T O P
WonderWall_E

She should still be primaried. It's not good enough to be right once in a blue moon.


Godspiral

> She said Democrats had agreed to remove a provision raising taxes on “carried interest,” or profits that go to executives of private equity firms. Only if we keep the most corrupt tax loophole enjoyed by the richest least productive hedge funds will she support investing in America's future. Still a decent bill that should go forward, and should have future bills with larger amounts for clean energy.


Chidling

She did add a stock buyback tax however. The carried interest loophole would generate 14 billion in tax rev. The 1% stock buyback tax she included would generate much more. A fair trade to pass this legislation imo. Businesses in Arizona probably value that over stock buybacks. Drought resiliency was also added presumably so she could benefit her state.


DweEbLez0

Her godfather Manchin is giving her some insider tips so she comes out more rich.


Yvaelle

Lol she doesn't need it. Sinema's requirement to agree was that they would cut taxes on specific types of hedge fund managers by 14 billion. They'll write her a tidy check for her services. Manchin is small time corruption compared to Sinema. He just wants tax cuts for west Virginia coal and pharma companies like the ones his family owns.


cocoagiant

>Manchin is small time corruption compared to Sinema. He just wants tax cuts for west Virginia coal and pharma companies like the ones his family owns. I mean, they both seem to be inclined to follow the dollar. Manchin just has the luxury of already being wealthy & coming from a wealthy family. Sinema grew up poor/homeless and is having to do all the work Manchin's ancestors did for him.


Miserable-Lizard

I agree,she is not the same person anymore I remember when she wasn't a corporate shill and actually stood for progressive polices


UncommonHouseSpider

You mean when she was trying to get elected so said what people wanted to hear and then flipped on most policies when she got in? Is that what you are talking about?


Forest-Ferda-Trees

I assume they mean when she protested the WTO and whatnot


sporesofdoubt

I marched by her side against the Iraq War and organized a progressive activist conference with her at Arizona State. She wasn’t running for office at the time. She really has changed.


Splenda

That's what allowing unlimited political media spending will do to a country, and to the individuals who run it.


glynnjamin

She was never that person. She worked for me in 2000 on the Nader campaign. She was then exactly what she is now - an attention seeking opportunist who finds value in polarization. We literally kicked her out of the party.


dorisdacat

Which was obviously a lie


doyouevenIift

Huh? She’s always been more of a moderate


Miserable-Lizard

Nope not true. She was a part of the green party before and a activist. *Since her 2012 election to the U.S. House, the candidate who once railed against capitalism’s “Almighty Dollar” has welcomed the contributions of industry groups and corporate political action committees. She’s raised at least $3 million from CEOs, businesses executives, investors, lobbyists and finance sector workers, campaign finance records show.* https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-arizona-congress-campaigns-a4dea683b0fabda460e3d6993a46ec8b https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/05/from-radical-activist-to-senate-obstructionist-the-metamorphosis-of-kyrsten-sinema/


dethb0y

maybe it was all lies meant to garner support and votes, with the ultimate goal being the furtherance of Sinema's career rather than any actually held political beliefs.


Miserable-Lizard

I don't think so. From past comments and actions she hated the Dems before one and becoming a corporate dem. Money and power corrupts.


dethb0y

>Money and power corrupts. can't argue with that


hafgrimmar

Would welcome the chance to try..


UltraMegaMegaMan

How could you be so cynical, inferring her motivations based on what she says and does? 😐


Illustrious_Air_1438

That's true, but by the time she ran for Senate in 2018 she was known as one of the most conservative Democrats in Congress and a member of the Blue Dog caucus. ["In Sinema’s first two terms, covering 2013 to early 2017, she was more liberal than 54 percent and 57 percent of the House as a whole. In both those terms, Sinema was rated the most conservative Democrat in the House."](https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/10/31/kyrsten-sinema-martha-mcsally-occupy-whats-left-political-middle/1572194002/) ["In her current race, Ms. Sinema holds up Senator Joe Manchin III, a centrist Democrat from West Virginia, as one of her role models; goes to lengths to avoid criticizing Mr. Trump; and is focusing on priorities for veterans and law enforcement."](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/24/us/politics/kyrsten-sinema-arizona.html) I do not understand why so many people seem to have thought she was a progressive at the time she ran for Senate (not talking about you, but a lot of people on Reddit say that she ran as a progressive). It was very clear that she was a conservative if you looked at her voting record.


JuanofLeiden

Green party activist means very little tbh.


meekonesfade

This is exactly what I said to my husband! Like, great, the bill will now oass the house because every Democratic rep, who should have been a sure vote to begin with, is voting for it. Whoopdeedoo. Now we just have to get it past the joke that is the senate.


-Umbra-

You’re just completely wrong. Manchin and Sienna are both senators. The bill has been introduced by the senate. The bill was never in doubt to pass the house.


jgjgleason

I’ll throw bills at a challenger as long as Mark Kelly wins re-election by a margin of +2. Otherwise I’m gona wait and see the ‘24 environment before making a call.


nutmeggerking

Lol, fuck that noise. She needs to be primaried.


CZ-Bitcoins

You got remember. You risk splitting the vote that way. And that's how you get ab even worse situation with a republican in office.


nutmeggerking

How do you split the vote with a primary?


CZ-Bitcoins

I meant the general obviously. All it takes is a few percent from some person who refuses to drop to throw off big races. I feel like we need ranked choice or some other election reform before we can push for more parties.


nutmeggerking

Where did anyone suggest more parties? It's rather clear that the talk is of primarying her.


cinderparty

It’s a primary?


razor_sharp_pivots

So sick of this bullshit argument. If a candidate does not support the things that I believe in, they don't get my vote. I don't give a fuck about splitting the vote or any political calculations. Represent me if you want my vote.


Nevermere88

That's how we wound up with three Republican Supreme Court picks and potentially a Republican controlled House and Senate later down the line. At a certain point we have to be politically pragmatic if we want to stop the Republicans from eroding democracy. A Manchin Democrat is far preferable to a Trump Republican.


CZ-Bitcoins

This 100%. The stakes if Republicans get control are literally the collapse of our democracy. Once we secure our democracy let's worry about seizing the means of production and removing our current police state.


razor_sharp_pivots

Voting for the lesser of two evils and expecting the lesser evil to do good is how we got here. Evil is evil is evil is evil. View for evil, get evil. Not a difficult concept.


Nevermere88

And that's how you become an electorally irrelevant rump party that can do little more than shout loudly as democracy withers away.


razor_sharp_pivots

We don't have an electorally relevant party that is capable or gives a shit about maintaining real democracy. We don't have an electorally relevant party that represents me or fights for any of the things that are important to me. Our "choices" for parties are the reason that the largest group of eligible voters in this country are the disenfranchised non-voters. I don't blame to third party candidates for splitting the vote and I don't blame voters who won't vote against their own interest. The status quo, the bought and sold politicians, and the voters voting against their own interests and expecting things to change in the ways they want are the ones responsible for our withered husk of a democracy.


Nevermere88

Voters vote for candidates that suit their interests, that's called the primary system, the problem is that your positions are nowhere near as popular as you think they are.


jgjgleason

I get the sentiment, but if Arizona does not continue it’s trend leftward it is far better to keep a shitty D than replace her with an R. Incumbency can be powerful and the 2024 senate map is Fucking awful for pro-environment candidates.


nutmeggerking

If Arizona Democrats think she should be ousted, then that is the right move. This limp-dicked fear of Republicans being a justification for keeping shitty Democrats is a huge problem. Sinema might be the worst Democrat we have had in the last 30 years (at least people like Manchin are up front about who they are) and you are somehow willing to defend keeping her past her current term. What does that say about where your standards are?


StraightConfidence

Came here to say this. She and Manchin really aren't liberal enough to have the D after their names. The Republicans get rid of the weak links, and if we want to win, we need to do the same.


TranscedentalMedit8n

Not Manchin. Trump won WV by almost 40% in 2020. The question is Manchin or one of the most conservative R’s in the whole Senate.


gibsonsg51

Do you even know what’s in the bill to determine what’s “right”?


Chidling

It’s pretty decent by most measures. If the goal is to reduce emissions by 50% in 2030, this bill apparently reduces emissions by around 40%. So like 80% of the way there give or take. Obviously these are just guesstimates.


dorisdacat

No they just heard it was **THE BIGGEST CLIMATE DEAL IN DECADES** from the corporate media.


gibsonsg51

And what else are they going to try to hide in this bill that will inevitably ensure it won’t pass?


CaiusRemus

It’s almost certainly going to pass.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

She represents a purple state, why should she be progressive in her views?


dubiousadvocate

She was elected as a progressive. She didn’t do her 180 until after she was in office.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

You mean after she was in office representing a purple state? Isn’t she supposed to represent her constituents?


dubiousadvocate

Yes she is. The Progressives she lied to, the Progressives GOTV and got her elected. Those constituents. These days her are constituents are corporations and hedge fund managers.


Chidling

She’s been a centrist since her times in the House. Arizona was much redder then and her district was also competitive. Did progressives vote for her? Yes. She didn’t win only off Progressive voted though. She won off the independent and moderate voter too. That being said, she’s voting much more conservatively than she needs to be.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

It’s weird then how relative to her states partisan lean (R+8) she is the 13th most popular senator in this congress. Above Bernie, Merkley, Wyden, etc. Seems like her constituents thinks she’s doing a great job. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-every-senator-and-governor-ranks-according-to-popularity-above-replacement/


dubiousadvocate

The people who got her elected don’t think so.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

You mean progressives are the only people who got her elected?


WonderWall_E

Mark Kelly represents the same state and doesn't make concessions to every industry who slips him a dollar at the expense of his constituents. Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff represent Georgia and they don't hold any and all progress over a barrel so they can grandstand nor do the senators from New Mexico. Jon Tester in Montana, Sherrod Brown in Ohio, Bob Casey in Pennsylvania, and Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin don't either. There are plenty of senators from purple states who are perfectly happy acting like something other than a corporate shill. There are plenty of extremist Republicans representing purple states as well (notably Johnson, Portman, Burr, Thillis, Rubio, and Scott). From an electoral perspective, representing one party exclusively in a purple state doesn't seem to have stark consequences. A better question is why should we put up with this type of duplicitous jackass in our party?


Sharkbait_ooohaha

Because the Democratic Party has many more types of people in it than left wing progressives? Left wing progressives are actually a minority in the Democratic Party.


WonderWall_E

I'm not asking for a left wing progressive (though that would be great). I'm demanding that we get out a poorly disguised Republican vulture who is only interested in advancing her own career by sabotaging reasonable legislation. There's quite a bit of a difference.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

She voted with Biden 94.1% of the time which is higher than Catherine Cortez Masto, Jacky Rosen, Jon Tester and of course Joe Manchin. Her views are center left but definitely not close to republican. By contrast the most moderate Republican (Susan Collins) votes with Joe Biden only 71% of the time. You can look at it yourself here https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-congress-votes/


WonderWall_E

It's important to recognize *which* votes she sides with the Republicans on. Anyone who literally dances while gleefully helping Republicans block a vote on a minimum wage increase needs to be thrown the fuck out of the party.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

Ok, going to be tough to get anything done when you are throwing important senators out of the party but I suppose you have a plan to pass minimum wage increases with only 48 senators.


WonderWall_E

We can't pass it with the 50 we've got so I'm not seeing the downside in punishing Sinema for her backstabbing. It's also worth noting that people made [exactly the same argument](https://www.salon.com/2010/08/11/primaries_colorado_2010/) (that purging the party of moderates would kill any chances of electoral victory) when Republicans primaried all of their moderates in 2010. Fast forward 12 years and they have had incredible successes with a party focused on maintaining cohesion among members and advancing even the most extreme versions of their preferred outcomes. They have a stranglehold on the courts for the foreseeable future, and the best the Democrats can do is bitch from the sidelines as their own members hamstring them. Leaning into the base worked for Republicans and there's no reason to think it wouldn't work for Democrats. We're never going to get a big enough majority to overcome the Sinemas and the Manchins unless we deliver on some meaningful legislation like minimum wage and we're never going to deliver on that until we get members in line. The threat of a primary is how you do that.


Sharkbait_ooohaha

Well first off all if you kick Sinema and Manchin out of the party you then don’t have a majority and can’t confirm Supreme Court noms, pass this current IRA bill or the past Cares act bill so we’d be much worse off. Secondly you are dramatically misunderstanding the political calculus of the last few years. The republicans pivot to their base was possible because of Republicans electoral advantage in the Senate and Electoral college due to bias towards small, rural states (plus alittle bit of gerrymandering in the house) with that advantage the republicans can win the presidency and the senate while losing the popular vote by 2-4%. Playing to their base helps them shore up their electoral advantage at the expense of losing purple states. That’s why dems currently have 8 senators in GA, MI, NV, and AZ, 1 in OH, 1 in PA, 1 in Wi, etc. Those are all republican leaning states (purple) that democrats have won senate seats in because republicans moved to the right. This strategy works for republicans because of their inherent advantages but it will not work for democrats because they can’t afford to lose those purple states. The democrats would do much better by having a large tent party which would allow moderates who are alienated by the Republican Party but aren’t on board with progressive politics. This includes pro-life, pro-business and pro-gun democrats that currently vote for the Republican Party because of vitriol from people like you against non-progressive dems. It’s not a bad thing to have diversity of opinions in your party!


dorisdacat

Kelly is a terrible neolib pos who doesn't even want the filibuster touched.


Wildera

And it will feel good but then you will lose that senate seat


WonderWall_E

Mark Kelly won in the same state and he doesn't pull this kind of fuckery. It's entirely possible to win Arizona without electing an asshat like Sinema.


razor_sharp_pivots

What good is having a democrat in a senate seat if they vote with the Republicans on every issue?


Pessimist2020

>Senate Democratic leaders say they have reached an agreement on the party’s major climate and economic bill with Kyrsten Sinema – the centrist Democrat whose opposition remained a major hurdle to passing the most ambitious US climate legislation yet. Sinema, the Arizona senator seen as the pivotal vote, said in a statement that she had agreed to eleventh-hour changes in the measure’s tax and energy provisions and was ready to “move forward” on the bill. The Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer said on Thursday that lawmakers had achieved a compromise “that I believe will receive the support” of all Democrats in the chamber.


jetstobrazil

Definitely not celebrating until both her and Manchin vote. Also still need to primary both of them. Also these bills now are way more harmful to the environment now than they were before we had secured their votes, naturally. Just unbelievable that a climate bill, gives our tax money to fucking gas companies making record profits and destroying the planet, and we have to be happy about it, because it could have been worse.


ThMogget

Everyone take notes. Manchin and Sinema need primaried. They aren’t centrists. They are fossil fuel industry plants.


dorisdacat

What is there to celebrate even if it passes, it will do hardly anything for the environment, and mandates more drilling and pollution.


ramy2019

I hate Manchin but let's get real he is in West Virginia. I really doubt any progressive can win there, that place is super republican


jetstobrazil

Yet progressive policies are extremely popular in West Virginia. If you get the right candidate, who will support the very neglected working class, they could absolutely win in West Virginia.


ramy2019

I like your optimism, I mean it could happen. It is just that a lot of people are so hyper partisan that just having a D next to your name is a curse. Not saying it cant happen, just saying it will be rather difficult. Manchin is a rarity to be honest, he was governor and other things so people know him very well. Let's hope a progressive can win


jetstobrazil

I agree it won’t be easy, but if you can communicate the message well with solid policies you will implement and point out the many chosen failures, working class denials, and self serving actions of Joe Manchin, even hyper partisan people could very well decide that it couldn’t be any worse to give it a try. Shutting down right wing talking points isn’t difficult if you speak truthfully.


Chidling

Ok but we’re taking about a state where a majority of people agree with those right wing talking points. Without Manchin in WV, we would’ve have got zero in climate change legislation. This reconciliation bill, however, would do wonders.


jetstobrazil

It will do wonders for oil companies. It will do little, but agreeably more than nothing, in the climate change fight.


Chidling

Repeat Project from Princeton says this will reduce emissions to 40% below 2005 levels. It’s good. It doesn’t fulfill every single goal that environmentalists want but stopping domestic production, for example, is a small pill to pay if you look at overall emissions.


jetstobrazil

Right, and we’re at around 32% below those levels now, and the US, Biden specifically, has promised to be at 50-52% below those levels by 2030. So falling quite a bit short of those promises. And I wouldn’t call Biden an environmentalist by any stretch of the imagination. If our wind production, for instance, wasn’t tied to first making sure that we sell 60 million acres of offshore land to oil companies first, every single year, those numbers would go up. If we similarly didn’t have to open up millions of acres onshore for drilling and fracking and gas pipelines, before we were “allowed” to invest in more solar and wind. Those numbers would go up. There is also zero reason to be subsidizing and giving tax breaks to oil companies, in the amount of billions of dollars, on top of the tax breaks they receive every single year, who are among the most profitable in the world.


Nevermere88

The policies are popular in the abstract, it's when you get down into the details that they become very unpopular to the average West Virginian voter. It's important to note that Trump won in West Virginia by 38.9 points, that doesn't bode well for a progressive candidate. Manchin is one of the last of the old guard Democrats, he represents a wing of the party that doesn't really exist anymore, primarying him doesn't result in a progressive senator from West Virginia, it just means some Trump pick wins there. Manchin is irreplaceable, there's not a single other Democrat who could win in West Virginia.


jetstobrazil

Biden isn’t a good candidate though, he didn’t even talk about how he was going to help anyone. I agree, that if your platform is, I’m not Trump, you will lose West Virginia. But if you can explain why the Republican candidate, and Joe Manchin are failures for the working class, and enumerate the policies you would be working toward to help the working class, I definitely think it can be done. Nobody is irreplaceable


Nevermere88

West Virgians just aren't receptive to the class argument, they don't view themselves as part of an abstract maligned underclass at odds with the rich, but rather as individuals with a moral agenda. Class issues haven't been salient since Reagan and the Moral Majority, we live in a post-materialist poltical landscape. West Virginians might be amenable to certain economic policies in the abstract, but their view of how they should be implemented is going to vary significantly from a progressive, and they are much more likely to place social issues at the forefront of their poltical concerns. There is no secret working class identity that can be activated if only someone would have the right rhetoric, West Virginians simply don't prioritize economic issues. If we keep pretending that this is the case, we will lose. Biden talked extensively about how he was going to help Americans, that was a major part of his campign. Biden had a slew of polices that he has planned to and has implemented, the main argument was never "I'm not Trump," but rather "I'm a reasonable bipartisan who is going to push for policy that helps the average American."


Mcdonnel1252

Every republican runs on su} orting the working class there, of course its a lie but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.


AwesomePurplePants

IMO the bigger problem is limited resources. Why go after the effective Republican who’s popular with his electorate and will at least come to the table to negotiate when you could go after Ron Johnson, Marco Rubio, or Michael Bennet?


AnimaniacSpirits

>Also these bills now are way more harmful to the environment now than they were before we had secured their votes, naturally. What? >gives our tax money to fucking gas companies making record profits and destroying the planet, and we have to be happy about it I don't see any money going to gas companies in the bill.


jetstobrazil

Maybe because you didn’t look. Manchin whittled down a number of strong environmental measures into almost nothing and removed universal pre-K, medicare expansion to cover dental, vision, and hearing benefits, tuition-free community college, in-home care for elderly, affordable housing funds. It gives huge tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies amounting to billions of dollars, on top of the tax break they get every year, plus makes it mandatory that we sell up to 60 million acres of public waters each and every year to the oil and gas industry before the federal government can approve any new offshore wind development. How does that make any sense? Plus a brand spankin new gas pipeline that’s running straight through hometown West Virginia. Over 700 million acres of public land and waters in total are now being given up to the fossil fuel industry for oil and gas drilling…..in the “climate bill” A good climate bill is not applauded by the fossil fuel industry CEOs all over twitter. They should not be happy when we make a climate bill, and they definitely have no reason to receive **more** of our tax dollars, when they’re making it hand over fist every single day, ruining the planet.


AnimaniacSpirits

I did look https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1X2PORZp5JzP2yWbdUSbXphElIGPEOlJNI-T12gz7n1s/edit#gid=313301748 Where are the tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies? I know he whittled down those other provisions but we are talking about the climate. And this bill contains about 80% of what was in BBB in regards to the climate. Who gives a fuck what fossil fuel companies say? Why are you listening to them in the first place? Has it entered your mind they might be LYING? They still clearly support climate deniers in Congress who don't want this bill to pass, they are just positioning themselves in bad faith for shareholders.


[deleted]

"Climate provisions: The deal would be the biggest climate investment in US history. It would slash US greenhouse gas emissions 40% by 2030" https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/15/politics/biden-build-back-better-manchin/index.html


jetstobrazil

The US: hasn’t invested anything in climate CNN: it’s the biggest climate investment ever! It doesn’t slash them by 40% from here until 2030, it slashes them 40% from 2005 standards by 2030, of which we are currently around 32% and of which the US, Biden specifically, has promised to be at 50-52% slashed by 2030. I’m not saying it’s nothing, I’m saying it should be better.


[deleted]

Given the sheer amount of money that opposes addressing climate change and anything the Democrats try to pass to help and until Democrats have a supermajority without the likes of Manchin and Sinema, it's a great step in the right direction and should be celebrated by anyone who cares.


jetstobrazil

Fair enough. I also feel it should also continue to be rightly criticized for its inadequacies. I’ll be happy to celebrate when it passes.


tinacat933

So the billionaires are still getting their tax loophole I assume


Secunda_Son

They always will. Saving the planet either means giving them what they want or eating them. Those are your choices.


Marvelous_Margarine

I'm starving, what do they taste like?? Hamburger and ketchup I assume.


nibbles200

More like salty leather.


Yvaelle

I Can't Believe Its Not Beef Jerky!


nutmeggerking

Except this doesn't save our planet. It gives us the illusion of saving it. So we pass this bill and then ignore climate change bills for another decade or two. Same way that voting for Biden in the primary was with the hopes of him ousting Trump and giving us another 4 years of complacent comfort. It's simply not close to good enough and I wish we would stop celebrating it like we fixed climate change. We need to frame it as a decent first step.


pkulak

This bill does not ignore climate change at all.


nutmeggerking

I didn't say that though


dorisdacat

It mandates drilling an fracking on our federal land before the bullshit other stuff comes in to play. It is a gift to fossil fuel...even if we cut emissions we will be supplying the world all the crap to destroy the planet instead.


Vladimer_Trump

its a good first step - no one is declaring victory over climate change - but let me ask this - what are you doing today to contribute to this effort?


nutmeggerking

>but let me ask this - what are you doing today to contribute to this effort? "Let me deflect with some loaded questions that are pointless." Funny enough, I think I'm doing more than the average person. Rarely eat meat. In the last year, I replaced our gas furnace with a heat pump and had solar panels put on my roof. I also don't drive a car and use a bike instead.


razor_sharp_pivots

The time for meaningless first steps is over. We either take real action, or we burn the whole thing down. Those are our options. And what have you done to help? Seems to me like you're working against the cause.


Vladimer_Trump

I live in a 565 sq ft house - my air conditioner is set to 76 degrees - and I am preparing my pellet stove for the winter - I car pooled to go grocery shopping today and am going out now to pick some vegetables from my garden. you? plus I may or may not add to the compost heap today.


razor_sharp_pivots

You should probably shut that AC off and save the world.


FamousAmos87

Well…I’ve never tried human before…


coswoofster

From Democrats who are not actually democrats.


chootchootchoot

Environmental legislation always get cucked, and if somehow a genuine one makes it through it becomes an unfunded mandate immediately by the next budget


Nevermere88

That's not really true, there is a long history of sucessful environmental legislation in the U.S., you just have to get the right people in Congress and the Whitehouse to get it.


Chidling

Kind of. It’s a carve out for businesses who use this to depreciate equipment purchases. In return, there is an stock buyback tax on corporations. On balance I think the stock buyback tax is worth more because it generates more gov revenue and the purpose of stock buybacks is to benefit shareholders. Therefore, a tax on that would hit people the most when they’re trying to cashout.


comfort_fiend

She needs to be voted out- she's a fake Dem.


monjorob

This is extremely good news. I am ecstatic about the prospects of us actually making a meaningful positive impact on the future of the planet. I really can’t believe it


dorisdacat

You obviously have not read the bill, it increases oil production, fracking and pollution! Hardly an EV will qualify for the bS rebate. Gives away 2 million acres of federal land to polluters, even a coal pipeline for Manchin...You are ignorant, sorry...


Chidling

The numbers don’t really lie and while you’re right about all those things, the benefits to fossil fuel are peanuts compared to the emission reductions achieved. If you don’t think giving up a few dimes is worth receiving a couple dollars in return, then I have nothing to say.


monjorob

You haven’t read it either, because it’s not fully written yet. Like it or not our world still runs on petro chemicals. Do you want to get those chemicals from American companies, or autocratic governments that share none of our values? Look at how Russia has Germany over a barrel right now. We must make investments that will make progress. For every one dollar going to the oil industry, there like 23-24 that going to renewables and electric cars etc in the bill. Not it’s not perfect, but few laws are.


dorisdacat

Dude, the planet is on a red alert, and only an idiot would call a bill the mandates increase oil, fracking, and coal, good for the planet. From what I read, the bill only cover sub $55k EVs, made in America with American parts. That excludes nearly every EV, and they know it. The pharma part only hits 10 drugs and starts in 2032. Doesn't cover insulin. Do you know dangerous abandon oil fields are, how fracking poisons our drinking water? The dander of mountain top removal for coal, and the waste associated with it? If we are looking into the future why in fucks name do you call doubling down on pollution a win?


UndyingQuasar

Yay! Thank you, Empress Sinema! We plebs are grateful for your Grace's generosity.


Konukaame

Letting her leave the carried interest loophole open. Which is... fine, whatever, but Manchin said earlier in the week that it was non-negotiable for him. Heaven help me if I wake up tomorrow morning to a statement from the other asshole saying that he won't support the bill anymore because of this.


portalsynapse

Manchin and Schumer are on board. It’s all up to the senate parliamentarian now


pkulak

He was the one mostly negotiating with her. It'll be fine. Looks like the income from that provision was replaced, which may have been what he was looking for.


Godspiral

There is presumably 1 republican who would support a 1 line bill that eliminates the tax loophole. Christian Nazis would not send them death threats for it. 2017 corporatist tax giveaway act even has a large contingency of republicans that favored taking out the loophole, as it was in the text of the bill, also by coincidence during most of its discussion.


goplantagarden

It must be nice to always be the hold out. Everyone has to kiss your ass and offer all types of incentives. And all while the world burns.


ludefisk

I understand some of the cynicism here but, sheesh - some of you folks need to take a step back and celebrate for once. Then if the bill actually passes and is signed, celebrate even harder. This is a huge deal - [it's the biggest climate bill](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/08/manchin-climate-bill-carbon-emissions-2030/671049/) EVER. Bigger than the Clean Air Act and anything else that's passed. It covers a huge number of carbon and environmental justice issues, and it does it super well. It gives us a fighting chance at reaching 50% below 2005 levels, and it does so with the likely support of the entire Democratic caucus. And it happened at the last possible second - in all likelihood, the Democrats wouldn't have another chance to pass such a bill for at least another decade, and we all know that would be far too late by that point. This is a hat trick. It's a coup. It is a GIANT victory. So please, for the love of god, celebrate for once. A lot of people have spent a lot of blood, sweat, and tears to make this happen, and any other political movement would be ecstatic about such a victory. But the environmental movement just seems determined to continue grumbling, come hell or high water.


VexRockwood

I wont celebrate until I actually see it happen though. Thats the point. I know how American politicians operate and its to get re-elected. When we actually reduce emissions and start meaninful progress towards phasing out fossil fuels ill consider it a victory. Until then its just another promise from an instituionally untrustworthy source.


Nevermere88

Isn't that the whole point of being a politician, though? To represent your constituents interests so you get elected again? You can't exactly pass environmental legislation if you get voted out.


VexRockwood

No the point is to not represent interests but to make good on them. You have to actually go from campaign promises to legislation. And until this makes noticeable changes its still a promise.


meekonesfade

I hear what you are saying. The problem is that I was excited for this to pass months ago before these two reps sabotaged it. Backstabbers.


Chidling

Well, what happened was that McConnell said Republicans wouldn’t pass the CHIPs bill if Dems tried to pass anything using Reconciliation. Manchin came out and said he agreed with McConnell. So the Senate passes the CHIPs bill with Republicans voting for it because the GOP assumed no other legislation was on the table. Then a few hours later Manchin said jk, I actually worked a deal out with Schumer. Then they unveiled this massive package that they obviously worked on months in advance for Climate change and other things.


Lyrical_Satyrical

Democrats secure breakthrough with paid Republican puppet posing as Democrat.


tech01x

The EV tax credit part of this deal is structured wrong… it is seemingly written by Ford and GM lobbyists. There isn’t a high enough minimum battery requirement which will be abused.


dorisdacat

all the parts have to be US made, which excludes every car sold today, too


KryptikMitch

Shes a liar so we will see.


scabdul

get this jackass outta office. she's a bad actor and it's the worst.


Rustys_Beefaroni

Okay, so what was her bribe? Is there a company in Arizona that produces unwanted junk mail and needs to be protected so they can keep cutting down trees to send me an unwanted coupon to a dry cleaners that I will never use?


ADTP28

My personal favorite is AT&T sending a person door to door leaving ads for internet in plastic bags. They're littered around my neighborhood.


JoshStubbs85

Until this stupid bitch changes her mind when it’s time to vote


portalsynapse

No need for the misogyny


[deleted]

[удалено]


portalsynapse

It’s a gendered attack that is only being made because she’s a woman. There are ways to disagree with women without calling them a stupid bitch


zombie32killah

I’m okay with amoral piece of shit.


portalsynapse

Agreed, much less sexist


zombie32killah

I appreciate you calling out sexism in a place where it’s not a popular stance.


portalsynapse

Thanks! Could care less about the downvotes


zombie32killah

I know I get that. I work construction and call out this shit at work. It sucks but it’s worth it.


portalsynapse

If only everyone did what you do then such casual sexism and racism would be a lot less prevalent


VexRockwood

Except its literally not sexism lol. Bitch is used interchangeably. The times it is used to describe a womab doesnt automatically make it sexist.


VexRockwood

Bitch isnt a term uniquely leveled against women. Calling someone a bitch isnt any more sexist than calling a guy a dick (another term thats used interchangeably).


BidetTester23

she is stupid and a bitch. She lied about her positions. she has been nothing but a let down and a sell out. she refuses to meet with her constitutants. She started in the green party but now acts like a republican. She's an unnecessary thorn in the side. She acts like a mini Manchin. And is selling out to lobbiest. Calling her a stupid bitch seems accurate


[deleted]

[удалено]


worotan

What part of their comment said or in anyway implied that she did those things because she is a woman? None of it. Stop with the divisive right wing shit.


[deleted]

[удалено]


worotan

Except the person didn’t “point out that women’s brains aren’t developed.” What on earth was that ridiculous fantasy of persecution you indulged yourself in about? Why criticise them using right wing rhetoric, trying to make it seem like they are right wing? Because you’ve just found a way to act holier than thou, and to try to impose middle-class peoples ideas of politeness. Like I said, shove your divisive shit and your shitty attitude. You’re the only one on here who has posted nasty right-wing rhetoric. Which is quite telling.


BidetTester23

Yeah I see what you're doing. And thats not what's happening here. Stop fighting with allies because Im speaking in a way that represents your version of a purely egalitarian world. Stop defecting away from the con artist this liar is. This evil piece of shit that is no way holding up to her campaign promises.


portalsynapse

If you’re calling women you disagree with a “dumb bitch”, you should be a better ally


BidetTester23

yeah I don't extend people preferential treatment because of their gender.... that would be sexist


branded

Calling her a cunt isn't.


JoshStubbs85

Seems like most people disagree with you


portalsynapse

Not really a surprise on Reddit (or in the real world) unfortunately


KeitaSutra

When did she change her mind?


JoshStubbs85

Google “Sinema votes no”


KeitaSutra

Lol it’s not hard…when did she change her mind? If the Google is so easy then just post the link.


MyNameIsMud0056

Thank Christ. Now push it through before she changes her mind.


Dr_Tacopus

I’ll believe it when it passes


sdwdqw65

For once Manchin and Sinema didn’t shit in the punch bowl.


glynnjamin

Not sure how the "The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022" gets called the "Climate Bill" when it has billions of tax breaks for the largest polluters and won't do anything to see them drastically reduce their emissions. It will, in fact, increase emissions from now until 2031 when this disaster finally ends. By then, many of us will already be displaced or dead. But ya...the climate bill.


dorisdacat

Opens up 2 million acres to the oil polluters, and encourages fracking, so we can send it overseas. But to read the comments of the corporate media junkies being EXCITED over this, sickens me to no end.


dorisdacat

Read the details and listen to the critics like Bernie, this deal MANDATES drilling and even a coal shale pipeline (in [W.VA](https://W.VA) for Manchin), nearly every EV sold in the US will be exempt from the tax breaks for EV's, 2 million acres of federal land given to big oil. Big Boost for fracking and polluting our aqua-fires now that our rivers are dry. Only a handful of seldom used drugs get negotiated starting 2032. I wish this page would stop parroting corporate media and wake the fuck up. Joe Manchin is pushing this because he is the largest recipient of fossil fuel money, and owns a god damn coal mine!


Daveruapehu

Her and that other fake dem show that politicians cans be bought./


thehourglasses

It’s way too late for this man.


konalight

What crowbar has been used to alter the position of Sinema in the past month?


travalavart

So did hedge fund managers. What a totally predictable allegiance.


AffectionateElk3978

Hoping for Ruben Gallego to take her privileged smile off her face.


Iancreed

She’s kind of a bimbo, but at least she did all right here 💯