Reconcilable Differences

Shortly after Congress passed President Biden’s $1.9 trillion pandemic rescue bill earlier this year, Mississippi senator Roger Wicker issued a celebratory tweet about the bill’s provision of nearly $30 billion to support the restaurant industry.

Here’s the thing, though: Wicker and every other Republican had voted against the legislation. His tweet and similar statements from his GOP colleagues can and should of course be written off as typical political hypocrisy, but they suggest a likely preview of how the current political debates over the President’s latest spending proposals will play out—and also why Republicans should, frankly, not worry too much about them.

Since these bills, through the magic of a parliamentary maneuver called “reconciliation” (which we’ve all had to learn way too much about), can pass with simple majority support, they are likely to squeak through Congress with only Democratic votes. Once this happens, feckless Republicans can brag to their constituents about all the goodies they’re receiving while still proudly proclaiming their anti-Biden credentials. Win-win.

And while I hate to be giving Republicans any advice, I take comfort in the fact that the “win-win” alluded to above includes the country as a whole.

Solipsistography: “Democrats Push a Budget to Fulfill Biden’s Aggressive Economic Ambitions”

Talking ‘bout the Weather

President Biden has proposed major new rules and regulations to drastically reduce climate emissions in the US. Unsurprisingly, Republicans oppose this legislation. Senator Turtle (R-KY) complains that China produced more emissions than the US, and so this legislation would harm America while doing nothing to really solve the problem of global warming.  This confuses me: I thought Republicans denied that global warming was a thing.  I guess it's only a thing when caused by China.

The critics who point out that meaningful action on climate change will be difficult if not impossible unless big polluters like China get on board are not wrong: This is a worldwide problem that calls for worldwide action.  But claiming that the US shouldn't do anything unless China and India and other big polluters do is inane.  We can only control what we do.  We can urge other countries to follow suit, but only by taking action ourselves can we have any moral authority to make these demands.

More to the point, saying the US shouldn't do anything to mitigate climate change unless China agrees to the same type of actions, is analogous to a person saying that he knows that smoking and lack of exercise and poor eating habits are going to kill him, but since his neighbor also has bad habits, he refuses to change his behavior.