a straight up-or-down proposition, Deuce. There's give and take on the actual number.... plus, there's always the option to logroll. For example, Senator Portman has 60 bills in Committee right now... how many of those do you figure we let come to a vote on the floor will get him to agree to $11/hour?

So now we need additional bribes in order to try and get him to agree to what was already a compromise position. Here's the thing:

That doesn't work.

You need to understand this: Republicans don't care. We gave them, literally, more than a hundred compromises on the ACA. They voted against it anyway. They already said no to $11/hour minimum wage. They're not going to vote for it because you pinky promise that they'll get a floor vote on their pet project. By the way, no, we're not giving Portman his anti-choice agenda. We're not sacrificing the freedom of Americans to buy this man's vote. Do you think he'd vote for an $11/hour minimum wage just because we take a floor vote on *checks notes* awarding a Congressional Gold Medal to a hockey player? LOL.

You keep talking about this wonderful hypothetical world you wish existed and then berating me over coming back to reality. I am dealing with the reality of the 2022 GOP. They are not what you wish they were.

 

[Cordelier]

So now we need additional bribes in order to try and get him to agree to what was already a compromise position. Here's the thing:

That doesn't work.

You need to understand this: Republicans don't care. We gave them, literally, more than a hundred compromises on the ACA. They voted against it anyway. They already said no to $11/hour minimum wage. They're not going to vote for it because you pinky promise that they'll get a floor vote on their pet project.

I'm not talking bribes. I'm talking about getting bipartisan bills to the floor. Like S. 3047 - The Veterans Pro Bono Corps Act of 2021, designed "To establish a pilot program to support medical residency and fellowship programs that assist veterans, and for other purposes." It was originally sponsored by Senators Portman and Sinema back in November of last year, and it has been co-sponsored by Senators Blackburn (R-TN), Hassan (D-TN), Van Hollen (D-MD) and Warnock (D-GA). That's about as bi-partisan a group as you're ever going to find. So why has it been languishing in Veterans' Affairs ever since? It ought to easily pass the Senate and the House. And I just pulled that one out of the hat. Imagine how many more of Senator Portman's 60-odd bills I could find that are in a similar position? And he's just one Senator - imagine how many other good bills I could find that have been proposed by other Senators that have gained bipartisan support.

We could be bringing bill after bill like this to the floor and getting them passed, and working toward greasing the wheels so that people like Senator Portman are more likely to find favor with our bills as well. That's how it's supposed to be done - not to bottle up good bills just because they happen to come from the other side of the aisle.

 

[Deuce]

I'm not talking bribes. I'm talking about getting bipartisan bills to the floor. Like S. 3047 - The Veterans Pro Bono Corps Act of 2021, designed "To establish a pilot program to support medical residency and fellowship programs that assist veterans, and for other purposes." It was originally sponsored by Senators Portman and Sinema back in October of last year, and it has been co-sponsored by Senators Blackburn (R-TN), Hassan (D-TN), Van Hollen (D-MD) and Warnock (D-GA). That's about as bi-partisan a group as you're ever going to find. So why has it been languishing in committee ever since? It ought to easily pass the Senate and the House. And I just pulled that one out of the hat. Imagine how many more of Senator Portman's 60-odd bills I could find that are in a similar position?

We could be bringing bill after bill like this to the floor and getting them passed, and working toward greasing the wheels so that people like Senator Portman are more likely to find favor with our bills as well. That's how it's supposed to be done - not to bottle up good bills just because they happen to come from the other side of the aisle.

Super. Here's the thing: bill after bill after bill like this doesn't get Republicans to vote for a higher minimum wage. "That's how it's supposed to be done?" Sure. 20 years ago that is how things were done. When you join us in the present decade, let me know, because the GOP doesn't behave this way anymore. Don't bottle up good bills just because they come from the other side? That is literally what the GOP does every single day. It's just so bizarre that you wont level one single word of criticism towards them. The logjam is their fault.

 

[Cordelier]

Super. Here's the thing: bill after bill after bill like this doesn't get Republicans to vote for a higher minimum wage. "That's how it's supposed to be done?" Sure. 20 years ago that is how things were done. When you join us in the present decade, let me know, because the GOP doesn't behave this way anymore. Don't bottle up good bills just because they come from the other side? That is literally what the GOP does every single day. It's just so bizarre that you wont level one single word of criticism towards them. The logjam is their fault.

Takes two to tango, Deuce. The Democrats did the exact same thing to Trump's bills as well. My point is this - when do we break this continual spin cycle and actually start doing the job we expect Congress to do? Who is it that's going to be who steps up and makes it happen? Sure as hell isn't going to be someone like Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell, is it?

 

[Deuce]

Takes two to tango, Deuce. The Democrats did the exact same thing to Trump's bills as well. My point is this - when do we break this continual spin cycle and actually start doing the job we expect Congress to do? Who is it that's going to be who steps up and makes it happen? Sure as hell isn't going to be someone like Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell, is it?

False equivalency. Both sidesism is boring. The two are not equal, and Democrats have absolutely gone along with Trump bills when the country needed it. Like covid relief bills, even though that help makes Trump look better, they did it. Meanwhile, McConnell, during the worst recession of most of our lifetimes under Obama said "our first priority is making sure Obama does not win reelection." Really? Millions are out of their jobs and that is more important to you, Mitch?

Again. Democrats compromised repeatedly, Republicans refused to go along. This is historical fact and no amount of pretense on your part can change that. You still refuse to criticize Republicans here, so your fake both sides argument is rejected.

 

[Cordelier]

False equivalency. Both sidesism is boring. The two are not equal, and Democrats have absolutely gone along with Trump bills when the country needed it. Like covid relief bills, even though that help makes Trump look better, they did it. Meanwhile, McConnell, during the worst recession of most of our lifetimes under Obama said "our first priority is making sure Obama does not win reelection." Really? Millions are out of their jobs and that is more important to you, Mitch?

Again. Democrats compromised repeatedly, Republicans refused to go along. This is historical fact and no amount of pretense on your part can change that. You still refuse to criticize Republicans here, so your fake both sides argument is rejected.

Look, I don't care about what Mitch McConnell does or doesn't do.... if he wants to be the immovable object, then let him be the immovable object. The answer to that is to just go around him. My approach would be to grab onto a whole bunch of bills like S. 3047 and pass every damn one of them that I can. Good ideas are good ideas, no matter which side of the aisle they come from or how big or small they are. Once you start going down that road and forging these kind of bipartisan coalitions, then I guarantee to you that they will start becoming the new normal... and when you get to that point, that's when the legislative logjam will open up. That's what LBJ did once he became President... Kennedy had all of these great ideas, but they didn't go anywhere because he wasn't willing to wheel and deal and engage Congress.... but Johnson knew how to get things done - and it wasn't just to sit on your side of the aisle and just try to bash the other guy on the head - you've got to get in there and engage with the other side and establish a bipartisan governing coalition. I'm sure President Biden knows that simple fact probably better than anyone else alive.... but I also think he is being grossly ill-served by his Senate leadership team.

 

[Luckyone]

Look, I don't care about what Mitch McConnell does or doesn't do.... if he wants to be the immovable object, then let him be the immovable object. The answer to that is to just go around him. My approach would be to grab onto a whole bunch of bills like S. 3047 and pass every damn one of them that I can. Good ideas are good ideas, no matter which side of the aisle they come from or how big or small they are. Once you start going down that road and forging these kind of bipartisan coalitions, then I guarantee to you that they will start becoming the new normal... and when you get to that point, that's when the legislative logjam will open up. That's what LBJ did once he became President... Kennedy had all of these great ideas, but they didn't go anywhere because he wasn't willing to wheel and deal and engage Congress.... but Johnson knew how to get things done - and it wasn't just to sit on your side of the aisle and just try to bash the other guy on the head - you've got to get in there and engage with the other side and establish a bipartisan governing coalition. I'm sure President Biden knows that simple fact probably better than anyone else alive.... but I also think he is being grossly ill-served by his Senate leadership team.

Go around Mitch? For 20 years better men that you or I have tried.................and failed. He has had total control of the Senate and if he didn't not want something to be put up for vote, it wasn't put up for vote.

 

[Cordelier]

Go around Mitch? For 20 years better men that you or I have tried.................and failed. He has had total control of the Senate and if he didn't not want something to be put up for vote, it wasn't put up for vote.

He's not the majority leader anymore. It's Chuck Schumer who makes the decision on what gets called off the calendar and when.... and Schumer may be in favor of this bill or that one... but how much weight is that going to carry with someone like Rob Portman if Schumer obviously doesn't give a damn about his ideas as well? Surely you've got to see that this has to be a 2-way street if things are going to get done here. It's not good enough to just stay on your side of the aisle and lob partisan grenades around, is it?

I look around at all of you guys' arguments and it just seems to me that you've got an opposition mentality when we're actually the ones in power. And if we don't get done what needs to get done, then we deserve to get our asses kicked come the mid-terms. Mitch McConnell is just an excuse.

 

[Deuce]

He's not the majority leader anymore. It's Chuck Schumer who makes the decision on what gets called off the calendar and when.... and Schumer may be in favor of this bill or that one... but how much weight is that going to carry with someone like Rob Portman if Schumer obviously doesn't give a damn about his ideas as well? Surely you've got to see that this has to be a 2-way street if things are going to get done here. It's not good enough to just stay on your side of the aisle and lob partisan grenades around, is it?

I look around at all of you guys' arguments and it just seems to me that you've got an opposition mentality when we're actually the ones in power. And if we don't get done what needs to get done, then we deserve to get our asses kicked come the mid-terms. Mitch McConnell is just an excuse.

He still wrangles the GOP. It's not just him and nobody claimed it was. The vast majority of the GOP votes against virtually everything Democrats try to do. Open your eyes.

Get what needs to be done? Tell us what that is and how you would get it. It'll be entertaining.

 

[Luckyone]

He's not the majority leader anymore. It's Chuck Schumer who makes the decision on what gets called off the calendar and when.... and Schumer may be in favor of this bill or that one... but how much weight is that going to carry with someone like Rob Portman if Schumer obviously doesn't give a damn about his ideas as well? Surely you've got to see that this has to be a 2-way street if things are going to get done here. It's not good enough to just stay on your side of the aisle and lob partisan grenades around, is it?

I look around at all of you guys' arguments and it just seems to me that you've got an opposition mentality when we're actually the ones in power. And if we don't get done what needs to get done, then we deserve to get our asses kicked come the mid-terms. Mitch McConnell is just an excuse.

No one has a right to complain when for 20 years you set the ruled of the playing field (like McConnell did) and then the same set of rules he set up are used against him. That is only fair.

 

[Cordelier]

He still wrangles the GOP. It's not just him and nobody claimed it was. The vast majority of the GOP votes against virtually everything Democrats try to do. Open your eyes.

Get what needs to be done? Tell us what that is and how you would get it. It'll be entertaining.

Hokay... I can only surmise from that that you haven't actually been reading my posts.

 

[Roadvirus]

They're US Senators - they can vote however they want.... but if you can't change minds, then you need to change the landscape. Make the deals you need to make to get you to the ground where deals can be done.

Democrats don't believe in compromising where their Far Left agenda is concerned.