Latest / Pod Save America / “The fun part.”

Transcript

“The fun part.” · Pod Save America

• 0:20
  Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau.
• 0:22
  Speaker 2: I'm Dan Pfeiffer.
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: On today's pot, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema still won't
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: back Joe Biden's agenda despite exclusive polling showing that Build
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Back Better is extremely popular in some of the most
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: competitive House districts. We'll get to that later. Then Dave
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: Wasserman from the Cook Political Report talks to Dan about
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: the new redistricting maps that have been drawn so far
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: and what they might mean for control of Congress. Just
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: before we started, Dan said this conversation is Made him hopeful. No, no, no, no, no.
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: That's not what I said. I said it was the
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: most optimistic conversation I've had about politics in the last
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: couple weeks.
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: Okay, that's something. We're grading on a curve. It's a
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: tough day here. We're heading into some rough waters. I'm
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: trying to put a positive spin on it for the
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: folks who are tuning in today. One quick note before
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: we start. There's only one episode left of This Land.
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: This season, award-winning journalist Rebecca Nagel takes you inside her
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: year-long investigation into a series of custody battles. over Native
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: American children that exposes a larger plot by right-wing forces
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: to dismantle American Indian tribal rights. Just like last season,
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court will once again hear the case in
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: this season. So catch up on all the details before
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: the court's new term begins. I know you're probably thinking
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: it's the Supreme Court. It's not going to go well.
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: It went well last time because on Native American rights,
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: there's some interesting coalitions on the court with some justices
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: that you wouldn't normally expect who support Native rights. Anyway,
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: you can binge the first seven episodes of This Land
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: Now before next week's finale, wherever you get your podcasts.
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: It is a fantastic season. Rebecca does some just incredible journalism,
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: and it's a really, really compelling story, so check it out.
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: All right, let's get to the news. Dan, I got
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: my phone here in my hand and my Twitter feed
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: up because what we're doing right now is we're recording
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: at 10 a.m. Pacific time, 10.30 a.m. Pacific time, Thursday,
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: and the news is moving rather quickly.
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: But it's going nowhere.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: But it's going nowhere quickly. But we are hoping this
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: is an episode that doesn't feel completely stale by the
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: time it is in your ears later this afternoon on Thursday.
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: We need to record various, reacting to various scenarios that
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: have not yet happened, like the very famous and outdated
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: Saturday Night Live skit. Gerald Ford's death.
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: Gerald Ford died today. Let's see if anyone gets that.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: And yeah, so things could change rather quickly. As of
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: right now, Joe Biden and the Democrats have figured out
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: how to avoid a government shutdown. That's good. Everything else
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: is fucked currently at this moment. Republicans keep filibustering any
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: attempt to raise the debt ceiling. which must be done
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: by October 18th in order to avoid a catastrophic recession.
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: So that's one thing. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema keep
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: refusing to negotiate the details of Joe Biden's Build Back
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: Better plan despite hours of meetings at the White House
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: this week. And progressive Democrats in the House keep saying
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: they'll only vote for Biden's bipartisan infrastructure bill if Manchin
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: and Sinema agree to pass Build Back Better, a vote
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: that is scheduled to happen today. Here's the latest from
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: Pelosi this morning on how she feels about all this.
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: We're on a path to win the vote. I don't
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: want to even consider any options other than that. We
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: will have a reconciliation bill. That is for sure.
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: Look, I think that Joe Manchin is a great member
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: of Congress, of the Senate. This is the fun part.
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: A few moments ago, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer was
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: asked if he's confident that it will pass.
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: His answer?
• 4:05
  Speaker 3: Nope.
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: Thanks, Steny. Thanks. Glad everyone's on message. Glad the message
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: coordination is tight. I'm glad that Nancy Pelosi thinks that
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: this is the fun part. All right, let's start with
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: the vote on the infrastructure bill in the House, which, again,
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: as of this recording, is still supposed to happen today.
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: If you were the distinguished congressman from Delaware, because let's
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: say that you haven't made it to the Senate yet,
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: you haven't beat Chris Coons or Tom Carper yet, You're
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: the congressman from Delaware. How would you vote?
• 4:41
  Speaker 2: I would vote no.
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: What would you need to see before voting yes?
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: The Senate has to pass a budget reconciliation bill.
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: Nothing less than passage. Legislative text? No. Mansion and cinema?
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: Do a press conference? Bells and whistles? They make a promise?
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: They swear a blood oath? No, nothing?
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: There's no point in voting before that. The BIF is
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: not going anywhere. Our roads and bridges have been crumbling
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: for decades. Even if you were to pass it tomorrow,
• 5:10
  Speaker 2: there's not a bunch of like guys, men and women
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: in orange vests going out to fix roads. Like that's
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: not what's happening right away. It takes time. And so
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: just wait, see what the Senate does. Keep your leverage
• 5:21
  Speaker 2: to that point. I don't even know why the House
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: is drawing up bills or like none of it matters.
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: What matters right now is what Kyrsten Sinema and Joe
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: Manchin can agree to with Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: and Bernie Sanders and the rest. And everything else is
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: just noise. And so they should pass it. And this
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: is the leverage. If you want your BIF, pass a
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: reconciliation bill. If I were a member of Congress, I
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: would not trust that Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema would
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: be able to execute on a deal that they came with.
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: There's just too many moving pieces. So pass a bill,
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: send it to us. If it's good enough, we'll pass
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: Biff too. We'll do it on the same day. It'll
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: be cool. Then everyone can have their champagne.
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: Can I play– I'll play devil's advocate.
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: Godheimer's advocate.
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: I was going to say the distinguished gentleman from the
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: state of no labels addressed the house.
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: So I've seen some of the never-Trumper Republicans have made
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: this argument, right? They're like, here's the deal. Why– Would
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: Democrats have this big win, this big bipartisan infrastructure bill?
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: Joe Biden could pass it. Look at this. I got
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: a bipartisan win. Lots of money, projects, hard hats, construction
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: projects all over the country. You can go home to
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: your district and talk about how you delivered the goods
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: for your district. We're paving roads, all this kind of
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: good shit. Why not take that, take that win, and
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: then keep working on the reconciliation bill? Because it doesn't
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: seem like that Manchin and Sinema care that much about
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: the BIF, I'm still calling it the fucking BIF, care
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: that much about the infrastructure bill dying, or that's not
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: like leveraging any real pressure on them. And they're either
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: going to support a reconciliation bill or not, but it's
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: not going to have anything to do with whether the
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: infrastructure bill lives or dies.
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: Well, Congressman Gottheimer, I do not trust you. Put aside
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: Sinema and Manchin for a second. You also need Josh Gottheimer,
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: And you have a three seat majority in the house.
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: And so I, so that's one point, right? I think
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: the leverage does matter as it's maybe not as significant
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: as we want. We, I think we've determined that at
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: least thus far, Kiersten Sinema's her, how would I say this?
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: Her affection for her own reputation. is as an iconoclast,
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: seems greater than saving the planet or anything else. But
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: I think it still matters and you don't want to
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: take– it may not be all the leverage, but it's
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: some leverage. I do– like I saw that tweet from
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: Tim Miller about this point last night. I do think
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: it was probably.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: And I should say, by the way, not just Tim Miller.
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: I heard the hacks, hacks on taps all talking about this.
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: Both hacks? No, it was Gibbs. Gibbs was not as
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: into this. Obviously, Mike Murphy was. And then here's a Democrat,
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: Terry McAuliffe. I want to get to the McAuliffe thing. Yeah,
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: but we should just tell everyone. Terry McAuliffe running for
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: governor of Virginia. Very tight race. said that the Democrats
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: should just pass the infrastructure bill now. And he also
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: supports a Build Back Better bill, but he also said
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: not $ 3. 5 trillion, which guess what? We're not getting $ 3. 5
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: trillion at this point anyway. But anyway, that's for later.
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: But so there's a bunch of people saying this. Yeah.
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: So in hindsight, the better approach to this from everyone
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: involved would be to not trash the bipartisan infrastructure bill.
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: It is a fine bill. It is a good bill.
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: It is actually a pretty amazing validation of Joe Biden's
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: theory of governance that he ran on. And many people,
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: no one on this podcast, of course, but many people
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: doubted he could actually do. But if we lived in
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: a vacuum, if we did not know about another bill
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: that would extend the child tax credit and raise taxes
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: on the wealthy and do amazing climate change things and
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: do all these other things, we would– The BIF or
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: whatever would be a huge win. It'd be a giant win.
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: There would be signing ceremonies. There would be columns written
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: about how amazing a legislator Joe Biden is and getting
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: this done. All of that would all would have happened.
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: But because it has been trashed as a lobbyist written bill,
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: written by big oil and all of that, the ship
• 9:47
  Speaker 2: has sailed on. Like if they were to pass BIF
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: today and Biden were to do a signing ceremony, the
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: press coverage would suck. It would not be good. It
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: would not be triumphant. And we do know with infrastructure,
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: it's not like it's going to dramatically change everyone's lives
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: by the time the election comes or that a few
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: weeks will matter. And so I don't think we don't
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: live in a world where passing Biff would be treated
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: as a big win for Biden right now. We put
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: all our chips on the table. It's get both things.
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: And it's a huge, gigantic win for the party, the country,
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: the planet, or it's a loss, whether it's a half
• 10:21
  Speaker 2: a loss or a full loss is still a loss.
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: I'll say two things. One, infrastructure bill is also very popular.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: We're going to get to the polling that we have
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: in a minute, but especially in competitive host districts, people
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: love infrastructure. The reason they love infrastructure is because they
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: don't like having crumbling roads and bridges and infrastructure also
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: creates a lot of jobs, right? So it is completely
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: insufficient to I would be with one of those progressives
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: in the House voting down the bill until I get
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: billed back better as well. So it's completely insufficient. And
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: I think when you say that, as the proponents of
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: the infrastructure bill do, that it also contains some climate provisions,
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: environmentally friendly provisions. Yeah, sort of, but not really.
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: I mean, compared to something else. Like it is like
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: woefully inadequate on climate, even though there's some small climate
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: stuff in there. But you're right. It's a good job
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: creating bill. that we tried to pass something like it
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: in the Obama years, many different times, talked about the
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: importance of infrastructure. Great. But again, Joe Biden ran on
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: this broader agenda. And, you know, we're talking a lot
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: about Manchin and Sinema, but one reason, back to like,
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: you know, the argument, we should just take the win
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: on the Biff. You're starting to see a lot of
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: mainstream Democrats and even moderates in the House, moderate Democrats,
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: Frontline Democrats, vulnerable Democrats say we need to pass both
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: of these bills. They believe we need to pass both
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: of these bills because if infrastructure fails and build back
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: better fail, it's not progressives who are going to suffer
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: in the midterm election. They're in safe districts. They're going
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: to be fine. You know who was going to suffer
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: when they have to go campaign on passing absolutely nothing?
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: A lot of these moderates, a lot of these people
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: in really competitive House districts, because they're going to have
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: to campaign in 2022 and the voters are going to say, oh,
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: what did you do for me? Democrats controlled the White House,
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: the House and the Senate for two years. What did
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: you deliver? What are they going to say? Nothing? Because
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: we just didn't want to pass the president's agenda, President
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: Joe Biden? No, of course not. That's why a lot of, like,
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: you don't even, even Godheimer, you don't hear them saying like, no, no, no,
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: it's just, it's Biff or nothing. They all, most Democrats
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: in the House, just about like 90% of them plus,
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: all want to pass both the infrastructure plan and Biden's
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: Build Back Better plan. The problem remains, as it has
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: been from the start, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, right?
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: Yes, but I think on an even more meta level
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: than their just unwillingness to say what they want, engage
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: in good faith and all of those things. The problem
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: here is, like everything else, it's the filibuster. The problem
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: is that the only– and I do think one important
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: point here that we cannot get lost in this is
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: the biggest problem is, is that the Republicans, who have
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: 50 of the 100 Senate seats and nearly a majority
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: in the House, not a single one of them wants
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: to do a single goddamn thing to help a single person.
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: And so we have to do this all by ourselves.
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: And because of the filibuster, we have to do all
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: of it in one bill. And that makes it so
• 13:38
  Speaker 2: much harder. Like, Because the coalitions are so intermingled ideologically
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: and regionally and where every single thing is tied together.
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: So you got the small handful of pro-pharma Democrats who
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: are sinking the Medicare negotiation plan. That's bad because people
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: need cheaper prescription drugs. We should be a sane country
• 14:00
  Speaker 2: and negotiate better prices. But it also means there's now
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: $ 700 billion that can't be spent on something else. So
• 14:06
  Speaker 2: now that affects climate, or that affects the child tax credit.
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: Is it permitted?
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: Is it limited?
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: Does it not happen at all? And it is a
• 14:12
  Speaker 2: massively complicated thing to do. In the best of scenarios,
• 14:17
  Speaker 2: when you're doing zero margin of error anywhere, it becomes
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: like it's just so hard. And that is because the
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: filibuster is pushing us to do it all in one bill,
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: which is insane, right? Just absolutely insane.
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: So- As of this recording, we do not know whether
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: Pelosi will still hold the vote and then watch it fail,
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: which if she holds the vote, I don't see how
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: it passes.
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: Absent a deal.
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: Absent a deal. Because Jayapal, Pramila Jayapal, who chairs the
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that at least half her members
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: are still ready to vote no if there's no deal.
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: which would be enough to sink the bill because it
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: does not look like the Republicans will give us the votes,
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: even the Republicans who want to pass the infrastructure bill
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: because Kevin McCarthy is saying don't help them. Why would
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: you help them? Because why would they do anything constructive
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: for anybody? So if she holds the vote, it looks
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: like it will fail absent a deal or she'll delay
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: the vote. I actually, again, speaking before we know what happens,
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: I don't think that either outcome, there's much difference between
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: either outcome personally, whether the vote fails or whether she
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: delays the vote. Do you? No, I.
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: Have it.
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: I don't know. The press will treat each, whatever outcome
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: as a, you know, Armageddon. Right. And they'll, but like,
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: I actually don't think either outcome matters all that much.
• 15:36
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: It'd be Pelosi has never lost a vote. She's called like,
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: that has been a point of pride of her as
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: long in her many years as speaker. And so I
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: would be shocked if they don't have the votes and
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: they have the vote anyway. And there was some, I
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: heard Stephanie Murphy, a moderate member from Florida who was
• 15:53
  Speaker 2: part of the group of centrists who work with Josh
• 15:56
  Speaker 2: Gottheimer and sort of screwed this whole process up, say,
• 15:59
  Speaker 2: if we don't have the vote, that's like a violation
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: of trust. I cannot understand why you would want– if
• 16:04
  Speaker 2: you are so passionate about this bipartisan infrastructure bill, why
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: do you think it would help your cause to lose
• 16:10
  Speaker 2: the vote, to actually call it and lose it? It
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: makes no sense to me.
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: It makes no sense to me either. So Jayapal also
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: said when she came out of Pelosi's office this morning,
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: we're in the same place and we're willing to stay
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: here all weekend if we need to see if we
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: can get a deal. You could imagine something where the
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: vote goes down today or the vote is delayed today
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: and then finally Manchin, Sinema, the progressives all get in
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: a room over the weekend and try to hash something out.
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: Although Josh Gottheimer has predicted yesterday– that the bipartisan infrastructure
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: bill would pass. He said, quote, we'll be drinking a
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: nice glass of champagne over here Thursday night. So we
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: shall see. We shall see.
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: I mean, he's going to drink that champagne because we
• 16:49
  Speaker 2: have now spent seven of the first 18 minutes of
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: this podcast talking about Josh Gottheimer, which might've been the
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: goal all along.
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: All along. All right. So the, Here's the thing. Here's
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: why it's sort of silly. Josh Reinhemmer is not a
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: real player. He's just doing whatever Kirsten Sinema and Manchin
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: tell him to do.
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: Or Mark Penn.
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: They are the people calling the shots here, which is
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: why we're going to move to them. What do Joe
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: Manchin and Kirsten Sinema want? The question that we have
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: been screaming into the void since January. We still don't know.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: No one knows. It's not clear that Joe Manchin and
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: Kyrsten Sinema know. Despite hours of meetings with Biden and
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: other Democrats, neither of them have told anyone what level
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: of spending they'd support, what kind of taxes they'd support,
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: or any other details that might help move this bill along.
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: Manchin released this crazy long statement late Wednesday that didn't
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: say much of anything new. Key line is, while I'm
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: hopeful the common ground can be found that would result
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: in another historic investment in our nation, I cannot and
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: will not support trillions in spending or on an all
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: or nothing approach that ignores the brutal fiscal reality our
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: nation faces. He goes on to say he wants the
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: bill to only help those in need, and he wants
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: to undo the Trump tax cuts. All right, so there's
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: this very confusing statement that Manchin puts out Wednesday night.
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: Everyone's very upset about it because he says, you know,
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: passing $ 3. 5 trillion is the definition of fiscal insanity and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: and everyone goes nuts. So then this morning, Politico finds
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: a memo that Manchin and Schumer both signed on July
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: 28th that basically outlines exactly what Manchin wants. In the
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: Build Back Better bill, even though Minchin has not said
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: that publicly. And the memo says he wants it to
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: be $ 1. 5 trillion. He wants the debate on it to
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: start October 1st. He wants means testing for every program.
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: That means making sure that the wealthiest don't benefit from
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: a lot of these proposals. He wants on energy and climate.
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: He wants to make sure that all the investments you
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: make in climate reward clean energy, but don't penalize fossil fuels,
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: which is a fucking bummer. He wants the corporate rate
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: at 25 percent. He wants to raise income taxes to
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: thirty nine point six percent at the top rate, raise
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: capital gains and carried interest. So fairly good on taxes,
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: even though not quite where Biden and the Democrats are
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: on the corporate rate. So that's what Manchin wants. And
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: what do you think about this whole thing that like Schumer,
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: so Schumer basically signs the bottom of this memo and
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: then says, writes also, I will try to push Joe
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: to change some of these. Who is he writing that to?
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: What's the promise? I don't understand. Anyway, this memo has
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: been sitting there since July 28th. Everyone's been like, what
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: does Joe Manchin want? He writes these fucking inscrutable op-eds
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: and statements. Meanwhile, we have a very clear memo here
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: the whole time. I'm so confused about this.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: I just, I... I feel like we almost have to
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: apologize to Joe Manchin. He's definitely wrong on what needs
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: to happen.
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: Elijah, there's your SEO for today. Pfeiffer apologizes to Joe Manchin.
• 19:52
  Speaker 2: I mean, he did like what our frustration has been.
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: He wouldn't say what he wants. And he said what
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: he wanted. And he wrote it down in pretty significant
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: detail and then got the Senate majority leader to sign
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: the piece of paper.
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: Isn't it his fault, though, for forgetting what he wrote
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: down or not being able to fucking articulate what he
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: wrote down? What is wrong with this man?
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: Well, you know, he.
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: I don't... Is he playing with the full deck here?
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: I do not know. I mean, I.
• 20:15
  Speaker 2: But he did today.
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: He.
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: had some sort of press engagement and people asked him like,
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: why didn't you say anything? He said, I was trying
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: to uphold my end of the agreement.
• 20:23
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: So what's the agreement? Hush, hush on everything. Like don't,
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: don't even tell your colleagues.
• 20:30
  Speaker 2: That's what I'd like to know more of. Like, what's
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: the point? Like, this is, we're going to try to
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: do this behind closed doors and don't like keep your
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: cards close to the vest. I don't, I don't know,
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: but he like, here's what I can't figure out for
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: the life of me is Joe Manchin wrote down what
• 20:43
  Speaker 2: he wanted. Why is Joe Manchin and Bernie Sanders and
• 20:47
  Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and Kyrsten Sinema and Joe
• 20:50
  Speaker 2: Biden in a fucking room together working this out?
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: This is what I've been saying for months. Put them
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: all on the almost heaven on Manchin's houseboat. Fucking pull
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: up the anchor. Send them out to sea. Don't let
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: them come back until the deal is done. Just keep
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: them out there.
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is... Through all of this, whether it's Manchin, Sinema,
• 21:10
  Speaker 2: these House moderates, the centrists, Gottheimer, the people who sank
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: the Medicare thing, it's like everyone has to take a
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: step back and look at the big picture here, which
• 21:21
  Speaker 2: is we're not going to agree on all the details.
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: Joe Manchin is going to be way more conservative than
• 21:26
  Speaker 2: we want him to be. Kyrsten Sinema is going to
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: be way more difficult than we want her to be.
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: We're not going to get everything we want. We won't
• 21:29
  Speaker 2: even get probably most of what we want, which is
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: what happens when we have a 50-seat Senate majority that
• 21:34
  Speaker 2: depends on a guy who represents. a state that Donald
• 21:39
  Speaker 2: Trump won by nearly 40 points. We're not going to
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: get what we want here. Everyone, stop fucking around. Get
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: your heads out of your asses and go figure it out.
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: Because the stakes could not be any higher. This is
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: our last chance to do something about climate change, potentially.
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: Our last chance, our best way to try to protect
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: the majority from this group of fucking lunatics who are
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: trying to come in here and steal the next election.
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: And it's just like, why are we communicating by vague
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: statements and secret agreements and tweets and just figure it out?
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: It's hard, but it's not as hard as we are
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: making it.
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: No way to run a railroad, Dan.
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: Is that a saying?
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, of course. I don't know. Let me know if
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: I'm just old. I don't want to ignore the substantive
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: implications of Manchin's memo. This has been a problem, not
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: just for us, but all Democrats throughout this entire process
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: talking numbers and politics and negotiations and keep forgetting about
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: what the fucking bills are going to do. So at $ 1. 5 trillion...
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: And I saw Jeff Stein from the Washington Post tweet
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: about this. That would only pay for, I should say only,
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: the full extension of the child tax credit, which has
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: already basically cut child poverty in half over the last
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: several months. And to have that permanent would be quite something.
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: And then the climate provisions. That would leave out all
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: the education provisions and all the health care provisions, which
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: is really bad. Now, there's a lot of mix and
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: match there. Maybe you don't make the child tax credit permanent.
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: You extend it for a couple more years, and then
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: you use the rest of the money on some education
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: and health care, whatever. But it's a real– you would
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: really have to start scaling back a lot of the
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: proposals at 1.5. Now, Manchin was also asked at this
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: press gala, is 1.5 that your final offer? You will
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: never go above 1.5. And he gave some wiggle room.
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: He did not draw any red lines. So maybe you
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: could see this getting to 1.9 to, I don't know,
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: but it's certainly not going to be 3.5, which is
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: something that we've known for quite a while now.
• 23:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah, there's been definitely an expectations management problem among everyone involved.
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: And I think part of it comes from everyone was
• 23:49
  Speaker 2: so blown away by the success of the American Rescue
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: Act process, where it's like Joe Biden asked for $ 2 trillion.
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: He got $ 2 trillion. And yeah, Joe Manchin did some
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: annoying things on means testing. And Kyrsten Sinema did a
• 23:59
  Speaker 2: few annoying things. But we got what we wanted. This
• 24:01
  Speaker 2: is amazing. And everyone's like, Democrats have learned all the lessons.
• 24:04
  Speaker 2: We're going to be big and bold and not afraid.
• 24:07
  Speaker 2: And we forgot that. And I think what we lost
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: in that was that was a unique situation. And it's
• 24:14
  Speaker 2: sort of, if you look at the last many years
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: of Congress, sort of the Affordable Care Act and the
• 24:19
  Speaker 2: Trump tax scam are the exceptions, not the rule. Everything
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: else significant that has been done has been done in
• 24:26
  Speaker 2: the middle of a crisis facing a gigantic deadline that
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: would have dramatic impacts, right? Tax cuts expiring, taxes going up, default.
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: And so there's no real deadline here. The fact that
• 24:38
  Speaker 2: we're having this conversation about the vote tonight, that is
• 24:41
  Speaker 2: a fake deadline. That isn't something that Josh Gottheimer and
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: the centrists asked for. It means nothing. They'll say, well,
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: the surface transportation authorization expires. You know what happens tomorrow
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: if we don't pass that? The roads don't close, people.
• 24:54
  Speaker 2: It's a fake thing. You can put it in the
• 24:55
  Speaker 2: CR and pass it tomorrow. It's not real. This is
• 24:58
  Speaker 2: a completely fake deadline. And so that is one thing
• 25:01
  Speaker 2: I think that we– it is worth stepping back from
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: the brink when you read all of the apocalyptic news
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: coverage that is likely to come tomorrow, which is this
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: is a setback. Time is never your friend when you're
• 25:11
  Speaker 2: trying to pass a bill. Like there's some metaphor about
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: fish and smelling if you leave it out too long.
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: You never want to leave members of Congress too much
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: time alone with their thoughts. Like bad things will happen.
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 25:23
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: Idle hands. Idle hands.
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: But next week is just as good as this week.
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: And Joe Manchin did say in that weird contract that
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer signed and told no one that he wanted
• 25:33
  Speaker 2: to start on October 1st. That's tomorrow, people. Let's get
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: to work.
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: I know. The other thing Joe Manchin said during this
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: press gaggle today, he said, I've never been a liberal.
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: I'm more of a conservative Democrat. If you want to
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: pass a $ 3. 5 trillion package, elect more liberals. And I
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: was like, yeah, he's right. Yeah, he's he's right. And
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: like we spend a lot of time with Joe Manchin's thinking.
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: What are Joe Manchin's motivations? We can like rap. It
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: doesn't really matter at the end of the day because
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: we can't do anything about Joe Manchin at least until
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: 2024 and probably ever. All right. He he has a vote.
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: You can yell at him. He still has the vote.
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: You can run ads against him. He still has the vote.
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: And it is possible that. that there is no hidden
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: secret dark motivation to all what Joe Manchin does, except
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: the fact that he is a conservative Democrat, that he's
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: with us on some things, but he's just not with
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: us on everything else. That doesn't make him a good
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: guy or a worse guy. It doesn't matter. It just makes,
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: that's what he is. And that's the rules of the
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: Senate and the laws that we have right now. And
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: it fucking sucks. But if we want to change it,
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: then yes, we have to elect more liberals.
• 26:44
  Speaker 2: And I think that's a really important point about Manchin,
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: because in a lot of cases over the years, you
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: have Democrats representing red areas. And they are personally much
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: more progressive than they can be and keep their seat.
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: Joe Manchin, and then they retire, they lose, and all
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: of a sudden, they're like, I know I never said
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: it before, but Medicare for all, great, right? Or it's
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: just they are unburdened. And that happens sometimes when people
• 27:09
  Speaker 2: decide not to run for re-election. They are unburdened of
• 27:12
  Speaker 2: the constraints of the electorate of their state, and they
• 27:15
  Speaker 2: will take some tougher votes or more progressive votes. I
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: think you're right. Joe Manchin is a conservative. He is
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: a conservative Democrat. He is further to the right from
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: the median of our party than just about anyone else,
• 27:26
  Speaker 2: median of our party in Congress. And if he were
• 27:30
  Speaker 2: to– I often think like if Joe Manchin has– it's
• 27:36
  Speaker 2: always been assumed Joe Manchin would retire in 2024.
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 27:40
  Speaker 2: But now he has given some indication he may run
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: again and I sort of thought– well, Whatever person convinced
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: Joe Manchin that he can win in West Virginia in
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: 2024 is one of history's great villains. But that's not
• 27:50
  Speaker 2: actually true. He is almost certainly going to lose. I'm
• 27:53
  Speaker 2: sorry to say that. But I don't think if Joe
• 27:56
  Speaker 2: Manchin announced tomorrow he's not running for election, he'd turn
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: around and do a bunch of progressive shit. I don't
• 28:00
  Speaker 2: think that's who he is.
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I agree.
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: And this is what we're stuck with.
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: He'd probably go be a lobbyist somewhere and make a
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: bunch of money. And everyone would be like, see, he
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: told you and be like, yeah, no, that's just, he's,
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: he told us, he told, and he's like, that's who
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: I am. What are we going to do about that?
• 28:14
  Speaker 2: I think one of the, just on that mansion thing, one, the,
• 28:16
  Speaker 2: I think one of the rules, I think that for
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: the rest of our time in the majority that we
• 28:20
  Speaker 2: all have to abide by more is we should, we
• 28:22
  Speaker 2: have to pay less attention to this, to the things
• 28:24
  Speaker 2: Joe mansion says, because they're very confusing. And, more attention
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: to the things that Kyrsten Sinema is not saying. Like
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: that is one of the things that she has been
• 28:33
  Speaker 2: super silent through all of this.
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: Great segue. I was going to, I was just about
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: to get this because everything that we've been saying about
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: Joe Manchin, very little of it applies to Kyrsten Sinema
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: because she is in a completely different political environment being
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: a Senator from Arizona. What the fuck is she doing? Like,
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: What is her excuse for pissing off Democrats? Now, again,
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: what does Kyrsten Sinema want? We don't have a memo
• 28:57
  Speaker 1: that she and Chuck Schumer signed, at least yet. At
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: least it hasn't been leaked yet, but who the fuck knows?
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: But from all the reports, she's keeping the cards very
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: close to her vest. She doesn't give these, you know,
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: gaggles like Manchin does. She's very quiet about this. She's
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: been meeting with the White House officials. for like hours
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: and days this week, both with Biden and with the
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: White House staff. So she has been negotiating. She's not
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: telling us. We don't know what her negotiations are. We've
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: heard some leaks that she's where the Democrats are on
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: climate or at least closer to where they are in
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: climate than Manchin is, but further away on taxes. But
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: beyond that, we really don't know much about what she wants. Uh,
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: we do know that there was a new super PAC
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: that launched today to, um, where you can donate, uh,
• 29:46
  Speaker 1: to an eventual primary opponent. So that's something, uh, what
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: do you, what do you think about cinema? Which I'm like, again,
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: Levitt said he's ready to break his finger hitting the
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: act blue donate button, which I have to be honest,
• 29:59
  Speaker 1: I'm getting pretty fucking close to depending on how this,
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: this vote goes.
• 30:01
  Speaker 2: Oh, I am. I am. I don't almost without knowing
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: who the person is. I am supporting whoever's playing. Yeah. Like,
• 30:09
  Speaker 2: I'm sorry. Arizona is not West Virginia, right? It's not
• 30:13
  Speaker 2: like the person. I think the person who is probably
• 30:15
  Speaker 2: most annoyed at Kirsten cinema on the planet is not us.
• 30:19
  Speaker 2: It's not Joe Biden. It's gotta be Mark Kelly. He's
• 30:22
  Speaker 2: just doing his job. He's a moderate. He's got Kyrsten
• 30:25
  Speaker 2: Sinema making every Democrat in the state depressed. Mark Kelly
• 30:28
  Speaker 2: is up for reelection next year. You have her making
• 30:32
  Speaker 2: him look more– she's like setting the barometer of moderation
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: in the state. So now he looks more liberal than
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: he actually is. Like what a fucking disaster. I cannot explain.
• 30:41
  Speaker 2: There is no– there is a political logic as annoying
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: as it is to mention as we just said. There
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: is– I do not understand Kyrsten Sinema's there is not
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: a policy framework for what she wants. There is not
• 30:52
  Speaker 2: a political set of incentives here. It is just, ugh,
• 30:57
  Speaker 2: this is what it is. I don't know.
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: Well, again, it's about things that we have control over
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: and things we don't. There's not much we can do
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: about Joe Manchin is the hard truth. We've said that
• 31:05
  Speaker 1: many times. There's something we can do about Kirsten Sinema. Again,
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: not till 2024, but yeah. And there's a lot of
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: snarky people online who are like, oh, well, she knows
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: her constituents better than online Twitter. It's like, Well, what
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: about Mark Kelly? I keep coming back to that. Mark
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: Kelly won in Arizona. He's pretty moderate. He's not with,
• 31:27
  Speaker 1: you know, progressive Democrats on every issue, even most issues.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: And he's not fucking everything up right now. It is
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: possible to be elected in Arizona as a Democrat and
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: still reflect the more moderate electorate there and not be
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: acting like Kyrsten Sinema is acting. It is completely possible.
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: I totally believe that.
• 31:47
  Speaker 2: I mean, there was a Politico– I think it was
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: Politico profile with Kyrsten Sinema from earlier this year. Like
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: I said, time has no meaning. But it's like she
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: was the first Democrat to win statewide in whatever it is,
• 32:00
  Speaker 2: 20 years or something, which is a notable fact until
• 32:05
  Speaker 2: two Democrats won statewide the next year. It's like big– yeah,
• 32:14
  Speaker 2: it's a state that is getting bluer. She didn't– come
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: up with some magic formula to win. It's just, it's
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: a state that's getting bluer and she won. It's just,
• 32:24
  Speaker 2: I don't know. It's just, I do not know what
• 32:26
  Speaker 2: to do about it. It's hugely problematic. Yelling about it
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: doesn't seem to matter. Yes, we can break our finger
• 32:31
  Speaker 2: giving money to our primary opponent who does not yet exist.
• 32:34
  Speaker 2: That doesn't, it's going to solve any problems right now
• 32:37
  Speaker 2: other than making us feel better, which is a problem.
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: Maybe, maybe, I mean, optimistic take, maybe it puts pressure
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: on her. Um, maybe she wants to be a Senator
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: again and she wants to win. She is. And then
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: the other sort of John.
• 32:50
  Speaker 2: She took the summer off to intern at a winery.
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: Uh, yeah, that I don't even, I haven't even gotten
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: into that.
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: She, she missed votes to run in a triathlon. I
• 32:59
  Speaker 2: think like, it doesn't seem like legislating is her passion here.
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: Living her best life. Uh, I will say the optimistic
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: take is that if she really wanted to kill this thing,
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: why would she be running back and forth to the
• 33:10
  Speaker 1: White House all week with spreadsheets and negotiations? She wants something.
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: We just don't know what it is. So whatever. Brings
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: us to Biden in the White House. A lot of
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: anonymous griping from Democrats on the Hill, as Democrats on
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: the Hill are wont to do, that Biden's not doing
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: enough to land this plane. Is that fair? What else
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: could he be doing?
• 33:32
  Speaker 2: It's inevitable that this criticism would come, right?
• 33:34
  Speaker 3: It is.
• 33:35
  Speaker 2: Whenever something is not going well, it involves the Hill.
• 33:39
  Speaker 2: There will be people on the Hill who will play
• 33:40
  Speaker 2: in the White House. Sometimes that path goes the other way.
• 33:43
  Speaker 2: I don't even– I would like to say, yes, he
• 33:47
  Speaker 2: should be doing more. But what should he be doing?
• 33:50
  Speaker 2: I'm not entirely sure. Like it's like what– I don't– Speech. Yeah,
• 33:55
  Speaker 2: it's like this is.
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: Not a communication– I'm going to say what everyone said
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: in the White House that always made me really mad.
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: Big speech. Let's give a big speech.
• 34:03
  Speaker 2: I know the person who said that the most.
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: Dan. Yeah, it was you.
• 34:07
  Speaker 2: No, no, no. South side of Chicago, Hawaii, Indonesia. Maybe
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: you know that guy. But like I don't– like I
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: guess– I don't– like I can't, yes, do more, solve
• 34:23
  Speaker 2: the problem. I can't really tell you how, like which
• 34:25
  Speaker 2: is a side that it's more complicated than just like
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: more presidential involvement. I mean, he's clearly meeting with the
• 34:31
  Speaker 2: right people. He can't force them to come to an agreement.
• 34:34
  Speaker 2: It's not like he can't– there's no– they're like, be
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: more like LBJ. I was like, I don't know what
• 34:38
  Speaker 2: that means. Do like twist arms. Go to West Virginia.
• 34:42
  Speaker 2: Go to– like that. I don't think that's going to
• 34:44
  Speaker 2: solve the problem here. The one thing that I think
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: the White House could do, and I recognize it's incredibly challenging,
• 34:51
  Speaker 2: is someone needs to make the case for this bill
• 34:56
  Speaker 2: on a– like in a politically compelling way.
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean, I was only half joking about the
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: speech thing. And I'm not just saying this to now
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: get revenge on speechwriters who were in the White House
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: who have to do this because I've been in those
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: poor Van Nuys if he's listening. No, like, and I
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: don't know why they wouldn't have him out there more publicly.
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: The one reason I can think of is Manchin and
• 35:22
  Speaker 1: Sinema said, hey, while we're negotiating, please don't go out
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: there and start just barnstorming the country and giving big
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: speeches because it's going to push us further away from
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: you and we're going to be less likely to have
• 35:31
  Speaker 1: a deal. Like, maybe that happened. But I don't think
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: you need... I think you can give speeches about what's
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: in these bills and how important they are and what
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: the stakes are and what the urgency is without attacking
• 35:43
  Speaker 1: Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Again, we've talked about this before. Like,
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: you can... start attacking the people, the special interests who
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: are trying to stop this bill. Billionaires who don't want
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: to pay more taxes, drug companies who don't want people
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: to pay for cheaper drugs, big oil companies that don't
• 35:59
  Speaker 1: want to transition to clean energy, that don't want the
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: country to, like, there's a whole speech out there you
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: can give about why the country, there was a report
• 36:06
  Speaker 1: yesterday that the meeting between Manchin and Biden was Biden
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: just talking to Manchin about all the reasons that the
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: country desperately needs these policies and build back better. Tell
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: the rest of us. You know, give a big speech.
• 36:19
  Speaker 1: I mean, look, I keep thinking about what we did
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: around ACA. And in 2009, in the summer of 2009,
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: when things were looking shitty... right around Labor Day, we
• 36:31
  Speaker 1: gave a big speech to Congress about why the Affordable
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: Care Act was needed. Did we think it was going
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: to change a bunch of Republican minds? No, clearly not,
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: because one of them stood up and screamed, you lie
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: in the middle of the speech. Do we think it
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: was going to change a bunch of minds of Republican voters? Also, no.
• 36:45
  Speaker 1: But what it did is it rallied Democrats around Barack
• 36:48
  Speaker 1: Obama and the Affordable Care Act and all the Democrats
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: in Congress and the House and the Senate that were
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: wavering about that sort of you know, started supporting the bill.
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: And it wasn't just that big speech to Congress. Then
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: he went to the caucuses and sort of gave an
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: off the cuff speech, both the House caucus and the
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: Senate caucus, that was even more effective than the big
• 37:07
  Speaker 1: speech he gave to Congress. So I do think that
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: there is some role for the president to play here
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: in rallying at least the Democratic Party to his side.
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: What do you think? Yes.
• 37:17
  Speaker 2: I mean, yes. Just the situations are– and I think–
• 37:24
  Speaker 2: it's because all the same people are involved, right? So
• 37:26
  Speaker 2: it's like Ron Klain was around back then, right? Mike
• 37:30
  Speaker 2: Donilon was in the vice president's office back then. Jen
• 37:32
  Speaker 2: Psaki and Kate Bedingfield were in the White House back then.
• 37:34
  Speaker 2: So everyone– the situations are not analogous. And the– Not
• 37:40
  Speaker 2: that we had it free and easy. We had bigger margins,
• 37:43
  Speaker 2: more margin for error. We could lose a couple dozen
• 37:46
  Speaker 2: House members and still be fine. The hard part here
• 37:49
  Speaker 2: is we're like, get your message out. It is like 150,000
• 37:52
  Speaker 2: times harder to get your message out in this day
• 37:54
  Speaker 2: and age. And you know, not to be like political playbook,
• 37:58
  Speaker 2: but like, just look at like what Ron Klain's doing
• 38:00
  Speaker 2: on Twitter. Like he's also, they're fighting a battle on
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: vaccine mandates and COVID and you've got the FDA just
• 38:06
  Speaker 2: like fucking up your booster plan. And you have, and
• 38:10
  Speaker 2: you have Afghanistan and you have your members on the Hill, your, your, sorry,
• 38:13
  Speaker 2: your cabinet folks on the Hill, like dealing with, like,
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: there's just so much happening that it's really hard to
• 38:18
  Speaker 2: get lift. You know, could a giant speech to Congress
• 38:21
  Speaker 2: make a difference?
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: Maybe.
• 38:23
  Speaker 2: I think the one thing everyone needs to do, whether
• 38:26
  Speaker 2: it's Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, every Democrat, us, progressive activists, is
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: make the positive case for the bill. Make it for
• 38:36
  Speaker 2: why it matters, why it's important. Lift out of the
• 38:39
  Speaker 2: legislative minutiae. And in every moment, point out that Republicans
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: are unified against this incredibly popular bill. I understand why
• 38:48
  Speaker 2: it's lost in the press coverage. It's totally understandable. Republicans
• 38:51
  Speaker 2: have no say in whether this bill becomes law or not.
• 38:52
  Speaker 2: But in the larger historical rendering of this moment, we're
• 38:56
  Speaker 2: trying to save the planet. We're trying to help people,
• 38:57
  Speaker 2: give people food and shelter. Republicans are doing nothing. And
• 39:00
  Speaker 2: we should call that out. And sort of, and so
• 39:02
  Speaker 2: it's just, it's a special interest in their cronies and
• 39:05
  Speaker 2: the Republican party should be part of the narrative. And
• 39:07
  Speaker 2: the White House can, I'm sure, do more to make
• 39:08
  Speaker 2: that happen. It's just really hard.
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: Again, there's things you can control and there's things you
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: can't control. The White House cannot control all of the
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: stuff that you just mentioned, right? They're fighting on 10
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: different fronts. But Most of them are beyond their control.
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: They didn't ask for a lot of these fights. And
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: getting your message out in today's media environment is fucking
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: brutally difficult. What do you control? You control what the
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: president says and what public events the president does. They
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: can do that. And I would imagine, again, the only
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: reason I think I don't think, like you said, we
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: know all these people. I don't think that they just
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: like haven't thought about this. There must be something about
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: the negotiations that are stopping them from doing from from Biden,
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: from doing more publicly. I would imagine that if the
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: infrastructure vote fails today or gets delayed the next phase
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: of this, you could see Joe Biden saying, all right,
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: I'm going to make a stronger public case. I'm going
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: to make a big speech. Maybe it's primetime. Maybe it's not.
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: Maybe it's to Congress. Maybe it's not. Then I'm going
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: to go around the country. I'm going to sell individual
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: components of this bill. I'm going to make sure that
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: the public is still on our side because the public
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: is on our side because it's a very popular fucking bill.
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: But you could see that being the next phase if
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: they don't reach a deal today or in the next
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: few days. Believe it or not, though. The budget negotiations
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: are not even close to the biggest problem the Democrats
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: need to solve right now. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has
• 40:35
  Speaker 1: warned that the government will run out of money to
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: pay its debts on October 18th, which means that the U.S.
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: will default, which would trigger a global economic crisis and
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: a catastrophic recession here at home. The very easy and
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: completely cost-free way to avoid this is for Congress to
• 40:50
  Speaker 1: lift the debt ceiling, as they have done routinely in
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: a bipartisan fashion for over a century. And Republicans are
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: refusing to do so this time. Why? Because they want
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: to lie to voters by running midterm ads that falsely
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: equate Democrats voting to raise the debt ceiling with Democrats
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: voting to add more debt, which means the Democrats have
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: no choice but to do this on their own. We
• 41:11
  Speaker 1: thought through the budget reconciliation process, which only requires 51
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: votes in the Senate. But Schumer and other Democratic leaders,
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: for some reason, ruled out reconciliation on Wednesday, saying that
• 41:23
  Speaker 1: the process is too long and unpredictable to get done
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: by the 18th. Then today, before we started recording, Schumer said,
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: we are willing to move forward on debt ceiling ourselves.
• 41:37
  Speaker 2: What?
• 41:38
  Speaker 1: What does that mean? What the hell is going on here?
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: I don't have a clue. I have not been able
• 41:42
  Speaker 2: to figure this out for months. It is very strange
• 41:45
  Speaker 2: to me. I... I mean, it's so wild that you
• 41:53
  Speaker 2: have to use the sentence, the US Treasury Secretary said
• 41:55
  Speaker 2: the United States would run out of money on October 18th.
• 41:59
  Speaker 2: We're going to run out of money. And Yellen, in
• 42:02
  Speaker 2: the same testimony, talked about some of the consequences of it. Obviously, recession,
• 42:06
  Speaker 2: skyrocketing unemployment, 50 million Social Security recipients not getting Social Security,
• 42:13
  Speaker 2: troops not getting paid. This is just a gigantic... I mean,
• 42:19
  Speaker 2: it's a disaster of epic proportions. Now, it is not
• 42:25
  Speaker 2: true that you can't do budget reconciliation in time. Is
• 42:29
  Speaker 2: it easy? By the current rules as written, it would
• 42:33
  Speaker 2: be very challenging to get it done in a short
• 42:34
  Speaker 2: period of time. But guess what? The rules of Congress,
• 42:37
  Speaker 2: all fake. They're all fake rules. They can just be
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: changed by a majority of people. We have a majority.
• 42:43
  Speaker 2: We could change them. You could do it. It would
• 42:44
  Speaker 2: not be that hard. What are the Republicans going to do?
• 42:47
  Speaker 2: Who do they appeal to? Nancy Pelosi, who's in charge
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: of the House? Fine. It's a fake thing. Sue us.
• 42:52
  Speaker 2: I don't care. So you could do it. Now, the
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: reason to take it off the table is you have
• 43:01
  Speaker 2: to say there is no out. We're in a game
• 43:04
  Speaker 2: of chicken. We're heading towards the cliff. There's no way out.
• 43:12
  Speaker 2: So maybe– I've been trying to– I've been really trying
• 43:16
  Speaker 2: to figure this out because these people are not dumb.
• 43:20
  Speaker 2: They don't want to default. They've been through this before.
• 43:22
  Speaker 2: So like what is going on here? Maybe they just
• 43:24
  Speaker 2: want to push it as far as they possibly can.
• 43:26
  Speaker 2: At the last minute, they'll say we're responsible and do
• 43:29
  Speaker 2: it by budget reconciliation somehow, by hook or by crook.
• 43:34
  Speaker 2: Or like maybe they will blink.
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: So the Republicans will blink?
• 43:40
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, just think about this, right? I know, like,
• 43:43
  Speaker 2: I just, I think this whole thing.
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: Is- Tim Kaine had the best quote about that today.
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: Someone asked Tim Kaine whether he thought the Republicans would blink.
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: He's like, that's like putting on rose-colored glasses and looking
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: for a unicorn with a four-leaf clover. Hey- Just mixing
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: a lot of different metaphors, but I like where he's
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: going with that.
• 44:02
  Speaker 2: I mean, Tim Kaine, you have lunch with all these
• 44:05
  Speaker 2: people once a week.
• 44:06
  Speaker 1: Again, again, I ask, why aren't you all talking to
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: each other? It's like if Crooked Media operated solely by
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: us talking to each other on the podcasts. And we
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: never had any meetings. That's what Congress operates like that
• 44:24
  Speaker 1: to me. That's what it looks like to me right now.
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: They talk to reporters. They talk to each other through
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: reporters and press releases. And yet these people don't have
• 44:33
  Speaker 1: the discussions they need to have to do their jobs
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: in these private meetings. What is going on?
• 44:38
  Speaker 2: So here's how this could. There are a couple ways
• 44:41
  Speaker 2: this could act. One, default. That's bad. But that could happen.
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: Don't want that.
• 44:47
  Speaker 2: Second is Democrats just blink and do it by debt reconciliation,
• 44:51
  Speaker 2: which is the fakest blink ever. Who gives a fuck?
• 44:53
  Speaker 2: It's not a real thing. There's no concession. You're not
• 44:55
  Speaker 2: doing anything. There's never been a fight with higher stakes
• 44:59
  Speaker 2: about less than this one. No one wants anything. Democrats
• 45:02
  Speaker 2: don't or they're not demanding anything from Republicans. Republicans aren't asking.
• 45:06
  Speaker 2: This isn't like 2011 or 2013. They're not asking for
• 45:08
  Speaker 2: Social Security cuts or Medicare cuts or spending cuts or
• 45:11
  Speaker 2: the repeal of affordable character, anything. They're asking for nothing.
• 45:14
  Speaker 2: They're saying, do it on your own, but we're not
• 45:16
  Speaker 2: going to let you do it on your own. So
• 45:18
  Speaker 2: it's basically we've come down– this critical moment has come
• 45:21
  Speaker 2: down to two options, two primary options here. One is
• 45:25
  Speaker 2: Democrats blink into it by budget reconciliation or Republicans agree
• 45:30
  Speaker 2: to a consent to waive the filibuster so Democrats could
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: just vote 50 votes for it. Like those are the
• 45:35
  Speaker 2: two things.
• 45:36
  Speaker 1: Or a third option, which has been my wild theory
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: about this whole thing, that maybe this has been Schumer's
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: plan all along, that Republicans– refuse to waive the filibuster,
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: but the Democrats use this moment as we are about
• 45:51
  Speaker 1: to default and cause an economic catastrophe to finally convince
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to waive the filibuster, and
• 45:56
  Speaker 1: Democrats use this to get rid of the filibuster. Now,
• 45:59
  Speaker 1: that is me, the filibuster radical from way back when, wish-casting, probably. But, like,
• 46:06
  Speaker 1: I just, the reason I keep thinking about that is because, like,
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: what else has Schumer been doing? It is such a
• 46:12
  Speaker 1: fucking bizarre strategy to me to, like, like, if it's
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: true that it can ultimately be done by reconciliation, Republicans
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: know that. Mitch McConnell knows the rules of the Senate.
• 46:23
  Speaker 1: You're not fooling him by saying, oh, no, it can't
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: be done through reconciliation. Just kidding. It actually can. You're
• 46:29
  Speaker 1: not fooling anyone with that. Where do you do it?
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: I don't understand. So maybe if it really can't be
• 46:35
  Speaker 1: done through budget reconciliation in time for the 18th, because
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: it's a real long process, then the only option really
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: is to get rid of the filibuster. And if And
• 46:44
  Speaker 1: if Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are looking at the
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: options to get rid of the filibuster or let the
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: country default, they're much more likely to get rid of
• 46:51
  Speaker 1: the filibuster than McConnell and the Republicans joining in.
• 46:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that is true. But before people get
• 46:58
  Speaker 2: their expectations out of whack, it'll be like, we're giving
• 47:00
  Speaker 2: the filibuster, we're going to pass the For the People
• 47:02
  Speaker 2: Act and all of that.
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: Yeah, right, right, right.
• 47:04
  Speaker 2: It's going to be a debt ceiling carve out.
• 47:07
  Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 47:07
  Speaker 2: I mean, maybe that's the Camelsons under the tent that
• 47:10
  Speaker 2: starts us on our path.
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: You know, the first one's free, Dan.
• 47:13
  Speaker 2: That's right.
• 47:14
  Speaker 1: They get you hooked.
• 47:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I don't know. It's wild. I do not believe
• 47:22
  Speaker 2: that any of these people will let us default.
• 47:25
  Speaker 1: I agree. There's a lot of reporters completely freaking out
• 47:29
  Speaker 1: about this and they're like, everyone should understand the country.
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: This is the scariest moment yet that we've ever this
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: is the closest we've been to the brink ever. No,
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: it's not. In 2011, we could have defaulted because we
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: didn't have an agreement with the Republicans and Republicans just
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: would let it happen. I firmly believe that Democrats are
• 47:45
  Speaker 1: going to figure out a way to Make sure the
• 47:48
  Speaker 1: country doesn't default. I am not losing sleep over this.
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: Maybe I should, but I'm not losing sleep.
• 47:51
  Speaker 2: If this was Kevin McCarthy in the House, I would
• 47:54
  Speaker 2: be very worried that he would stumble ass backwards into
• 47:57
  Speaker 2: a default. Like the issue wasn't even in 2011 wasn't
• 48:01
  Speaker 2: whether we could get a deal with Boehner and Eric Cantor.
• 48:05
  Speaker 2: It was whether they had the juice to get their
• 48:08
  Speaker 2: members to vote for it. And that almost failed at
• 48:10
  Speaker 2: the last minute because they were too weak and too
• 48:12
  Speaker 2: stupid to lead their party. McConnell, we only need 10 Republicans.
• 48:16
  Speaker 2: You don't need a majority of the majority like you
• 48:18
  Speaker 2: do with the House. And so I think they will
• 48:20
  Speaker 2: figure something out. It's just such a stupid waste of
• 48:22
  Speaker 2: time and energy. And it's going to start affecting people's lives.
• 48:25
  Speaker 2: It's going to affect the stock market pretty soon. That's
• 48:27
  Speaker 2: going to affect people's 401ks and their income and everything else.
• 48:30
  Speaker 2: And it's just dumb.
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's stupid. When we come back, Dave Wasserman of
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: the Cook Political Report talks to Dan about the latest
• 48:37
  Speaker 1: redistricting maps and what they mean for control of Congress.
• 48:49
  Speaker 2: Draft congressional maps are circulating furiously on Twitter. The redistricting
• 48:52
  Speaker 2: process is underway here. To explain it all to us
• 48:56
  Speaker 2: is Mr. Redistricting himself, the U.S. House editor of the
• 48:59
  Speaker 2: Cook Political Report, Dave Wasserman. Dave, thanks for joining us.
• 49:03
  Speaker 3: Hey, thanks so much, Dan.
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: I want to talk about a lot of specifics happening
• 49:07
  Speaker 2: in states. But first, redistricting is your passion. It's your
• 49:11
  Speaker 2: Twitter handle. This is your Super Bowl, your Olympics. It
• 49:14
  Speaker 2: happens once every 10 years. It is here. How are
• 49:16
  Speaker 2: you feeling? How are you doing?
• 49:18
  Speaker 3: No pressure, right? Right. So it's amazing. I feel like
• 49:22
  Speaker 3: redistricting has exploded in the public consciousness over the past decade,
• 49:26
  Speaker 3: in part because it's become existential, right? As voters are
• 49:30
  Speaker 3: more geographically polarized, urban versus rural, than they used to be.
• 49:34
  Speaker 3: As straight ticket voting has hit all-time highs. it really
• 49:40
  Speaker 3: is so important how these district lines are drawn. I mean,
• 49:43
  Speaker 3: they essentially predetermine political outcomes in all but a handful
• 49:49
  Speaker 3: of the most competitive drawn districts. When I signed up
• 49:53
  Speaker 3: for the Twitter handle at Redistrict back in, I think, 2009,
• 49:57
  Speaker 3: I thought I was just signing up to cover the
• 50:00
  Speaker 3: 2010 redistricting round and then I would get off Twitter.
• 50:03
  Speaker 3: Little did I know that redistricting never really is fully resolved, right?
• 50:10
  Speaker 3: There are lawsuits that lasted all through the decade. And
• 50:13
  Speaker 3: in fact, had it not been for democratic lawsuits that
• 50:16
  Speaker 3: overturned Republican drawn maps in Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania,
• 50:21
  Speaker 3: Democrats would not be holding the speaker's gavel right now.
• 50:24
  Speaker 3: Kevin McCarthy would be speaker, not Nancy Pelosi.
• 50:28
  Speaker 2: Do you spend like the nine years leading up to this,
• 50:30
  Speaker 2: like training, like working on spreadsheets, like just doing, drawing
• 50:34
  Speaker 2: fake maps to train, like, like, uh, like a biathlete
• 50:37
  Speaker 2: for the winter Olympics? Like, how does that work for you?
• 50:39
  Speaker 3: You know, this sounds crazy, Dan, but my way of
• 50:42
  Speaker 3: zoning out at the end of the day is to
• 50:45
  Speaker 3: draw maps. And that's been true, you know, since I
• 50:49
  Speaker 3: was a kid, but now there are more high-tech gadgets
• 50:52
  Speaker 3: to be able to do that. And, you know, my
• 50:54
  Speaker 3: favorite app is actually Dave's redistricting app, which people think
• 50:58
  Speaker 3: is me, but I didn't actually build it. Uh, I'd,
• 51:01
  Speaker 3: you know, I've, I've consulted, uh, to, to help with it, but, uh,
• 51:05
  Speaker 3: It's a guy named Dave Bradley, who's a retired Microsoft
• 51:09
  Speaker 3: engineer out in Seattle. And he put this together in
• 51:12
  Speaker 3: advance of the last round. But now it's basically got
• 51:16
  Speaker 3: so much sophistication with the help of his team that
• 51:19
  Speaker 3: it's on par with the most expensive software that has
• 51:22
  Speaker 3: been used by political professionals to draw maps. And so
• 51:24
  Speaker 3: it's really small d democratized the game. Although, of course,
• 51:29
  Speaker 3: this is still the province of insiders in most states.
• 51:34
  Speaker 2: So as the process was getting underway, after we sort
• 51:38
  Speaker 2: of knew the Democrats had not done as well at
• 51:41
  Speaker 2: the state legislative level as we had thought in 2020,
• 51:44
  Speaker 2: there was a lot of fears among Democrats that the
• 51:47
  Speaker 2: redistricting process would cost us the majority in itself. It
• 51:50
  Speaker 2: maybe would put us so far in a hole we
• 51:52
  Speaker 2: couldn't possibly overcome it. You have been– you sort of–
• 51:55
  Speaker 2: I don't want to say poo-poo because it's not poo-poo,
• 51:57
  Speaker 2: but you've been more sanguine about the threat to Democrats
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: than others. Can you explain why that is?
• 52:02
  Speaker 3: Well, look, just because I think redistricting this cycle could
• 52:07
  Speaker 3: be only a minimal gain for Republicans doesn't mean I
• 52:10
  Speaker 3: think it doesn't matter. Because the net effect of redistricting
• 52:14
  Speaker 3: is to reduce the overall number of competitive seats. And
• 52:17
  Speaker 3: we see what's happening in Texas. I'm sure we'll talk
• 52:20
  Speaker 3: about it. But Republicans proposed a map that essentially moves
• 52:24
  Speaker 3: all nine of their vulnerable incumbents into much more solid positions.
• 52:28
  Speaker 3: Republican districts by purging as many Democrats and minority voters
• 52:32
  Speaker 3: from those districts as possible. So that isn't necessarily a
• 52:36
  Speaker 3: seat gain for Republicans, but it's a game of keep
• 52:38
  Speaker 3: away from the Democrats. And so it's a continuation of
• 52:42
  Speaker 3: what we saw in 2011, where Republicans had almost a
• 52:45
  Speaker 3: five to one advantage in the number of districts that
• 52:47
  Speaker 3: they got to draw over Democrats. And what they did
• 52:50
  Speaker 3: was they locked in their gains from 2010, when they
• 52:53
  Speaker 3: had a really great anti-Obama midterm, right? And so they
• 52:58
  Speaker 3: were able to use those lines to preserve power for
• 53:04
  Speaker 3: most of the decade. But I think what happened in
• 53:07
  Speaker 3: 2018 was a couple things. Number one, by eight years
• 53:12
  Speaker 3: into a census cycle, a lot of suburbs have changed.
• 53:16
  Speaker 3: A lot of the best laid plans of partisan cartographers unraveled.
• 53:21
  Speaker 3: because political trends overtake it. And so we saw a
• 53:23
  Speaker 3: number of districts that were drawn by Republicans last time
• 53:27
  Speaker 3: to be safe red seats in places like Atlanta and
• 53:30
  Speaker 3: Houston and Dallas and the suburbs of Detroit that flipped
• 53:33
  Speaker 3: blue when you had this blue wave in 2018. The
• 53:37
  Speaker 3: other component of it was the Democrats got some really
• 53:40
  Speaker 3: good court decisions. They managed to take a majority on
• 53:43
  Speaker 3: the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which overturned the Republican gerrymander in
• 53:47
  Speaker 3: that state that had given Republicans 13 of the 18
• 53:49
  Speaker 3: districts for most of the decade. As a result of
• 53:54
  Speaker 3: the new court-ordered map, the delegation is now split 9-9.
• 53:59
  Speaker 3: And so you have much more politically equitable maps in
• 54:03
  Speaker 3: place in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, than you used to.
• 54:07
  Speaker 2: So I'm glad you brought up Texas because when the
• 54:09
  Speaker 2: Texas map came out, you, among others, remarked that it
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: was not as aggressive as you thought. Democrats, myself included,
• 54:15
  Speaker 2: thought Republicans would try to net as many as three
• 54:18
  Speaker 2: or four seats out of this. But it was, as
• 54:20
  Speaker 2: you said, less aggressive. The history of Texas Republicans is
• 54:23
  Speaker 2: not that they are doing this because they care about
• 54:26
  Speaker 2: democracy or fairness. They have been the most aggressive, certainly
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: in the 2000 cycle. Can you help people understand why
• 54:33
  Speaker 2: they made the specific decision they made in Texas to
• 54:35
  Speaker 2: do this?
• 54:37
  Speaker 3: Sure. So look, I don't think this was a case
• 54:42
  Speaker 3: where Republicans relented much. This is a smart map. I
• 54:47
  Speaker 3: think it's the map that Democrats would have drawn if
• 54:50
  Speaker 3: they were in charge of Texas and the roles were reversed, right?
• 54:54
  Speaker 3: Was it as aggressive as I might have expected? It
• 54:58
  Speaker 3: wasn't maximally aggressive in the sense that Republicans probably could
• 55:03
  Speaker 3: have could have bacon mandered a bunch of districts out
• 55:07
  Speaker 3: from Houston into really rural Texas. And it could have
• 55:10
  Speaker 3: looked totally absurd and they could have maybe squeezed one
• 55:13
  Speaker 3: more district out of it. But there are a couple
• 55:14
  Speaker 3: of constraints on what Republicans were able to design. And
• 55:19
  Speaker 3: the first is the Voting Rights Act. Keep in mind
• 55:23
  Speaker 3: that those districts in South Texas, which are super Hispanic
• 55:27
  Speaker 3: majority seats, Republicans did try, they are trying to flip
• 55:32
  Speaker 3: one of them from a Biden plus two district to
• 55:36
  Speaker 3: a Trump plus three district. And they could be successful
• 55:40
  Speaker 3: in flipping that seat red. But the reason they couldn't
• 55:42
  Speaker 3: draw it into like a Trump plus 15 was that
• 55:47
  Speaker 3: they would need to reduce the Hispanic population in a
• 55:50
  Speaker 3: way that would trigger a Voting Rights Act suit. Now,
• 55:53
  Speaker 3: there still is guaranteed to be litigation, VRA litigation over
• 55:58
  Speaker 3: Republicans map if it's passed. The reason is, 95% of
• 56:03
  Speaker 3: Texas's net growth in the past decade was people who
• 56:06
  Speaker 3: aren't white, including 53% Hispanic growth. And there's not a
• 56:11
  Speaker 3: single new Hispanic opportunity district on the map. There's a
• 56:15
  Speaker 3: new Democratic vote sink in Austin, and it's a Biden
• 56:19
  Speaker 3: plus 53 district. And the reason Republicans needed to draw
• 56:22
  Speaker 3: that was that the Democratic vote growth in the Austin
• 56:27
  Speaker 3: and I-35 corridor is unsustainable for all of their incumbents
• 56:31
  Speaker 3: who represent parts of it. Travis County and Austin were
• 56:34
  Speaker 3: split six ways under the old map. It's still split
• 56:37
  Speaker 3: in a lot of ways this time, but essentially Republicans
• 56:40
  Speaker 3: managed to stuff all these Democrats into one district so
• 56:43
  Speaker 3: that each of their incumbents in surrounding seats gets 15
• 56:47
  Speaker 3: points safer. It's exactly what Democrats would have done had
• 56:50
  Speaker 3: they been in charge.
• 56:52
  Speaker 2: So the thing about this is you use the term,
• 56:55
  Speaker 2: and some of you write on this, called defensive gerrymander, right?
• 56:58
  Speaker 2: Which essentially, as I understand it, trying to do is
• 57:02
  Speaker 2: instead of trying to grab as many seats as you
• 57:03
  Speaker 2: possibly can right now, right? Putting at both risk the
• 57:07
  Speaker 2: court action, which could take it out of their hands,
• 57:09
  Speaker 2: but also sort of as a bulwark against the changing
• 57:12
  Speaker 2: demographics of the state, which are heading in one direction.
• 57:14
  Speaker 2: Is that correct?
• 57:15
  Speaker 3: That's absolutely correct. And back when Republicans drew this map
• 57:18
  Speaker 3: the last time in 2011- they designed these seats with
• 57:24
  Speaker 3: the understanding that they'd probably get more purple over time.
• 57:28
  Speaker 3: And in fact, they did. And it's pretty impressive actually
• 57:33
  Speaker 3: how Republicans just barely managed to hang on in the
• 57:37
  Speaker 3: 2020 cycle. They managed to reelect nine incumbents in districts
• 57:42
  Speaker 3: where Biden got more than 47% of the vote. So
• 57:45
  Speaker 3: had this been left untouched another cycle, I think Republicans
• 57:48
  Speaker 3: might've lost a whole bunch of seats. But now they
• 57:51
  Speaker 3: get to move those seats to higher ground. We may
• 57:56
  Speaker 3: be talking about a similar dynamic at the end of
• 57:58
  Speaker 3: the 2020s, where a bunch of seats that look safer
• 58:01
  Speaker 3: Republicans today in DFW and Houston and the Austin area
• 58:06
  Speaker 3: are once again competitive. But it's going to be a
• 58:09
  Speaker 3: while until that happens.
• 58:12
  Speaker 2: You, among others, have suggested that Florida is a place
• 58:14
  Speaker 2: where Republicans might take a more aggressive stance. approach to redistricting?
• 58:19
  Speaker 2: What are you expecting from there? And how bad could
• 58:21
  Speaker 2: it be for Democrats?
• 58:23
  Speaker 3: Well, Republicans' biggest weapon this cycle is probably Florida. The
• 58:27
  Speaker 3: reason is they have a 16 to 11 edge in
• 58:29
  Speaker 3: the delegation today. And it was a map that was
• 58:33
  Speaker 3: altered by courts in the middle of the last decade.
• 58:37
  Speaker 3: And now Republicans feel like they have a freer hand
• 58:42
  Speaker 3: because the state Supreme Court, which is charged with with
• 58:46
  Speaker 3: essentially enforcing the Fair Districts Amendment that was passed by
• 58:50
  Speaker 3: voters there in 2010 that was supposed to curb gerrymandering,
• 58:53
  Speaker 3: has taken a hard right turn. So six of the
• 58:55
  Speaker 3: seven justices on the Florida Supreme Court were appointed by
• 58:58
  Speaker 3: Rick Scott or Ron DeSantis. That's a real sea change
• 59:03
  Speaker 3: from what we had when, in 2015, the Florida Supreme
• 59:07
  Speaker 3: Court struck down the previous Republican map. So this time,
• 59:11
  Speaker 3: Republicans could add three seats to their total for a
• 59:15
  Speaker 3: 19-9 breakdown. I think they're going to target Stephanie Murphy's
• 59:19
  Speaker 3: seat north of Orlando. That's probably the easiest to gerrymander
• 59:22
  Speaker 3: into a red district. We'll see if she runs again.
• 59:26
  Speaker 3: Charlie Crist in St. Pete is running for governor and
• 59:29
  Speaker 3: Republicans could draw that seat into a double digit Trump seat,
• 59:33
  Speaker 3: but they'd probably have to stuff parts of St. Pete
• 59:37
  Speaker 3: in with Tampa, which was struck down under the last
• 59:41
  Speaker 3: court ruling. We'll see if the court would green light
• 59:43
  Speaker 3: that this time. And then Republicans could add the state's
• 59:47
  Speaker 3: new seat to their column. It's gaining a district and
• 59:50
  Speaker 3: they could put that in the villages or somewhere in
• 59:52
  Speaker 3: Central Florida, right? But keep in mind that in South Florida,
• 59:56
  Speaker 3: Republicans have to protect their own incumbents. They've got two
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 3: Miami incumbents who need some boosting in the remap. And
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 3: Maria Salazar is the number one example. I think Republicans
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 3: will probably try and chop Miami Beach out of that
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 3: district and perhaps brickle into Debbie Wasserman Schultz's district to
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 3: flip it from a Biden seat to a Trump seat.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 3: And then they have to find a way to protect
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 3: Carlos Jimenez to the south. So Republicans in the Sunbelt
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 3: states they control, they're constrained by the fact that number one,
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 3: a lot of these maps are already Republican gerrymanders. So
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 3: you can't gain a seat you already have. Number two,
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 3: they have to shore up a lot of their own people.
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 3: And number three, demographic growth, population growth has mostly been
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 3: in areas that are urban, more diverse and more democratic.
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 2: Are there other states under the process under Republican control
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 2: that you're watching that could be determinative in how this
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 2: plays out in terms of the House majority, both this
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 2: time and over the next decade? Oh, yeah.
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 3: The other states where Republicans could conceivably gerrymander their way
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 3: to gains are North Carolina. But again, the state Supreme
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 3: Court there is going to be crucial. North Carolina is
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 3: the only big state where the governor does not have
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 3: veto power over maps. And so the Democratic- Which is
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 3: not an accident.
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 2: Which is not an accident, yes.
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 3: Well, actually, it was a change that was made a
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 3: long time ago by Democrats thinking that they would always
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 3: hold the legislature, but there might occasionally be a Republican governor. Now,
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 3: it's got a law of unintended consequences. So Republicans could
• 1:01:38
  Speaker 3: try and squeeze two more seats out of North Carolina,
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 3: but that's really subject to the state Supreme Court. And
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 3: Democrats actually heartbreakingly for them lost a state Supreme Court
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 3: race for Chief Justice by 400 votes in 2020. That
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 3: could be hugely consequential to the MAP outcome. Georgia, right
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 3: now it has an eight to six Republican advantage. I
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 3: expect Republicans to try and push that to nine to
• 1:02:04
  Speaker 3: five by putting Lucy McBath and Carolyn Bordeaux into the
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 3: same district, or at least making one of those districts
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 3: much more Republican. And then Ohio is a real wild
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 3: card here. Ohio has this new kind of hybrid process
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 3: where there's supposed to be bipartisan buy-in required to pass
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 3: a new map. But if the party's deadlock, then the
• 1:02:28
  Speaker 3: Republicans who control the legislature with the super majorities can
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 3: pass along party lines a map that's valid for four years.
• 1:02:37
  Speaker 3: That's what I expect they'll try to do. And they
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 3: could try and convert their 12 to four advantage in
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 3: Ohio into as wide as 13 to two by getting
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 3: rid of Tim Ryan and Marcy Kaptur's seats. However, again,
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 3: the state Supreme Court, which is more moderate than the legislature,
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 3: could strike that down as a violation of the reform
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 3: that was supposed to take effect. So one theme that
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 3: is really emerging this cycle that's new from last cycles
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 3: is because Congress and the Supreme Court have failed to
• 1:03:11
  Speaker 3: step in and put guardrails up against gerrymandering. The last
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 3: line of defense against partisan shenanigans is really state courts.
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 3: And not only in North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio, but
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 3: all over the country, they're going to be critical.
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 2: And that's an important point just for people to understand,
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 2: which is parties can sue under the Voting Rights Act,
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 2: if it's a racial gerrymander. But if it's a partisan gerrymander,
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 2: they no longer can sue in federal court because of
• 1:03:41
  Speaker 2: a recent Supreme Court decision. Is that correct? That's correct.
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 3: And the Supreme Court decision in 2019 that said you
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 3: can't bring a federal partisan gerrymandering claim, that's really curbed
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 3: what Democrats had hoped for as the most powerful tool
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 3: to combat Republican maps. But I think it's actually added
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 3: some clarity at the state level that, you know, This
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 3: is really a matter that states need to resolve if
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 3: they want to combat the most extreme excesses of the
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 3: majority party. Now, of course, that's tricky. Are states able
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 3: to pass a ballot amendment? Are they able to establish
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 3: a commission? We do see that this time around, there
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 3: are three more commissions than last time. Actually four, because
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 3: Montana's commission now gets to divide the state in half
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 3: because it gained a seat. So you've got 10 states
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 3: totaling 121 districts with commissions in place. And those are
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 3: real wild cards as well.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 2: Let's go to the Democrats. And I want to come
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 2: back to the commissions for a second. But as I
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 2: understand it, there are probably three states where Democrats have
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 2: an opportunity to be aggressive. They control the process and
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 2: there's a movement. The three most notable states in everything
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 2: I know about redistricting, I know from your Twitter handle,
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 2: but is Illinois, Maryland, and New York. Is that correct?
• 1:04:57
  Speaker 2: Are there other Democratic states where there could be– where
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 2: the process could advantage them?
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 3: The only other one could be New Mexico. And that's
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 3: a state to watch as well. But you make a
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 3: very important point. The states that Democrats control are really important.
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 3: And at the same time, had it not been for
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 3: more of these commissions, they would have much more parity
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 3: in terms of the districts they get to draw. The
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 3: total is there are 75 districts under Democratic control there
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 3: are 187 districts under Republican control. Had it not been
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 3: for commission states though, and if legislatures got to draw
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 3: maps in, for example, California and Virginia, and you've had
• 1:05:44
  Speaker 3: Democrats in control of those processes, the total breakdown would
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 3: be 200 for Republicans to 168 for Democrats. So a
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 3: much closer margin. But those three big prizes for Democrats
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 3: the onus really falls on those states to counteract what
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 3: Republicans are doing elsewhere. So in Illinois, Democrats could convert
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 3: a 13 to five breakdown now into 14 to three.
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 3: And they do that by probably eliminating Adam Kinzinger and
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 3: converting Rodney Davis's district downstate into a Democratic seat. Now,
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 3: Democrats might say, well, Adam Kinzinger, he's our favorite Republican. Well,
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 3: the Democrats I talked to in Illinois are convinced that
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 3: they're not necessarily eliminating Adam Kinzinger so much as they'd
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 3: be eliminating a pro-Trump Republican who would beat him in
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 3: a primary. So that's the calculus there. In Maryland, Democrats
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 3: could completely eradicate Republicans from federal office by eliminating Andy
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 3: Harris's seat. And the strategy there would be to combine
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 3: most of the Eastern shore of Maryland with parts of
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 3: Anne Arundel County and perhaps Howard County. So Annapolis and
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 3: Columbia perhaps. And that would flip a double digit Trump
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 3: seat into a double digit Biden seat. We'll see if
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 3: Maryland's congressional delegation, whether the Democrats there are able to
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 3: coalesce behind that strategy because everyone wants a safe seat.
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 3: But New York is by far Democrats' biggest redistricting weapon.
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 3: It's really the biggest weapon for either party in the country. Currently,
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 3: there are 19 Democrats and eight Republicans in New York.
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 3: And Democrats, if they're able to override the commission there,
• 1:07:33
  Speaker 3: which is really kind of an advisory commission, they could
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 3: purge as many as five of the eight Republicans from
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 3: the delegation for a 23 to three breakdown overall. Governor
• 1:07:44
  Speaker 3: Kathy Hochul has said that she's willing to help Democrats
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 3: in this regard. Keep in mind that she was essentially
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 3: drawn out of a winnable district in the last round
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 3: when a court got to redraw the map. This is
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 3: the first time Democrats have had unified control of Albany
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 3: in a redistricting cycle since 1912. So, you know, a
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 3: lot of people ask, well, why haven't Democrats done this before? Well,
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 3: they haven't had functional control of state government to be
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 3: able to impose their will. But the way this would
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 3: work is Democrats would take advantage of two Republicans who
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 3: are not running for reelection, Lee Zeldin on Long Island,
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 3: his seat could be converted from a Trump plus four
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 3: district into a Biden plus 10 district in the Hamptons
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 3: and parts of Islip and Babylon. You could see in
• 1:08:34
  Speaker 3: Western New York, Democrats combine the seat of retiring Republican
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 3: Tom Reed with Chris Jacobs into a super Republican vote
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 3: sink there. And then as much as Democrats hate Elise Stefanik,
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 3: it's probably actually in their interest to put her into
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 3: a super red district in the North country to maximize
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 3: Democrats' chances of winning other upstate districts, including those held
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 3: by Claudia Tenney, and John Katko. And then probably the
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 3: most egregious from a community of interest standpoint would be
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 3: combining Staten Island with parts of Brooklyn like Park Slope
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 3: and Prospect Park and Cobble Hill so that you convert
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 3: a Trump plus 11 district into a Biden plus 12 district.
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 3: And that would basically roll out the blue carpet for
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 3: Max Rose to come back to Congress there. So when
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 3: you add that all together, that's the gerrymander that could
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 3: net Democrats five more seats, or sorry, four more seats
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 3: for them, but five fewer seats for Republicans.
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 2: And I wanna just... Just push on the commission boards
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 2: as people were. You tweeted out Colorado is what became
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 2: the third state, I guess, to finish its map. Or no,
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 2: they're not finished yet. They have finalized the map. They
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 2: send it to the Supreme Court. It is a– I
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 2: think the Cook Report scored it a– you think it's
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 2: a 4-4 split in the state that Joe Biden won
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 2: by 13 points? Well, we think it's more like 4.5
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 2: to 3.5.
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 3: Who gets the. 5? Do we get the. 5?
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 2: Democrats get the. 5 or Republicans?
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 1: Republicans.
• 1:10:05
  Speaker 3: So, you know, the map that the commission agreed to
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 3: in Colorado is a compromise map between the parties. And
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 3: even though Democrats think that the eighth district, the new
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 3: seat Colorado's getting from the census should be theirs, the
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 3: reality is the reform that voters passed put an equal
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 3: number of Democrats and Republicans on the commission, in addition to,
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 3: you know, for unaffiliated commissioners. And so they had to
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 3: arrive at a deal And the deal is that this
• 1:10:33
  Speaker 3: new eighth district north of Denver would be a seat
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 3: that voted for Trump by two points in 2016, but
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 3: by Biden for five points in 2020. So it's more
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 3: of a fair fight kind of district. It's designed as
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 3: kind of a Hispanic influence district. And Democrats, you know,
• 1:10:52
  Speaker 3: if I had to really guess, I think Democrats will
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 3: end up keeping it, but it's likely to be very competitive.
• 1:10:58
  Speaker 3: And so you have four districts. solid Democratic seats, three
• 1:11:01
  Speaker 3: solid Republican seats, including Lauren Boebert's, by the way. And
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 3: then you've got this new competitive district. And so it
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 3: could be a 5-3 map. It could end up being 4-4,
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 3: which would be a great outcome for Republicans in a
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 3: blue state. But over time, I expect that district to
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 3: get bluer. 20 years ago, Colorado gained a seventh district,
• 1:11:23
  Speaker 3: and it was designed as a fair fight seat north
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 3: of Denver. Over time, as the Denver suburbs got bluer,
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 3: so did that district. So the same scenario could play
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 3: out right now.
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 2: And then last question, California, which also has a commission,
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 2: do you have an understanding or a thought or expectation
• 1:11:40
  Speaker 2: of what happens there as California loses a seat for
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 2: the first time ever, I believe?
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 3: So that's right. And California's commission, no one is sure
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 3: what they'll do right now, but we do know where
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 3: the population is. And so the seat loss is going
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 3: to have to come from LA County. LA County had
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 3: enough people for 14 districts 10 years ago. It only
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 3: has enough people for 13 this time around. And the
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 3: conventional wisdom is that a Democratic seat somewhere in LA
• 1:12:09
  Speaker 3: County gets collapsed. But that could have some reverberations outside
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 3: of downtown, right? So if you eliminate one blue seat
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 3: in LA, then a lot of surrounding districts have to
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 3: kind of move inward a little bit. And if Mike
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 3: Garcia's district in Northern LA County gets pulled a little
• 1:12:30
  Speaker 3: bit South, it could torpedo his chances of winning reelection.
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 3: If Young Kim's district in Orange County gets pulled closer
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 3: into LA, that could make her reelection race much tougher.
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 3: And so overall, I'm expecting at least a couple of
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 3: Republican held seats to get bluer. And Democrats own less
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 3: competitive real estate at the moment. So the odds are
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 3: that the seat loss will come from Republicans' column, but
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 3: we're just going to have to wait and find out.
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 2: Awesome. Dave, thank you so much. This is very helpful.
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 2: Everyone needs to follow every district on Twitter, not just
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 2: during their district, but also on elections nights for the
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 2: official call of Seen Enough. Dave, thank you so much.
• 1:13:16
  Speaker 2: And we'll talk to you again soon.
• 1:13:17
  Speaker 3: Hey, thanks for letting me nerd out.
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 1: All right, before we go, we do have some exclusive
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: polling that was conducted for the good folks at Tax
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: March by ALG Research, which is John Anzalone's firm, former
• 1:13:39
  Speaker 1: Obama pollster and Biden's top pollster. They surveyed a few
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 1: thousand likely midterm voters in six districts represented by some
• 1:13:47
  Speaker 1: of the centrist Democrats in the House who forced this
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 1: infrastructure vote and have been complaining about Build Back Better.
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 1: Kurt Schrader in Oregon, Jared Golden in Maine, Scott Peters
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 1: in California, Lizzie Fletcher in Texas, Stephanie Murphy in Florida,
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 1: and Carolyn Bordeaux in Georgia. Here's the bad news. Biden's
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: approval is underwater in all these districts except California and Oregon,
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: and Republicans lead the generic midterm ballot in the Maine
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 1: and Georgia districts. Here's the good news. Despite that very
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: challenging political environment for Biden and Democrats, Build Back Better
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: has at least 57 percent support in every district. A
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 1: plurality of voters in every district say the bill would
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 1: have a positive effect on them and their families personally
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: and that they would be less likely to vote for
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: their member of Congress next year if that member voted
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 1: no on Build Back Better. What was your takeaway from
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 1: these polls?
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 2: What are we doing, people? You have a very popular
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 2: piece of legislation that people like. And it's not just
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 2: that it is popular. It's also not polarizing. People are
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 2: not Republicans are not angry about it. This does not
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 2: get them fired up. By focusing on these issues in
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 2: this bill, we are focusing on issues that unite our
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 2: base and divide their base. That's exactly where you want
• 1:15:08
  Speaker 2: to be in politics. It's very hard to find those things.
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 2: We have them. It's before us. And we are tripping
• 1:15:12
  Speaker 2: over our own two feet. This is why I maintain
• 1:15:16
  Speaker 2: some measure of relative optimism that something is going to
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 2: get done here because the political logic for doing it
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 2: is so overwhelming. Failure is an obvious disaster. As you
• 1:15:28
  Speaker 2: pointed out earlier, the people who need this most are
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 2: the most vulnerable Democrats. This is good for them. This
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 2: is not like the Affordable Care Act or the stimulus
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 2: or these other very polarizing environments. The Republican coalition does
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 2: not get fired up about size of government issues like
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 2: it used to. They don't care about the debt, the deficit.
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 2: They don't care about anything else other than racial grievance
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 2: and cultural issues. And so you can go do this
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 2: and it will strengthen you with your base and strengthen
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 2: you with independence. And it's not going to make your
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 2: problems any worse. It's not going to fire up Republicans.
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 2: So just go do it.
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 1: And lest anyone think that the way the question was
• 1:16:01
  Speaker 1: worded was just, you know, some progressives in a poll
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 1: trying to make it sound as good as possible. Here's
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 1: how the plan was described in the very long question
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: that I'm about to read. Congress is considering legislation to
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: lower costs for healthcare, prescription drugs, childcare, education, and electricity bills.
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 1: The plan would include a tax cut to help working
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: families pay for health care premiums, would allow Medicare to
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 1: negotiate with drug companies to lower prescription drug costs, expand
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 1: access to paid family and medical leave, and help families
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 1: cover the cost of child care, elder care, and community college.
• 1:16:29
  Speaker 1: The plan is estimated to cost $ 3. 5 trillion. They broke
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 1: your rule, Dan. They put the $ 3. 5 trillion in the
• 1:16:38
  Speaker 1: description that they pulled. What was the result? 61% support
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 1: that plan, 36% oppose. This is not a national poll.
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 1: This is a poll in the most competitive House districts
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 1: in the country, split fairly evenly between Democratic, Republican, and
• 1:16:56
  Speaker 1: independent voters in these districts. I don't know what else
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 1: to say. I don't know what else to say.
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 2: No one's asking you to do anything hard. We're asking
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 2: you to do something popular and good. What a world.
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 1: And they asked another version of it where they threw in,
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 1: they're going to raise taxes on big corporations and the
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 1: wealthiest Americans who earn more than $ 400, 000, just as popular,
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 1: people like that. They put in one, they tested one
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 1: with the $ 3. 5 trillion and the taxes, one without the $ 3. 5 trillion.
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 1: They all tested around the same, which was interesting to me.
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 1: They all tested the same. People, because when people hear
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 1: the component parts of the bill, which of course they
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 1: are not hearing because of this fucking mess in D.C.,
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: they like it and they want it to pass. Even
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 1: if it costs a lot of money, they like it.
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 2: One thing that I think is worth noting, we said
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 2: the whole thing about speeches and messaging, and that is
• 1:17:46
  Speaker 2: definitely true on the earned media side, on the press side.
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 2: But whether it's the Build Back Better group or a
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 2: bunch of Democratic super PACs have all been spending a
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 2: lot of money to advertise this bill in these districts.
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 2: So it is not an accident. Even if the Twitter
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 2: press narrative is just a fucking shit show of legislative morass,
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 2: the messaging that a lot of swing voters are getting
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 2: in swing districts is exactly what the bill should be.
• 1:18:11
  Speaker 2: And it's one of the reasons why it's so popular
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 2: because that is one lesson the Democrats definitely learned from
• 1:18:16
  Speaker 2: the early Obama years, which is you're going to have
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 2: to pay to put your messaging in front of people
• 1:18:20
  Speaker 2: because when you get to the legislating and the sausage making,
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 2: it's disaster. And so there's good messaging about this. People
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 2: are getting the actual narrative of the bill out there
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 2: and it's showing up in polls.
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 1: And one last point on this. On the other side,
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 1: there's a ton of money being spent by Republican groups
• 1:18:34
  Speaker 1: trying to oppose this, and they're doing their best to
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 1: message against it. Inflation, you know, Nancy Pelosi gets a
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: park in San Francisco, this money isn't going to you.
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: And they've been out there with those ads for a while,
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 1: and they haven't made this any less popular. So those
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: attacks clearly are not landing. So anything people can do
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 1: with this information other than scream about it?
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 2: I mean, call your member of Congress. Sometimes we're like,
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 2: call this Republican member of Congress or call Joe Manchin.
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 2: Here you have members of Congress. And you're asking them
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 2: to do something popular and good for their district, call
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 2: them and tell them. If you are someone who volunteered
• 1:19:11
  Speaker 2: on their campaigns, was a donor of their campaigns, call
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 2: the campaign office and tell them how their vote on
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 2: this is going to dictate your enthusiasm level for next cycle.
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 2: That message will get back to the congressman pretty darn fast.
• 1:19:23
  Speaker 2: I can tell you that.
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 1: And you always say this, Dan. Obviously, there's a lot
• 1:19:28
  Speaker 1: of paid advertising out there. Obviously, it's hard for the
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: White House and Democrats to get their message out through
• 1:19:32
  Speaker 1: this media environment. But we all have the ability to
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 1: help get the message out. We all have Twitter feeds.
• 1:19:37
  Speaker 1: We all have Instagram feeds. We all have platforms, right?
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 1: Like start talking about the different provisions in these bills
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 1: and why they're so important and how they would change
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 1: people's lives, what they would do for climate, what they
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 1: would do for people looking for an education, what they
• 1:19:51
  Speaker 1: would do for people looking to pay less for health care.
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 1: what they would do to create jobs. Like, there are
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 1: plenty of ways to talk about why this bill would
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 1: positively impact people's lives. Clearly, when you describe it to people,
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 1: a plurality of voters in the toughest districts in the
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 1: country say, yeah, that would be pretty good for me
• 1:20:08
  Speaker 1: and my family. It would actually personally affect me. So
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 1: that should tell us a lot. Okay. Thank you to
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 1: Reed District himself, Dave Wasserman, for joining us today. And
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: we'll talk to you Monday. And I'm sure everything will
• 1:20:22
  Speaker 1: be figured out by then.
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 2: Bye, everyone.
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 1: Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. The executive
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 1: producer is Michael Martinez. Our senior producer is Flavia Casas.
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: Our producer is Haley Muse. And Olivia Martinez is our
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 1: associate producer. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 1: Seglin is our sound engineer. Thanks to Tanya Somanator, Katie Long,
• 1:20:46
  Speaker 1: Roman Papadimitriou, Brian Semmel, Caroline Reston, Madison Hallman, and Justine
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 1: Howe for production support. And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn,
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 1: Phoebe Bradford, and Milo Kim, who film and upload these
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 1: episodes as videos at youtube.com slash crookedmedia.