Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
13 Republican Congressmen Save Pelosi, Biden on $1.2T Infrastructure Vote
Six Democrats voted against the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Plan (BIF) late Friday night, which should have killed the legislation. Instead, 13 Republicans rode to Nancy Pelosi’s rescue and voted yes. The BIF passed the Senate nearly two months ago, so the legislation will head straight to the White House for the President’s signature.
Here are the Republicans for Pelosi:
- Rep. Don Bacon (R–NE)
- Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R–PA)
- Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R–NY)
- Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R–OH)
- Rep. John Katko (R–NY)
- Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R–IL)
- Rep. Nicole Malliatokis (R–NY)
- Rep. David McKinley (R–WV)
- Rep. Tom Reed (R–NY)
- Rep. Chris Smith (R–NJ)
- Rep. Fred Upton (R–MI)
- Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R–NJ)
- Rep. Don Young (R–AK)
Despite Democrats not having the necessary support, the final vote was 228-206 thanks to these 13 Republicans. Each should be primaried, at least those who aren’t retiring. And it’s time for Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R–CA) to be removed as House Minority Leader since he has demonstrated brutal incompetence.
For the record, here are the six Democrats who voted against the bill:
- Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D–NY)
- Rep. Cori Bush (D–MO)
- Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–NY)
- Rep. Ilhan Omar (D–MN)
- Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D–MA)
- Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D–MI)
Finally, some honest commentary on it in the media.
“Everything Wrong with American Infrastructure in One Tunnel…
The current tunnel, which was built by a bunch of guys with pickaxes and dynamite in the 1870s, took two years to complete. And though it’s outdated now, it has lasted 148 years, so it’s not like they did a terrible job. Somehow, despite all the technological developments that have completely transformed our lives since the 1870s, it now takes six times longer to build its replacement. And $2.7 billion for the new two-mile-long replacement tunnel comes out to $1.35 billion per mile. To put this in perspective, consider the Gotthard Base Tunnel in Switzerland. It opened in 2016 and cost about $12 billion. That’s a lot more than $2.7 billion, but the Gotthard Base Tunnel is the deepest tunnel in the world, bored through the Alps, and it’s 35 miles long. That comes out to a cost of $343 million per mile. So, for roughly a quarter of the cost per mile that it takes the United States to replace an existing tunnel that’s only a few dozen feet underground, the Swiss can build a completely new marvel of engineering through a mountain range. … American infrastructure is not crumbling, and there’s no nationwide crisis or emergency demanding a massive federal response. There is, however, a 148-year-old rail tunnel in Maryland that needs replacing. Funding that project should not require assent to a national political agenda, but our backward infrastructure funding process means it does. And our money-first, projects-later mentality means we end up spending lots of money on not a lot of projects.” — Dominic Pino, nationalreview.com
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/everything-wrong-with-american-infrastructure-in-one-tunnel/
Well, the Swiss probably don’t have to assemble a diverse consortium of minority and woman-owned business, file multiple environmental impact statements, litigate for twelve years, “invest” some of the project budget into “community outreach” (i.e. kickbacks), and operate under union rules requiring six workers to operate a shovel with mandatory one-hour breaks every hour.
This isn’t arguing facts; it’s an appeal to authority.
I read that article. Why stuff takes so long is frustrating. We built the Empire State Building and the Pentagon in about a year each. But there is a huge need for a new tunnel The article explains:
“Today’s Wall Street Journal includes a story about the Baltimore and Potomac Tunnel on the Northeast Corridor in Maryland between Baltimore Penn Station and Washington Union Station. The 1.4-mile-long tunnel was built from 1871 to 1873 and is in terrible shape, the Journal says:
“A new replacement tunnel would be waterproof, ventilated, and have emergency escape walkways, all standard features on tunnels today, the Journal reports.
“Trains can go only 30 miles per hour through the current tunnel, which greatly increases travel times for Maryland commuter trains going between Baltimore and Washington. A new, modern tunnel would allow trains to go up to 100 miles per hour. The Journal says that would allow commuter trains to go from Baltimore to Washington in under 30 minutes, a 15-minute improvement.
“The tunnel’s biggest user is Amtrak, which runs about two-thirds of the 150 trains that use the tunnel every day. The tunnel slows rail traffic all the way up the East Coast, and Amtrak has wanted to replace it for years.
“There’s a very strong case that the Baltimore and Potomac Tunnel needs to be replaced. Since Amtrak is its biggest user, there’s even a very strong case that federal money should be used to replace it. It seems like something Maryland could work out with the federal government. Maryland transportation officials and Amtrak officials could outline the need for a new tunnel and give a ballpark estimate for cost and time frame to the legislature and the public. Maryland politicians, both in Annapolis and in Washington, could make the case to voters that the tunnel needs replacing. There could be a debate on how much the state should fund and how much the federal government should fund, how that money should be raised, and how much the project should cost in total — the sort of questions that elected legislatures are designed to answer.”
And Reagan is the ultimate authority.
Don’t forget the new cryptocurrency reporting and tax provision that was also in the bill.
You have an odd definition of “collapsed.”
Ah. So I guess it’s time to buy some votes.
From definition 2 in Merriam-Webster:
to break down completely : DISINTEGRATE
Is it possible to oppose this bill without having to argue the competency of Donald Trump, or even not invoke him at all? If so, I’d like to take that option, please.
Yeah sure, primary Don Young, hilarious. One problem:
They passed ranked choice voting in 2020 by ballot measure 2 which just happened to follow the exact same fraud pattern as we saw in MI, WI, PA, AZ and GA. Maybe if you guys had been willing to help us investigate, expose, and educate America about the fraud we might have a chance of having a real election again someday…but ya didn’t. By the way, here’s the data on that, if you’re interested.
Till that happens you’re stuck with a Representative Young, and a Senator Murkowski. Elections have consequences, and so does ignoring election fraud.
This makes me curious to know on what grounds these three opposed the bill.
I’d guess it’s the same reason they’ve advanced in the past: they wouldn’t support this bill unless the House agreed to vote on the much larger “Reconciliation” bill.
Figures. He’s in an adjacent district, sort of what used to be David Stockman’s district. He likes to emphasize that he’s a fiscal conservative, with special emphasis on the word “fiscal,” which as far as I can tell means he’s a tax-and-spend Democrat.
Or maybe it’s because there was no money included for the de-infrastructure-ization of Israel.
It can sound like a nice theory, I suppose, but I suspect that all of the money will be “spent” before a single foot of tunnel is dug or a foot of rail laid down.
And they’ll be back for more.
Good. What’s the problem?
At what point is the debt going to be addressed – I suspect must of this will be waster – as was Obama’s 850 billion bill – lots of signs – not must infrastructure – but hey, Kinzinger will get his gig on CNN
Sun rises.
Proud Republican for Biden likes spending boondoggle and inflation.
And Reagan started all this Government Overspending and fiscal irresponsibility.
Stop, no, Viruscop you mustn’t! Don’t you like my cooking, don’t you believe in God?!!!
Anthony Gonzales voted to impeach President Trump. Our local Republican Party in Northeast Ohio that Gonzales represents, has totally disowned Gonzales, voted to “unsupport” him in the upcoming election, and stopped inviting him to all local party functions (unless he just chose to stop showing up, I’m not sure which). Unsurprisingly, about a month ago he announced his “retirement” after serving just two terms in office. His given reason was of course the usual “to spend more time with my family” and had nothing to do with the fact that the local Republican community has totally renounced him and several very attractive candidates have jumped in to challenge him in the primary. [sarcasm]
When he first ran, I was one of the Republican Party members who voted to endorse a different candidate for Congress that seemed more conservative to me, rather than Gonzales, but I was over-ridden by the majority vote. In the meeting where he addressed the party asking for our endorsement, he didn’t say much because he had already been vetted and endorsed by the executive Committee. Being the presumptive winner, he didn’t risk outlaying his conservative “bona fides.” He just needed final approval from the general membership, unlike his opponents who made substantial pleas to the members. He is a young good-looking charismatic former college football star and seemed to cruise easily into the nomination by the party. What could possibly go wrong?
Gonzales has not been happy with the rude rebuke by the local party, as evidenced in interviews, and has been very mealy-mouthed about his impeachment vote. My guess is that he is vengeful and is going out with a scorched-Earth policy against Republicans. I could be wrong.
More seriously, is there a consequence to Dems and Reps getting proof that they can pass legislation together and bypass the extreme Left and (arguable) Right? Is this bad news for ideologues and Bittereinders on both sides of politics?
Now that I hear Nancy explain things, I feel better about the bill.
Garbage. Why weren’t these infrastructure projects completed in the 8 years of Obama’s term? I seem to recall a “stimulus” thing, there, for a couple of years.
These projects should be planned/budgeted for within the DOT regular planning cycle. Not for political opportunities. Driving on roads isn’t something to “enjoy”, as if they’re giving us some kind of benefit. They are not gods that shower stuff we like upon us.
This is purely dependency, like Hunter Biden on a pipe: State budgets are largely subsidized by federal dollars. National politicians pull the strings. That includes DOT work and the more obvious Medicare/Medicaid component.
Cheering this on cheers the end of federalism, which seems odd coming from a Reagan guy.
Can we start a countdown to the next big stimulus spending bill? 2 years? What side will we all have to be on, then? Which right side of history, Gary-Gary-Quite-Contrary?
I am not totally up on this topic, but at the very least it’s genuinely debatable. I think James is right about the constitutionality. I’m pretty sure Ike lied about the interstate being critical to national security. It is a well-known fact that the interstate displaced all kinds of black businesses in multiple cities. They just ran them over. The same thing happened with the light rail in Minneapolis. The Vietnamese and the Hmong lost a ton of businesses for no good reason. It was really sickening.
I think if you didn’t have centralized funding, you would end up with more productive output. This way has to have a lot more graft and vote buying.
Government Is How We Steal From Each Other™
You argued and failed. No one debates the value of roads, any more than anyone debates the value of sewers, which we all pay for.
What’s the larger issue is the *how*, Gary, and the fact that it’s not all infrastructure spending, and we know how infrastructure spending goes (which means it doesn’t, it’s enormously slow, and laden with political overhang), and robs the states of their autonomy because they are now inextricably linked with the idiots in Congress you laud so loudly for making this crap happen, annually.
Congrats, again, on your heroic arguments. Now go do a little math on something called “unfunded liabilities”, and let me know how much we can enjoy our golden government gifts without debt and liabilities smashing us into ash.