Biden/Harris Legislative/Policy Discussions - Now with a Republican House starting 2023

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

[LD0506]

[88Comrade2000]

The only way any climate legislation is going to work; is if it produces immediate jobs.   None of this retraining ****.  People have to see that the plans to address the climate; are producing jobs that are in equal or great in pay; to the jobs that will be lost?

 

If they don't do that; they will not get buy in. Alot of states depend on fossil fuel related jobs.   

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

 

If they don't do that; they will not get buy in.

I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure even if they did just that - they would get the buy-in.

[goskins10]

14 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

The only way any climate legislation is going to work; is if it produces immediate jobs.   None of this retraining ****.  People have to see that the plans to address the climate; are producing jobs that are in equal or great in pay; to the jobs that will be lost?

 

If they don't do that; they will not get buy in. Alot of states depend on fossil fuel related jobs.   

 

Climate legislation has to be part of infrastructure. You can easily marry the two show improved infrastructure, create jobs and at least begin addressing climate control. If both the dems and reps would actually try to work together they could get a bill done. But right now, neither side wants to give other any wins. Unless that changes very little of anything else will change. 

Edited January 26, 2021 by goskins10

[DCranon21]

 

Biden to reopen ACA insurance marketplaces as pandemic has cost millions of Americans their coverage

[Momma There Goes That Man]

 

[spjunkies]

 

[China]

 

[88Comrade2000]

I think Biden will have a tough time to get anything done.  It's not just GOP obstructionism.  He's going have problems within his own party.

The progressives are going to pull him towards Bernie.  The moderates and conservatives will push him the other way. Though, are there really any conservative Dems other than maybe Joe Manchin?  Given the narrow majority in the house; the various voting blocks in the Dem party are going to use their power to attempt to get what they want.  Nancy may be able to get things through the House but Chuck is going to have a hard time in the Senate.  

 

Whatever they are going to do, just do it. Do reconciliation if you have to.  Odds are strong the GOP wins back the House at least, in 22.  So, Joe has a limited window to get anything done.

[spjunkies]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[mammajamma]

Biden was one of my last picks in the primaries, but i'll admit that he's on fire so far. both with EO's and covid/vaccine re-organization. yeah, a lot of those EO's don't go far enough (we need to eventually end ALL private prisons), but he's definitely doing all he can to make the right changes without needing legislative/state action. very impressive first week, especially with almost zero cooperation during the transition

[PleaseBlitz]

6 minutes ago, mammajamma said:

Biden was one of my last picks in the primaries, but i'll admit that he's on fire so far. both with EO's and covid/vaccine re-organization. yeah, a lot of those EO's don't go far enough (we need to eventually end ALL private prisons), but he's definitely doing all he can to make the right changes without needing legislative/state action. very impressive first week, especially with almost zero cooperation during the transition

 

I don't think it's a matter of his EOs "not going far enough."  The President simply does not have the power to end all private prisons because the federal government does not run all private prisons.  

 

I haven't read the whole thing, but an addition to phasing out private prisons, which will take forever because they are massive facilities that have to be totally reorganized, I wish he would issue an EO that phases out all of the private companies that provide services to prisoners.  For example, prisons have outsourced food services companies, banking providers, telecom providers, etc.  They are all expensive AF because they have to pay a ton of their profits in kickbacks to the people actually running the prison (that give them access) and because its not like prisoners can choose another service provider or, you know, leave.  So they get ****ed.  So like, if a prisoner's family wants to send him money for a razor at the commissary, the bank takes $30 for the deposit (which is free for non-prisoners) and the $2 razor costs $20.  You could implement this much faster because each thing is on a much smaller scale than the entire prison.

 

Anyways, just a rant because I've had to deal with this. Here is a primer:

 

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

[mammajamma]

28 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I don't think it's a matter of his EOs "not going far enough."  The President simply does not have the power to end all private prisons because the federal government does not run all private prisons.  

ya i was trying to say the same thing in my post (in response to critics saying they don't go far enough. not that i believe that). thanks for the additional info, and definitely agree on phasing out all of the profit centers from private prisons as a great way to start

[Larry]

26 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I haven't read the whole thing, but an addition to phasing out private prisons, which will take forever because they are massive facilities that have to be totally reorganized, I wish he would issue an EO that phases out all of the private companies that provide services to prisoners.  For example, prisons have outsourced food services companies, banking providers, telecom providers, etc.  They are all expensive AF because they have to pay a ton of their profits in kickbacks to the people actually running the prison (that give them access) and because its not like prisoners can choose another service provider or, you know, leave.  So they get ****ed.  So like, if a prisoner's family wants to send him money for a razor at the commissary, the bank takes $30 for the deposit (which is free for non-prisoners) and the $2 razor costs $20.  You could implement this much faster because each thing is on a much smaller scale than the entire prison.

 

The one I heard a radio report about was that there were companies who specialize in gouging on prisoner's phone calls.  The way it worked was:  

 

1)  Prisoners (if they're good) were allowed to make a phone call a week to their family.  

2)  But, the phone is connected to a prisoner-only telephone company.  

3)  All calls are collect.  And the company blocks the federally-required ability to dial a code to select a different carrier, or to use prepaid services.  

4)  For LOCAL calls, the phone call is $20 for the first minute, and $5/minute after that.  

5)  And they're collect calls.  So the prisoner's family gets stuck with this bill.  People who have not broken a single law.  

 

[PleaseBlitz]

49 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

The one I heard a radio report about was that there were companies who specialize in gouging on prisoner's phone calls.  The way it worked was:  

 

1)  Prisoners (if they're good) were allowed to make a phone call a week to their family.  

2)  But, the phone is connected to a prisoner-only telephone company.  

3)  All calls are collect.  And the company blocks the federally-required ability to dial a code to select a different carrier, or to use prepaid services.  

4)  For LOCAL calls, the phone call is $20 for the first minute, and $5/minute after that.  

5)  And they're collect calls.  So the prisoner's family gets stuck with this bill.  People who have not broken a single law.  

 

The calls aren’t collect, the inmates have to put money into an account up front in order to make the calls. That money is generally sent to the inmates by family, so they are stuck with the bills (and sending money to a prisoner is, itself, expensive). Otherwise you are correct, and there are 2 companies that dominate the prison phone market. 

Edited January 27, 2021 by PleaseBlitz

[NoCalMike]

Approx a week in and the Biden era is going about as I expected.  The legislation and executive orders have admittingly been a little more left of center than I expected in some cases (but a lot of them likely also still have to hold up to court reviews).  Conservatives are running around speaking of impending doom & destruction of America while the progressives are saying Biden's policies don't go far enough.  Looks like we are going through Obama 2008-2010 all over again, in other words, back to normal. 

[China]

What are these things called facts you speak of?  Coming out of the mouth of the president?  How extraordinary!

 

Fact-checking 7 statistical claims from Biden's (quite factual) economic speech

 

President Joe Biden recited a flurry of figures in a Friday speech in which he urged Congress to pass the $1.9 trillion pandemic relief package he calls the American Rescue Plan.

 

We fact-checked many of the statistical claims Biden made in the speech -- and found Biden was highly factual, though there are some nuances worth noting. Here's an assessment of seven of the claims we looked into:

 

Job losses in education
Biden noted that his plan includes funding for local governments to keep critical public employees on the job; his predecessor Donald Trump and other Republicans resisted this kind of direct aid to state and local governments. Biden said: "Over the last year, more than 600,000 educators have lost their jobs in the cities and towns."

Facts First: This figure is roughly accurate, but it relies on a broad definition of "educators."

 

Click on the link for the rest