Senate Democrats Announce $3.5 Trillion Reconciliation ‘Infrastructure’ Proposal

Senate Democrats announced Tuesday evening a $3.5 trillion reconciliation “infrastructure” proposal that otherwise would not make it into a bipartisan infrastructure deal.

“We are very proud of this plan,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told reporters. “We know we have a long road to go. We’re going to get this done for the sake of making average Americans’ lives a whole lot better.”

The $3.5 trillion represents a top line budget number, which includes many items self-designated socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) facies, such as expanding medicare, global warming initiatives, and suburb displacement with low-income housing, subsidized housing, subsidized childcare, and subsidized racial equity and environmental justice.

“Formal text of the Senate’s budget resolution has yet to be released,” Politico reported. “If that measure can clear both chambers with lockstep party support, it will unleash the power to circumvent a GOP filibuster using budget reconciliation, the same move that Democrats used to pass the president’s $1.9 trillion pandemic aid package in March.”

The two-track strategy of attempting to pass a bipartisan infrastructure bill with the trojan horse reconciliation package presents a challenge for Democrats, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has said she will not support the bipartisan deal without an assurance the reconciliation package will succeed.

But Pelosi’s far-left House Democrats object to the bipartisan measure, leaving other Democrats who support it in the lurch.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) stated she and her colleagues have “made clear they’d vote down the bipartisan deal without the reconciliation bill.”

“It’s not just a few,” she said. “It’s dozens.”

Other House Democrats worry the reconciliation “infrastructure” package will destroy their 2022 midterms hopes.

“The reconciliation piece is much more complicated than people think,” Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said. “That process will likely take longer to get to an agreement.

“If they’re coming at you from one side and you’re always having to watch your back on the other side, I think it’s a huge distraction and it undermines our ability to protect our majority.”