WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Senate voted Saturday to start debating Democrats’ election-year economic bill, boosting the sprawling collection of President Joe Biden’s priorities on climate, energy, health and taxes past its initial test as it starts moving through Congress.
In a preview of votes expected on a mountain of amendments, united Democrats pushed the legislation through [to the "debate" stage, apparently] the evenly divided chamber by 51-50, with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie and overcoming unanimous Republican opposition.
The House, where Democrats have a slender majority, could give it final approval next Friday when lawmakers plan to return to Washington.
A vote was scheduled for today, I thought final vote. Maybe I misunderstood and the vote scheduled for today was this goddamned "start the debate" vote, I don't fucking know.
The vote came after the Senate parliamentarian gave a thumbs-up to most of Democrats’ revised 755-page bill. But Elizabeth MacDonough, the chamber’s nonpartisan rules arbiter, said Democrats had to drop a significant part of their plan for curbing drug prices.
AP's prior headline ("key" provision stricken) wasn't a "tumbs-up" to me, it was a bottoms-up.
MacDonough said Democrats violated Senate budget rules with language imposing hefty penalties on drug makers who boost their prices beyond inflation in the private insurance market. Those were the bill’s chief pricing protections for the roughly 180 million people whose health coverage comes from private insurance, either through work or bought on their own.
Other pharmaceutical provisions were left intact, including giving Medicare the power to negotiate what it pays for drugs for its 64 million elderly recipients, a longtime Democratic aspiration. Penalties on manufacturers for exceeding inflation would apply to drugs sold to Medicare, and there is a $2,000 annual out-of-pocket cap on drug costs and free vaccines for Medicare beneficiaries.
...
Provisions:
-Expiring subsidies that help millions of people afford private insurance premiums would be extended for three years...
-there is $4 billion to help Western states combat drought.
-A new provision would create a $35 monthly cap for insulin, the expensive diabetes medication, for Medicare and private insurance patients starting next year. It seemed possible that language could be weakened or removed during debate.
Do you mean to speak in the past test? I don't think you do. I think you mean to speak in the future tense, a la "It seems possible that language could be weakened or removed during debate" next week. This is complicated enough Appie, get your fucking tenses straight, at least.
-Reflecting Democrats’ calls for tax equity, there would be a new 15% minimum tax on some corporations that earn over $1 billion annually...
-The IRS budget would be pumped up to strengthen its tax collections.
-spend close to $400 billion over 10 years to slow climate change, which analysts say would be the country’s largest investment in that effort...
-spend billions more on health care.
-raise more than $700 billion in taxes and from government drug cost savings, leaving about $300 billion for deficit reduction over the coming decade — a blip compared to that period’s projected $16 trillion in budget shortfalls.
Oh my God. Don't you mean raise more than $700B in revenue from taxes and gov't drug cost savings? And I don't understand the last clause about $300B for deficit reduction, a "blip". Does it mean the $300B to reduce the deficit is a "blip" or that the deficit will be reduced to $300B which is a blip compared to the projected $16T. Okay, I didn't see the "T." I now understand that to mean that the $300B will lower the $16 trillion deficit, a sure-enough blim...blip.
Democrats are using special procedures that would let them pass the measure without having to reach the 60-vote majority that legislation often needs in the Senate.
Matthew Daly) you really need to do a better job of explaining in your reporting.
