Connect with us

Government

Bipartisanship in Congress isn’t about being nice – it’s about cold, hard numbers

Politicians say they want it, but how often, and under what circumstances, does bipartisanship really happen?

Published

3 years ago

on

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris meet Feb. 1 with Republican lawmakers, including Sens. Mitt Romney and Susan Collins, to discuss a coronavirus relief package. AP/Evan Vucci

Before he was even inaugurated as president, Joe Biden, elected at a time of strong political polarization, emphasized the importance of bipartisanship in dealing with Congress: “I think I can work with Republican leadership in the House and Senate. I think we can get some things done.”

Incoming presidents routinely make such appeals, and for good reason.

Senate rules require a “supermajority” – 60 out of 100 senators, including both Democrats and Republicans – to pass major legislation. But presidents have found it difficult to fulfill the promise of bipartisanship, which would require negotiation between Democratic and Republican leaders and the agreement of substantial numbers of lawmakers from both parties.

That is why newly elected presidents often resort to an exceptional tool – budget reconciliation – which allows the Senate to bypass the normal 60-vote requirement. Budget reconciliation bills typically contain major changes in spending and tax policy. Since Senate rules provide that, after 20 hours of debate, a simple majority – 51 votes – decides whether reconciliation bills pass, a cohesive Senate majority party can pass a budget bill without votes from the other party.

Thus, presidents may or may not need the support of both parties. Biden is in one of those situations as he seeks congressional approval for a COVID-19 relief bill. Democrats in the Senate have indicated they will, if necessary, disregard the wishes of Republicans and pass the bill through the budget reconciliation process.

In “Done Deal? The Politics of the 1997 Budget Agreement,” I identify several factors that affect the prospect of bipartisanship in the budget process, where it is not required – but can happen.

A note on the definition of bipartisanship: Politicians often claim they achieved bipartisanship, even if only one member of the opposite party voted with the majority. Most political scientists, like me, do not consider that bipartisan. Bipartisanship typically requires negotiation by members of opposite parties, and some say it requires agreement by a majority of both parties. Others say bipartisanship is when a negotiation across party lines occurs and the majority party needs votes from the minority to prevail. That is the threshold I use here, though some refer to that as “cross-partisan” rather than “bipartisan.”

President Obama meeting with congressional GOP leaders in 2011
President Obama and Republican congressional leaders met and ultimately negotiated a package of spending cuts in 2011 under the pressure of defaulting on the national debt. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

Divided party government

Party control of the branches is the most important factor.

Bipartisanship is much more likely under divided party control, when the president is of one party and the other party controls the House, the Senate, or both.

A crisis, or perceived crisis, is also a factor that may motivate leaders of opposite parties to negotiate a bipartisan agreement.

Finally, the willingness of congressional leaders of opposite parties to negotiate and compromise also affects bipartisanship.

Consider five examples of bipartisanship during divided party control from the past four decades, four of which involved a crisis:

In 1981, President Ronald Reagan, a Republican, relied on a faction of conservative Democrats in the House to pass major tax and spending cuts as the country struggled with both high employment and inflation.

In 1990, Republican President George H.W. Bush and congressional Democrats agreed to a major bipartisan budget deal under the threat of automatic cuts in domestic and defense spending.

In 1997, Democratic President Bill Clinton and congressional Republican leaders negotiated a balanced budget agreement, this time without a major crisis.

In 2011, Democratic President Barack Obama and Republican congressional leaders negotiated a package of spending cuts under the pressure of defaulting on the national debt.

In 2020, Republican President Donald Trump and a Democratic majority in the House agreed to several major bills designed to fight the effects of COVID-19.

Sen. Joe Manchin speaking on a cellphone.
Will moderate Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia become more powerful in a closely divided Senate if bipartisanship isn’t pursued? Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Unified party government

Bipartisanship is much less likely under unified party government, when one party controls both the presidency and Congress. The president typically gives up on bipartisan negotiations and bargains with fellow partisans in Congress to forge legislation.

In 1993, President Clinton and congressional Democrats passed a major package of tax and spending increases without Republican support. Similarly, in 2009, President Obama and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate developed an economic stimulus bill with no Republican support, and in 2017, President Trump needed only Republicans to pass a major tax cut bill.

An exception to this pattern occurred in 2001 – a bipartisan coalition prevailed to pass a major tax bill.

Republican President George W. Bush, who narrowly won the 2000 election, had the advantage of Republican majorities in the House and Senate. But they were slim majorities – in 2001, Republicans had only a nine-seat advantage in the House and, since the Senate was split 50-50, Vice President Dick Cheney held the tie-breaking vote.

This put moderate Senate Republicans who were concerned about budget deficits in a powerful negotiating position. Bush ultimately agreed to cut the bill’s cost by US$300 billion and include an expiration date of 10 years for the tax cuts, unless Congress renewed them.

Since a handful of Republicans – dubious of the need for tax cuts and wary of the effects on deficits – voted against the bill, Bush needed, and got, the votes of 28 Democrats in the House and 12 in the Senate.

2021: Bipartisanship under unified party control?

Today, Democrats control both branches of government, the nation is in crisis. Like the Republicans in 2001, Democrats have a slim majority of House seats, and a tie-breaking vote in a 50-50 Senate. President Biden seems to favor bipartisanship more than do Democratic congressional leaders – Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

[The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories. Sign up for Politics Weekly.]

Biden is seeking congressional approval for a major bill, a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package to address a broad range of concerns, from vaccine distribution and economic stimulus payments to assistance for state and local governments, including schools. Yet Republicans believe the bill is too costly and too broad, and some congressional Democrats agree with them.

A counterproposal offered by a group of 10 Republicans is one-third of the cost and targeted mostly toward COVID-19 relief and vaccinations, aid for economically distressed families and support for struggling business.

Even though Biden may want to find common ground with Republicans, Pelosi and Schumer distrust them. Eager to take “decisive action,” they resorted to budget reconciliation where a Democratic majority can work its will in the Senate.

As in 2001, moderates within the majority party – led by Joe Manchin of West Virginia – now have outsize influence and are in a unique position to shape the outcome. Ultimately, a few Republicans may vote in favor of the final bill forged by Democrats, but their support will be far short of a true bipartisan agreement.

Daniel Palazzolo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

International

United Airlines adds new flights to faraway destinations

The airline said that it has been working hard to "find hidden gem destinations."

Published

3 hours ago

on

March 8, 2024

By

Since countries started opening up after the pandemic in 2021 and 2022, airlines have been seeing demand soar not just for major global cities and popular routes but also for farther-away destinations.

Numerous reports, including a recent TripAdvisor survey of trending destinations, showed that there has been a rise in U.S. traveler interest in Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea and Vietnam as well as growing tourism traction in off-the-beaten-path European countries such as Slovenia, Estonia and Montenegro.

Related: 'No more flying for you': Travel agency sounds alarm over risk of 'carbon passports'

As a result, airlines have been looking at their networks to include more faraway destinations as well as smaller cities that are growing increasingly popular with tourists and may not be served by their competitors.

The Philippines has been popular among tourists in recent years.

Shutterstock

United brings back more routes, says it is committed to 'finding hidden gems'

This week, United Airlines  (UAL)  announced that it will be launching a new route from Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) to Morocco's Marrakesh. While it is only the country's fourth-largest city, Marrakesh is a particularly popular place for tourists to seek out the sights and experiences that many associate with the country — colorful souks, gardens with ornate architecture and mosques from the Moorish period.

More Travel:

"We have consistently been ahead of the curve in finding hidden gem destinations for our customers to explore and remain committed to providing the most unique slate of travel options for their adventures abroad," United's SVP of Global Network Planning Patrick Quayle, said in a press statement.

The new route will launch on Oct. 24 and take place three times a week on a Boeing 767-300ER  (BA)  plane that is equipped with 46 Polaris business class and 22 Premium Plus seats. The plane choice was a way to reach a luxury customer customer looking to start their holiday in Marrakesh in the plane.

Along with the new Morocco route, United is also launching a flight between Houston (IAH) and Colombia's Medellín on Oct. 27 as well as a route between Tokyo and Cebu in the Philippines on July 31 — the latter is known as a "fifth freedom" flight in which the airline flies to the larger hub from the mainland U.S. and then goes on to smaller Asian city popular with tourists after some travelers get off (and others get on) in Tokyo.

United's network expansion includes new 'fifth freedom' flight

In the fall of 2023, United became the first U.S. airline to fly to the Philippines with a new Manila-San Francisco flight. It has expanded its service to Asia from different U.S. cities earlier last year. Cebu has been on its radar amid growing tourist interest in the region known for marine parks, rainforests and Spanish-style architecture.

With the summer coming up, United also announced that it plans to run its current flights to Hong Kong, Seoul, and Portugal's Porto more frequently at different points of the week and reach four weekly flights between Los Angeles and Shanghai by August 29.

"This is your normal, exciting network planning team back in action," Quayle told travel website The Points Guy of the airline's plans for the new routes.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Walmart launches clever answer to Target’s new membership program

The retail superstore is adding a new feature to its Walmart+ plan — and customers will be happy.

Published

3 hours ago

on

March 8, 2024

By

It's just been a few days since Target  (TGT)  launched its new Target Circle 360 paid membership plan. 

The plan offers free and fast shipping on many products to customers, initially for $49 a year and then $99 after the initial promotional signup period. It promises to be a success, since many Target customers are loyal to the brand and will go out of their way to shop at one instead of at its two larger peers, Walmart and Amazon.

Related: Walmart makes a major price cut that will delight customers

And stop us if this sounds familiar: Target will rely on its more than 2,000 stores to act as fulfillment hubs. 

This model is a proven winner; Walmart also uses its more than 4,600 stores as fulfillment and shipping locations to get orders to customers as soon as possible.

Sometimes, this means shipping goods from the nearest warehouse. But if a desired product is in-store and closer to a customer, it reduces miles on the road and delivery time. It's a kind of logistical magic that makes any efficiency lover's (or retail nerd's) heart go pitter patter. 

Walmart rolls out answer to Target's new membership tier

Walmart has certainly had more time than Target to develop and work out the kinks in Walmart+. It first launched the paid membership in 2020 during the height of the pandemic, when many shoppers sheltered at home but still required many staples they might ordinarily pick up at a Walmart, like cleaning supplies, personal-care products, pantry goods and, of course, toilet paper. 

It also undercut Amazon  (AMZN)  Prime, which costs customers $139 a year for free and fast shipping (plus several other benefits including access to its streaming service, Amazon Prime Video). 

Walmart+ costs $98 a year, which also gets you free and speedy delivery, plus access to a Paramount+ streaming subscription, fuel savings, and more. 

An employee at a Merida, Mexico, Walmart. (Photo by Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Jeff Greenberg/Getty Images

If that's not enough to tempt you, however, Walmart+ just added a new benefit to its membership program, ostensibly to compete directly with something Target now has: ultrafast delivery. 

Target Circle 360 particularly attracts customers with free same-day delivery for select orders over $35 and as little as one-hour delivery on select items. Target executes this through its Shipt subsidiary.

We've seen this lightning-fast delivery speed only in snippets from Amazon, the king of delivery efficiency. Who better to take on Target, though, than Walmart, which is using a similar store-as-fulfillment-center model? 

"Walmart is stepping up to save our customers even more time with our latest delivery offering: Express On-Demand Early Morning Delivery," Walmart said in a statement, just a day after Target Circle 360 launched. "Starting at 6 a.m., earlier than ever before, customers can enjoy the convenience of On-Demand delivery."

Walmart  (WMT)  clearly sees consumers' desire for near-instant delivery, which obviously saves time and trips to the store. Rather than waiting a day for your order to show up, it might be on your doorstep when you wake up. 

Consumers also tend to spend more money when they shop online, and they remain stickier as paying annual members. So, to a growing number of retail giants, almost instant gratification like this seems like something worth striving for.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

International

President Biden Delivers The “Darkest, Most Un-American Speech Given By A President”

President Biden Delivers The "Darkest, Most Un-American Speech Given By A President"

Having successfully raged, ranted, lied, and yelled through…

Published

6 hours ago

on

March 8, 2024

By

President Biden Delivers The "Darkest, Most Un-American Speech Given By A President"

Having successfully raged, ranted, lied, and yelled through the State of The Union, President Biden can go back to his crypt now.

Whatever 'they' gave Biden, every American man, woman, and the other should be allowed to take it - though it seems the cocktail brings out 'dark Brandon'?

Tl;dw: Biden's Speech tonight ...

  • Fund Ukraine.

  • Trump is threat to democracy and America itself.

  • Abortion is good.

  • American Economy is stronger than ever.

  • Inflation wasn't Biden's fault.

  • Illegals are Americans too.

  • Republicans are responsible for the border crisis.

  • Trump is bad.

  • Biden stands with trans-children.

  • J6 was the worst insurrection since the Civil War.

(h/t @TCDMS99)

Tucker Carlson's response sums it all up perfectly:

"that was possibly the darkest, most un-American speech given by an American president. It wasn't a speech, it was a rant..."

Carlson continued: "The true measure of a nation's greatness lies within its capacity to control borders, yet Bid refuses to do it."

"In a fair election, Joe Biden cannot win"

And concluded:

“There was not a meaningful word for the entire duration about the things that actually matter to people who live here.”

Victor Davis Hanson added some excellent color, but this was probably the best line on Biden:

"he doesn't care... he lives in an alternative reality."

*  *  *

Watch SOTU Live here...

*   *   *

Mises' Connor O'Keeffe, warns: "Be on the Lookout for These Lies in Biden's State of the Union Address." 

On Thursday evening, President Joe Biden is set to give his third State of the Union address. The political press has been buzzing with speculation over what the president will say. That speculation, however, is focused more on how Biden will perform, and which issues he will prioritize. Much of the speech is expected to be familiar.

The story Biden will tell about what he has done as president and where the country finds itself as a result will be the same dishonest story he's been telling since at least the summer.

He'll cite government statistics to say the economy is growing, unemployment is low, and inflation is down.

Something that has been frustrating Biden, his team, and his allies in the media is that the American people do not feel as economically well off as the official data says they are. Despite what the White House and establishment-friendly journalists say, the problem lies with the data, not the American people's ability to perceive their own well-being.

As I wrote back in January, the reason for the discrepancy is the lack of distinction made between private economic activity and government spending in the most frequently cited economic indicators. There is an important difference between the two:

  • Government, unlike any other entity in the economy, can simply take money and resources from others to spend on things and hire people. Whether or not the spending brings people value is irrelevant

  • It's the private sector that's responsible for producing goods and services that actually meet people's needs and wants. So, the private components of the economy have the most significant effect on people's economic well-being.

Recently, government spending and hiring has accounted for a larger than normal share of both economic activity and employment. This means the government is propping up these traditional measures, making the economy appear better than it actually is. Also, many of the jobs Biden and his allies take credit for creating will quickly go away once it becomes clear that consumers don't actually want whatever the government encouraged these companies to produce.

On top of all that, the administration is dealing with the consequences of their chosen inflation rhetoric.

Since its peak in the summer of 2022, the president's team has talked about inflation "coming back down," which can easily give the impression that it's prices that will eventually come back down.

But that's not what that phrase means. It would be more honest to say that price increases are slowing down.

Americans are finally waking up to the fact that the cost of living will not return to prepandemic levels, and they're not happy about it.

The president has made some clumsy attempts at damage control, such as a Super Bowl Sunday video attacking food companies for "shrinkflation"—selling smaller portions at the same price instead of simply raising prices.

In his speech Thursday, Biden is expected to play up his desire to crack down on the "corporate greed" he's blaming for high prices.

In the name of "bringing down costs for Americans," the administration wants to implement targeted price ceilings - something anyone who has taken even a single economics class could tell you does more harm than good. Biden would never place the blame for the dramatic price increases we've experienced during his term where it actually belongs—on all the government spending that he and President Donald Trump oversaw during the pandemic, funded by the creation of $6 trillion out of thin air - because that kind of spending is precisely what he hopes to kick back up in a second term.

If reelected, the president wants to "revive" parts of his so-called Build Back Better agenda, which he tried and failed to pass in his first year. That would bring a significant expansion of domestic spending. And Biden remains committed to the idea that Americans must be forced to continue funding the war in Ukraine. That's another topic Biden is expected to highlight in the State of the Union, likely accompanied by the lie that Ukraine spending is good for the American economy. It isn't.

It's not possible to predict all the ways President Biden will exaggerate, mislead, and outright lie in his speech on Thursday. But we can be sure of two things. The "state of the Union" is not as strong as Biden will say it is. And his policy ambitions risk making it much worse.

*  *  *

The American people will be tuning in on their smartphones, laptops, and televisions on Thursday evening to see if 'sloppy joe' 81-year-old President Joe Biden can coherently put together more than two sentences (even with a teleprompter) as he gives his third State of the Union in front of a divided Congress. 

President Biden will speak on various topics to convince voters why he shouldn't be sent to a retirement home.

According to CNN sources, here are some of the topics Biden will discuss tonight:

  • Economic issues: Biden and his team have been drafting a speech heavy on economic populism, aides said, with calls for higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy – an attempt to draw a sharp contrast with Republicans and their likely presidential nominee, Donald Trump.

  • Health care expenses: Biden will also push for lowering health care costs and discuss his efforts to go after drug manufacturers to lower the cost of prescription medications — all issues his advisers believe can help buoy what have been sagging economic approval ratings.

  • Israel's war with Hamas: Also looming large over Biden's primetime address is the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, which has consumed much of the president's time and attention over the past few months. The president's top national security advisers have been working around the clock to try to finalize a ceasefire-hostages release deal by Ramadan, the Muslim holy month that begins next week.

  • An argument for reelection: Aides view Thursday's speech as a critical opportunity for the president to tout his accomplishments in office and lay out his plans for another four years in the nation's top job. Even though viewership has declined over the years, the yearly speech reliably draws tens of millions of households.

Sources provided more color on Biden's SOTU address: 

The speech is expected to be heavy on economic populism. The president will talk about raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy. He'll highlight efforts to cut costs for the American people, including pushing Congress to help make prescription drugs more affordable.

Biden will talk about the need to preserve democracy and freedom, a cornerstone of his re-election bid. That includes protecting and bolstering reproductive rights, an issue Democrats believe will energize voters in November. Biden is also expected to promote his unity agenda, a key feature of each of his addresses to Congress while in office.

Biden is also expected to give remarks on border security while the invasion of illegals has become one of the most heated topics among American voters. A majority of voters are frustrated with radical progressives in the White House facilitating the illegal migrant invasion. 

It is probable that the president will attribute the failure of the Senate border bill to the Republicans, a claim many voters view as unfounded. This is because the White House has the option to issue an executive order to restore border security, yet opts not to do so

Maybe this is why? 

While Biden addresses the nation, the Biden administration will be armed with a social media team to pump propaganda to at least 100 million Americans. 

"The White House hosted about 70 creators, digital publishers, and influencers across three separate events" on Wednesday and Thursday, a White House official told CNN. 

Not a very capable social media team... 

The administration's move to ramp up social media operations comes as users on X are mostly free from government censorship with Elon Musk at the helm. This infuriates Democrats, who can no longer censor their political enemies on X. 

Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers tell Axios that the president's SOTU performance will be critical as he tries to dispel voter concerns about his elderly age. The address reached as many as 27 million people in 2023. 

"We are all nervous," said one House Democrat, citing concerns about the president's "ability to speak without blowing things."

The SOTU address comes as Biden's polling data is in the dumps. 

BetOnline has created several money-making opportunities for gamblers tonight, such as betting on what word Biden mentions the most. 

As well as...

We will update you when Tucker Carlson's live feed of SOTU is published. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/08/2024 - 07:44

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending