Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(145,348 posts)
Wed Jan 15, 2025, 10:07 AM Wednesday

Jeffries: With narrow margin, House GOP can't 'pass anything close' to bill Johnson floating

Source: The Hill

01/14/25 11:06 PM ET


House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) argued House Republicans, with their narrow margin, won’t be able to pass “anything close” to what Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has been floating.

Jeffries joined MSNBC on Tuesday evening, where he was asked by host Chris Hayes about Johnson’s reconciliation package and the signs he may remove the debt limit from the sprawling legislation. “We believe that we’re going to have to take this fight to the public domain, make sure we can win the battle for public sentiment,” Jeffries said of Democrats’ plans.

Jeffries noted that “the votes will not be there” from Democrats on ideas floated by top Republicans, including those that enforce nearly all of President-elect Trump’s campaign promises.

Johnson told reporters last week that it was his “intention” to deal with the debt limit in the reconciliation package. However, he backtracked the statement on Tuesday to say he is “not wed” to including the debt limit increase in the package.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5086174-jeffries-house-republicans-debt-limit/

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

NoMoreRepugs

(10,728 posts)
3. Get a unified message and repeat it a 1000 times, it's the only way the
Wed Jan 15, 2025, 12:16 PM
Wednesday

“average” voter will understand.

Hugin

(34,989 posts)
4. Would someone please bring me up to speed on reconciliation?
Wed Jan 15, 2025, 12:22 PM
Wednesday

I thought it was limited to number juggling and not a means to ramrod through a cornucopia of Project 2025 wet dreams.

BumRushDaShow

(145,348 posts)
5. There are 3 types of subjects that can be addressed in "reconciliation" legislation (which is a "budget document" )
Wed Jan 15, 2025, 12:52 PM
Wednesday
Spending

Revenue (increasing or cutting taxes)

Debt (e.g., raising the debt ceiling)


Each type can be addressed in a SINGLE bill -OR- they can be combined into 1 or 2 bills (with a combo of 2 or all 3 types).

The main limitation is that each "type" can only be done ONCE per fiscal year.

The main "benefit" is that it is not subject to the Senate's "cloture" (filibuster) Rule requiring 60 votes and it is usually set for 10 years.

Whatever goes into it must be "budget neutral" (meaning not adding to the deficit) and per the "Byrd Rule", cannot have "policy riders" on it.

More on Byrd Rule - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/644

More detailed thing on it - https://www.cbpp.org/research/introduction-to-budget-reconciliation

As a note - the "BiB" (Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill) and the "IRA" (Inflation Reduction Act) under Biden, were both done by the "reconciliation" process.

Hugin

(34,989 posts)
6. As always, thanks for the detailed and well referenced answer to my question.
Wed Jan 15, 2025, 01:05 PM
Wednesday


It’s pretty obvious that the main interest in using reconciliation is as a means for the Retrumplicans to skirt a filibuster in the Senate.

I guess the Byrd Rule is what would exclude a number of unrelated provisions from moving through in one omnibus big bill?

Will it work? Well, I suppose we’re about to find out.

BumRushDaShow

(145,348 posts)
7. "obvious that the main interest in using reconciliation is as a means for the Retrumplicans to skirt a filibuster"
Wed Jan 15, 2025, 01:17 PM
Wednesday

That's pretty much the only reason why.

But the thing is - "reconciliation" is SUPPOSED TO BE for doing "budget" stuff. NOT policy. And if whatever "policy" someone wants to do can "save money" or reduce the deficit or bring in more revenue, only those parts can be put in there.

When Democrats did the Infrastructure bill by reconciliation, they had to show how those expenditures could save the government money (by no longer needing to spend on something related). The savings can be calculated out to "x" amount over 10 years.

Similarly, the tax cuts for the billionaires bill that was passed in 2017 (which is what the GOP wants to renew as it expires at the end of next year) had to have cuts somewhere else and/or included voodoo economics to show that it didn't add to the deficit (where instead we know it added to the debt).

The Senate Parliamentarian would need to look at the bill and/or its amendments to determine if the items are eligible.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Jeffries: With narrow mar...