Man, Oh Manchin

There are a lot of things about Joe Manchin's statement on "Fox News" that he's a "No" on the Build Back Better bill that I don’t understand.  Like – there are many things in the bill that Manchin is apparently for, and so what I think will happen (I hope…) is that they’ll just craft a smaller bill with all the things he’s fine with.  But if so, then a) why announce he’s against it and cause all this angst, and b) why do that on “Fox News”?? 

The only explanation I can come up with is that by saying he’s voting No, he thinks that will give him more negotiating power.  Which it may – but it may be no different than if he just said all that in private.

Also, I certainly don’t understand why he apparently offered a bill to the President of the United States that he was fine with – and then undercut that?  That's not a recipe for anything positive that you want to do with the White House and your Democratic colleagues.

The additional problem with Manchin doing things this way is not just that it causes all this concern – but you almost guarantee that House Democrats will not trust the Senate Democrats on most anything.

On the positive side, I like that the White House response was blunt.  As it should have been.  But it was a difficult statement to make because I’m sure it had to be crafted in a way that left the door open for continuing negotiation.  And not just on this bill, but Voting Rights and dealing with the filibuster.

What bothers me, as well, is that as understandable as it is that the media covers this as Manchin screwing up the bill, and so it seems like discord in the Democratic Party – they again, as always, leave the Republican Party completely off the hook for voting unanimously against the Build Back Better bill, which 60-70% of Americans support.  If just two Senate Republicans out of 50 voted for this bill – that 60-70% of Americans support – then Manchin and Sinema wouldn’t even be an issue.  The story would be that 48 Democrats voted for this bill that 60-70% of Americans support, and two brave Republicans.  This came down to Manchin because Republicans are unanimously blocking it.

To be clear, yes, Republicans get mentioned – but being "mentioned" is different from how a story is covered, which is that Manchin is undercutting Democrats and screwing up the bill.  That’s "the story.  Republicans are mentioned, but almost tangentially, buried deep in the story and then back to Manchin and the Democrats.  

To me, Manchin isn't the story.  The story is the Republicans.  To me, Manchin is only a story because of Republicans blocking the bill unanimously.  (And blocking many bills unanimously.)  Manchin is the evidence of Republicans being the problem.  That Republicans get mentioned within the Manchin Headline Story is not covering what the what I think the actual story is. And yes, I of course understand why it’s covered this way.  I just think it’s wrong-headed, easy to do, sloppy journalism, and damaging.

Yes, Manchin's statement was very disappointing.  But good for President Biden’s response, and I remain hopeful (and even a bit expecting) a solid bill to pass – even if it’s not close to what was hoped for and should have been.  I think.  We’ll see.