Mediaboss Marketing

The first theme to emerge in progressives' reaction to the news has been to call out the parliamentarian, even going as far as calling for a replacement to fill the role, despite the White House's reaction to move forward with the parliamentarian's decision and the reality that overruling a parliamentarian decision is highly unlikely.

"As a representative of a community that is very deeply impacted by this issue, I know that going back to my family's community in the Bronx and in Queens, we can't tell them that this didn't get done because of an unelected parliamentarian," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a progressive Democrat from New York, told reporters at the Capitol on Friday.

"All options should be on the table," Ocasio-Cortez added when asked if the parliamentarian should be fired as was done in 2001.

Congressional Progressive Caucus Chairwoman Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state framed the parliamentarian's ruling to reporters as "an advisory opinion" instead of a final judgment.

Even though Vice President Kamala Harris technically has the power to overrule the parliamentarian, it is highly unlikely that that will happen.

But as progressives are showing, this is not a fight they can afford to give up.

"Democrats made a lot of promises in winning the House, the Senate and the White House, and it's going to come up again and again," Jayapal said. "So, we're going to have to make a choice here. Are we going to stick to these rules or are we actually going to use the levers of government to work for the people? To me that's not radical that's governing."

"I think it is really important for us to draw a hard line," Omar said on CNN's "Inside Politics."

"This majority wasn't given to us to sit on the sidelines," Omar continued, adding that it is "unacceptable" for Democrats to "continue to come up with excuses on why we can't do the right thing on behalf of the American people."

Even though progressives have made their deep-seeded anger well-known, short of withholding their vote on the Covid package, which none have signaled is a move they will take, their options are limited in terms of how they can force Congress to pass a $15 minimum wage bill given the makeup of the Senate.

"Progressives are furious with the parliamentarian's move and are pushing for the decision to be overruled, but they are not likely to sink the entire relief package over this. We all recognize that the real fight is over the filibuster and will continue to push to make sure we get rid of the filibuster so we can pass the President's agenda," a senior staffer to a prominent progressive member tells CNN.

As Ocasio-Cortez sees it there are two immediate options progressives can take: "Do something about this parliamentary obstacle or abolish the filibuster."

Ocasio-Cortez also floated to reporters that a standalone bill could be possible, but pointed to the hurdle that Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who are against raising the minimum wage through reconciliation, present in the Senate.

"If we can pass a standalone bill, let's do it, but the fact that we have two people in this entire country -- two people in this entire country -- that are holding back a complete transformation in working people's lives, the same people who have held our country together throughout this pandemic, is wrong," Ocasio-Cortez said.

While House progressives are calling for dramatic and bold action to push a minimum wage increase through, their counterparts on the Senate side are far more measured on the topic. When the parliamentarian's ruling was revealed, Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent senator from Vermont who caucuses with the Democrats, did not entertain the idea of ignoring her ruling or breaking up the filibuster. Instead Sanders offered up an alternative plan to withhold tax breaks from large corporations from companies who refuse to pay their workers at least $15 an hour.

"In the coming days, I will be working with my colleagues in the Senate to move forward with an amendment to take tax deductions away from large, profitable corporations that don't pay workers at least $15 an hour and to provide small businesses with the incentives they need to raise wages. That amendment must be included in this reconciliation bill," Sanders said in a statement.

His plan was quickly supported by other key Senate leaders like Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The quick pivot to the alternative proposal shows Senate Democrats, even the most progressive ones, are unwilling to buck the traditions of the institution for something like a minimum wage hike despite the pleas from their House counterparts who don't have the power to make it happen.

Ocasio-Cortez was open to the idea of the tax penalty, telling reporters Sanders is "doing the right thing" by introducing the last-minute proposal, but warned "it's certainly not a replacement" for the long coveted $15 minimum wage legislation.

Members of the progressive group of Democratic lawmakers known as "The Squad" are not stopping from putting the pressure on the upper chamber to break with tradition. Omar said on CNN Friday that she wants to push the Senate and White House "to do the right thing" and "if not, then we have to look at our options in the House when the bill returns to us."

"I mean it's really important for us to use every single opportunity we have to engage in this fight to provide an actual path to increasing the minimum wage," Omar added.

A slew of progressive groups -- including Battle Born Collective, Justice Democrats, Data For Progress, Sunrise Movement and New Deal Strategies -- put out a joint statement Thursday night calling on lawmakers to put forward minimum wage as a standalone bill and abolish the filibuster if needed.

"Democrats should bring President Biden's popular policies like a $15 minimum wage straight to the Senate floor under regular order. If Republicans choose to block them, Democrats must abolish the filibuster to pass them. This approach is morally right, and it will deliver bigger, better results that the American people desperately need. It's that simple," the groups wrote.

The trepidation that most members of Congress feel over sending a minimum wage bill over to the Senate does not seem to faze Jayapal.

"The fears are not real," Jayapal said Friday, highlighting that progressives have public opinion on their side. "We have to bring all of that data out clearly including from constituents in West Virginia."

CLARIFICATION: This story has been updated to reflect two Democratic senators are against raising the minimum wage through the reconciliation process.

Read the original here:
House and Senate progressives split over next steps on minimum wage - CNN

Sign up for the Guardian's First Thing newsletter

Donald Trumps historic shakeup of the roster of US federal judges will not soon be reversed, despite his exit from the White House.

In just one term, Trump managed to replace more than 25% of federal judges overall and more than 30% of powerful circuit court judges. His picks were disproportionately white men with conservative views on immigration, abortion and the environment. With lifetime appointments, those judges will have a strong influence on the course of American life for decades to come.

But Joe Biden has an opportunity to reverse some of the damage, as progressives see it.

While Trump and his Republican accomplices left a small number of judicial vacancies on the table, additional vacancies have already arisen as judges retire or take senior status with curtailed workloads steps certain judges were known to be putting off as long as Trump was in office.

This past weekend, Judge Barbara Keenan of the fourth circuit court of appeals, a Barack Obama appointee, announced that she would take senior status in August, creating a 10th vacancy at the appeals court level for Biden to fill.

I certainly think its a factor that judges held off on taking senior status when Trump was in office, said Daniel L Goldberg, legal director of the progressive Alliance For Justice, so they could not be replaced by an ultra-conservative judge who wished to turn back the clock on so many of our rights.

Judicial watchdog groups see early promising signs in the Biden administrations approach to the challenge. Incoming Biden administration lawyers sent a letter to senators in December requesting a racially and ethnically diverse pool of judicial recommendations, just as Barack Obama had done before Trumps white male makeover.

The Biden letter also asked for judges from outside the Ivy League and corporate pipeline, which was not a priority for Obama.

We are particularly focused on nominating individuals whose legal experiences have been historically underrepresented on the federal bench, the Biden letter said, including those who are public defenders, civil rights and legal aid attorneys, and those who represent Americans in every walk of life.

On Monday, the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, said judicial nominees were something Biden was focused on personally.

But as Biden prepares to make his first judicial nominations, advocacy groups are watching carefully to see whether he follows through on that stated priority. And the first recommendation to come Bidens way to be made public has drawn objections in some progressive circles.

To fill a vacancy on Colorados federal district court, Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, a Democrat, recommended Regina Rodriguez, a former federal prosecutor originally nominated by Obama, whose mother was detained in a Japanese internment camp and who would be the second Latina in history to serve on the court.

But Rodriguez, currently a partner at the multinational WilmerHale law firm, also has roots in the corporate world, drawing accusations that her advancement exemplified fealty to big law.

The progressive judicial advocacy group Demand Justice has produced a video ad opposing the recommendation which is not yet an official nomination.

President Biden is ready to make a change, restoring balance to the courts by appointing lawyers who stand up for regular people, the ad says. But Bennet is standing in the way, demanding Biden appoint another corporate law partner.

Through the lens of Trumps appointments, Rodriguez would be a favorable shift for progressives but progressive groups have served notice that Biden must aim for a different standard.

That pressure could collide with political reality. With a razor-thin Democratic majority in the Senate, Biden cannot afford to lose the support of a single Democrat for any of his nominees, if Republicans stay unified in opposition. That dynamic could drive nominations toward the center.

Advocacy groups have praised the new administration for announcing it would bypass a review process by the American Bar Association (ABA), the countrys largest legal professional group, on potential judicial nominees.

The ABA review process, used by past administrations, has been criticized on the left as a pipeline for the halls of corporate law to the federal bench. But ABA recommendations have also been rejected on the right as too liberal, and Trump ignored the organization in favor of candidates hand-picked by the conservative Federalist Society.

Biden, for now, has a relatively limited ability to remake the courts. Long gone is the dream of some Democrats to win a decisive Senate majority in the election last November and pass legislation that would add seats to the US supreme court. Instead, Biden must work with the limited number of vacancies he has.

There are 10 vacancies at the circuit court level, counting one active judge who has announced he will semi-retire this summer. That compares with dozens of circuit vacancies Trump found when he came into office, thanks to obstruction of Obama nominees by the then Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell. Trump installed 24 circuit judges in his first two years.

Biden has a tremendous opportunity right off the bat to put on the bench individuals with a demonstrated commitment to equal justice who, as Donald Trump knows long after Joe Biden leaves the White House, the people he puts on the bench will have the ability to make a difference in the lives of the American people, said Goldberg.

As for the supreme court, all eyes are on a potential retirement announcement from the liberal justice Stephen Breyer, 82. Biden has promised to nominate an African American woman, the first in history, to the court as soon as possible. There is already pressure from Democratic lawmakers in Congress for Biden to line up a nominee for the next vacancy.

In the chess game of judicial appointments, the identity of that potential nominee could depend on the confirmation of Bidens attorney general nominee, Merrick Garland.

Garland is a judge on the District of Columbia circuit court, which has jurisdiction over many cases involving the federal government and has traditionally served as a staging ground for future supreme court nominees. His confirmation would create a vacancy on the court.

Widely seen as a potential replacement for Garland is Ketanji Brown Jackson, a district judge in Washington DC.

Jackson was one of the few Black women to be vetted by Obama for a potential supreme court nomination. And as a widely respected judge, a former public defender and working mother, she appears to fit the description of the kind of candidate Biden would be looking for if he has the chance to fill a supreme court seat.

The Biden administration seems to be ready to prioritize judges like never before, said Goldberg. Every signal weve received is that they are moving as expeditiously as possible to identify and nominate and, hopefully, confirm.

Go here to read the rest:
Biden under pressure from progressives as he prepares to pick first judges - The Guardian

Progressives are fuming over a setback on the minimum wage, worried that it signals looming problems for getting other key priorities through Congress.

Though Democrats control both the House and Senate for the first time since 2010, Thursdays decision by the parliamentarian to exclude a wage increase from the $1.9 trillion relief bill is reviving tensions about limited powers to pass some of the biggest Democratic campaign promises.

Progressives are warning that without making significant rules changes, theyre going to face a "Groundhog Day" of watching bills they championed and their voters supported pass the Housebutdie in the 50-50 Senate, where Democrats control the majority.

"It's not just about minimum wage,"Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalProgressives won't oppose bill over limits on stimulus checks Democrats snipe on policy, GOP brawls over Trump House Democrats' ambitious agenda set to run into Senate blockade MORE (D-Wash.), the chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told reporters. "Democrats made a lot of promises in winning the House, the Senate and the White House. And it's going to come up again and again."

Democrats, she added, face a choice: Are we going to stick to these rules, or are we actually going to use the levers of government to work for the people?

Evan Weber, political director of the Sunrise Movement, put it more bluntly, saying, Most Americans do not give a shit about and have never heard of the Byrd rule.

What will happen next if the parliamentarian rules a 100 percent Clean Energy Standard, another key Biden promise, is in violation of the arbitrary Byrd rule? ... From inequality to the climate crisis, our country and its people are in a state of emergency and in desperate need of action. Where is the urgency from our supposed leaders? he added.

Democrats are using reconciliation a budget process that allows them to bypass the 60-vote filibuster to pass their coronavirus relief legislation, which they had hoped would also include the $15 minimum wage increase.

But Elizabeth MacDonough, the Senate parliamentarian, advised senators late Thursday that it did not comply with rules that govern what can and cannot be included in legislation that uses the budget process.

Her ruling is a potential warning sign for Democrats who are hoping to use a second reconciliation package to pass an infrastructure bill, likely with climate change proposals that largely stalled when the Senate was under GOP control.

But the party faces bigger problems when it comes to passing its priorities outside of reconciliation, where they still need 60 votes to get most legislation through the Senate. In an evenly split Senate, where Democrats have the majority because Vice President Harris can cast any tiebreaking votes, the support of at least 10 GOP senators will be needed to clear procedural hurdles for legislation.

That includes big campaign promisessuch as tighter gun laws, immigration reform, voting rights, democracy reforms and LGBTQ protections.

The House, for example, is expected to pass legislation next week that would enact a sweeping overhaul of campaign finance and election and ethics laws.

But the measure, H.R. 1, is likely to go nowhere, despite Democrats also controlling the Senate.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMcConnell makes failed bid to adjourn Senate after hours-long delay Paul Ryan to host fundraiser for Cheney amid GOP tensions Senate Democrats near deal to reduce jobless boost to 0 MORE (R-Ky.) teed off against the bill from the Senate floor this week, calling it an attempt to grab unprecedented power over how America conducts its elections and how American citizens can engage in political speech.

The House also is expected to soon take up a police reform bill, which does not have 60 votes in the Senate.

Earlier this week, the House passed legislation that expands protections in education, housing, employment and more to LGBT people and prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in credit, jury service and public accommodations.

Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerLawmakers demand changes after National Guard troops at Capitol sickened from tainted food Ron Johnson forces reading of 628-page Senate coronavirus relief bill on floor Senate panel splits along party lines on Becerra MORE (D-N.Y.) has pledged that the bill will get a vote, but it will need GOP support. Democrats introduced the same measure last year; it had only one GOP co-sponsor in the Senate.

Progressives argue the dynamic underscores that changes are needed in the Senate: either overruling the parliamentarian or nixing the legislative filibuster.

If people in this country send us to government to change lives, we have a mandate to change those lives. And this problem is especially compounded in the Senate, which already has an extreme anti-democracy bias, said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezProgressives won't oppose bill over limits on stimulus checks Bipartisan bill would ban lawmakers from buying, selling stocks The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - J&J vax rollout today; third woman accuses Cuomo MORE (D-N.Y.).

So really our options right now, at least our immediate options on this specific issue, is to do something about this parliamentary obstacle or abolish the filibuster. Those are out two options right now, she added.

The filibusters high threshold is why Democrats are trying to pass coronavirus relief through reconciliation, which places strict limits on what can be included in the bill.

Several progressive Democrats immediately revived calls for nixing the filibuster after the parliamentarians ruling on minimum wage.

We shouldn't need to use an arcane procedure to pass the people's agenda! If we don't let the filibuster stand in our way, the Parliamentarian's decision on minimum wage won't matter. End the McConnell Veto! Sen. Jeff MerkleyJeff MerkleyHouse-passed election bill takes aim at foreign interference Bipartisan bill would ban lawmakers from buying, selling stocks Pentagon prevented immediate response to mob, says Guard chief MORE (D-Ore.) tweeted.

Supporters of eliminating the filibuster argue that leaving it in place effectively hands control of the Senate to McConnell because Republicans are able to block most legislation.

Today its the minimum wage. Tomorrow, the filibuster stands to block legislation on immigration, gun violence prevention, climate justice, voting rights and more, Kevin Kimble of Just Democracy said in a statement Thursday.

But the White House has dismissed talk of using Harris to overrule the parliamentarian a maneuver that doesnt have enough support among Senate Democrats to be successful anyway. The caucus also doesnt have the votes to nix the filibuster.

Democrats would need all 50 members of the caucus to vote on eliminating the filibuster. Sens. Joe ManchinJoseph (Joe) ManchinSenate Democrats vote to provide 0 unemployment benefits into September Senate GOP gets short-lived win on unemployment fight McConnell makes failed bid to adjourn Senate after hours-long delay MORE (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) are on the record opposing such a move, and several other Democratic senators are viewed as wary.

Progressives are warning that voters gave them a trifecta control of the House, Senate and White House in order to enact the agenda they campaigned on and that those same voters wont be forgiving during the 2022 midterms if Democrats fail to deliver because of Senate procedural rules.

No American voted to give power to a parliamentarian, Rep. Ruben GallegoRuben GallegoProgressives fume over Senate setbacks More than 0K raised for Ohio mom arrested for leaving kids alone at motel to work GoFundMe set up for mother arrested after leaving kids alone while at work MORE (D-Ariz.) tweeted. It will be hard to explain to voters in 2022 what we as Democrats produced if we stick to arcane ways.

Read the original post:
Progressives fume over Senate setbacks | TheHill - The Hill

[Stay on top of transportation news: Get TTNews in your inbox.]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren said her proposed wealth tax on households worth more than $50 million could help pay for investments in infrastructure, child care and health reforms as part of President Joe Bidens plan to Build Back Better after the coronavirus pandemic that has disproportionately hit low-income families.

We need to turn to infrastructure, child care, pre-K, college. We need to turn to the things that create investment and opportunity going forward and to do that, a wealth tax is the best way to pay for it, Warren said.

Warren, along with Rep. Pramila Jayapal and Rep. Brendan Boyle, said the tax they unveiled March 1, dubbed the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, would create a fairer economy with a 2% annual tax on households and trusts valued at between $50 million and $1 billion. All net worth over $1 billion would be taxed at 3%.

The measure like wealth tax proposals Warren has offered in the past is unlikely to garner the support needed to pass, particularly in the evenly divided Senate. But it could serve as a marker for progressives in Congress and is a reminder of the restiveness on the partys left flank.

Mergers and acquisitions have reshaped the trucking technology sector over the past decade, but what does this trend mean for the trucking and logistics companies that rely on these technologies? Seth Clevenger speaks with James Langley of Trimble Transportation. Hear a snippet, above, and get the full program by going to RoadSigns.TTNews.com.

The group claims the proposal would generate at least $3 trillion in revenue over 10 years, citing a Feb. 24 analysis from economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman from the University of California-Berkeley.

The ultra-rich and powerful have rigged the rules in their favor so much that the top 0.1% pay a lower effective tax rate than the bottom 99%, and billionaire wealth is 40% higher than before the COVID crisis began, Warren said in a statement. A wealth tax is popular among voters on both sides for good reason: because they understand the system is rigged to benefit the wealthy and large corporations.

While President Joe Biden campaigned on raising the income tax rate for top earners, he hasnt endorsed a tax on wealth. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden will discuss making sure the wealthy pay their fair share as part of the next package of legislation.

Addressing the inequities in the tax code is something he talked about as part of the Build Back Better agenda and something he remains committed to, Psaki said March 1. He has a lot of respect for Sen. Warren and is aligned in the goal of making sure the ultra-wealthy and big corporations finally pay their fair share.

A wealth tax would be particularly difficult to pass in the current U.S. Senate, which is divided 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats control the agenda, since Vice President Kamala Harris can break ties, but most bills require support from 60 senators to advance.

And Democrats have been unable to muster even 50 votes from some administration proposals, including a $15 hourly minimum wage. A wealth tax likely would be even more divisive.

However, Democrats are planning to use special budget reconciliation procedures to pass a bill with a simple majority later in the year that will include parts of a massive infrastructure package. At that point, taxes to pay for the build out would be on the table. And under Senate rules, tax increases generally are allowed in budget bills.

The bills co-sponsors include Budget Chairman Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Brian Schatz of Hawaii, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Mazie Hirono, also of Hawaii. Jayapal is from Washington State, and Boyle is from Pennsylvania.

Jayapal said the proposal will help level the playing field, narrow the racial wealth gap, ensure the wealthiest finally begin to pay their fair share, and invest trillions of dollars into our communities so we can make a real difference in the lives of people across America.

Warren defended the constitutionality of the plan, pointing to estate taxes as precedent for evaluating wealth. Some scholars have noted that the Constitution requires direct taxes to be apportioned among the states by population, while others have said that a wealth tax can be exempted from this requirement.

I am completely confident that this is a constitutionally responsible way to do this, Warren said.

With assistance from Nancy Cook and Mario Parker.

Want more news? Listen to today's daily briefing belowor go here for more info:

Read the original here:
Progressives Propose Wealth Tax to Fund Infrastructure - Transport Topics Online

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash. | Tom Williams / CQ Roll Call via AP

WASHINGTON (PAI)The almost evenly split Senate is still wrangling over Democratic President Joe Bidens $1.9 trillion economic stimulus package, but the Congressional Progressive Caucus is looking ahead to the next one, its chair says.

And while Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., didnt throw out any numbers in her Zoom session with Our Revolution Board Chair Larry Cohen and the organizations members, she said it will be huge, concentrating on infrastructureand strengthening workers wages and rights in those projects.

Jayapal gave that outlook as she described the inside-outside strategy the progressives, now the largest group within the Houses ruling Democrats, are using to push their agenda through on Capitol Hill, despite a 50-50 U.S. Senate.

It is critical, now more than ever, that we keep the heat on, she urged. Without it, she said, Democratic leaders could easily succumb to corporate pressure and dump key items, such as the $15 minimum wage and Medicare For All, that progressivesincluding worker-backed progressiveshave run and won on.

Were not sure about the entire scope of the (next) rescue plan, Jayapal admitted. In the first one, we prioritized popular items to champion: The $15 minimum wage and survival checks, referring to the $1,400 payments, as well as added federal jobless benefits.

One of the popular things that could be in the next bill is to lower prescription drug prices by giving the federal government power to force drug companies to accept lower prices from Medicare, which accounts for a significant share of their revenues.

There would also be limits on price-gouging and (drug) price spikes, as in a House-passed bill, HR3, last year. Then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., killed it.

Jayapal predicted Bidens next economic rescue bill will include a massive infrastructure plan to rebuild the nations roads, subways, bridges, railroads, and airports while expanding broadband coverage nationwide.

Itll have good union jobs, building the new infrastructure, especially green infrastructure, she predicted. There will also be Davis-Bacon Act coverage protecting construction workers prevailing wages and language strengthening collective bargaining for those workers, too, she said.

The progressives will also push another green cause besides construction: Levelling the playing field between renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power and traditional sources such as oil and gas. Their method: Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, which will also increase revenue.

The International Monetary Fund calculated last year that direct and indirect federal subsidies to oil and gas alone totaled $650 billion, according to Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., who introduced legislation in October to eliminate 11 of the most obvious ones. It died at the end of the last Congress without a hearing.

Eliminating those subsidies jibes with Bidens goals of enacting pro-green infrastructure legislation and pushing the U.S. to zero net carbon emissions. Those emissions, from burning coal, oil, and natural gas, are considered key contributors to global warming.

Still, such a plan would face a tough fight from the rich energy lobbies. OpenSecrets.org reported the American Petroleum Institute alone spent $12 million on lobbying in 2019-20 and gave $5 million to a GOP party committee and $217,000 to individual candidates.

That led Cohen, the former Communications Workers president, to call eliminating fossil fuel subsidies hard but not hopeless.

So Jayapal used the saga of the $15 minimum wage as an example of how the progressives new strategy to ensure lawmakers vote on their causes works. One part of it is to craft progressive provisions in such a way and with specific tax and budget goals that fit into a reconciliation bill, which is what Bidens $1.9 trillion plan officially is.

The second part of their strategy is outside lobbying, which is where organized labor, Our Revolutionthe old Bernie Sanders supportersand allies come in. The third is to wield the Progressive Caucuss collective clout to ensure their causes reach the House floor.

Two days before the House Education and Labor Committee, which handled the $15 minimum wage, was to work on its share of Bidens $1.9 trillion plan, the wage hike wasnt in it, Jayapal revealed. Thats where the inside clout came into play.

The Progressive Caucus, which now has around 95 of the Houses 222 Democrats, officially endorsed it, after briefings and discussion. An official endorsement of an issue needs a two-thirds vote of all caucus members, she saidand it binds the entire group to vote as a bloc for it, and to threaten to walk if leaders dont include it.

With that endorsement in her pocket, Jayapal went to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., saying the $15 minimum wage was a make-or-break issue for her members. Meantime, workers and their allies put outside pressure for the wage on the E&L Democrats. Committee chair Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., got the word, and yielded.

But just in case, Jayapal, an E&L committee member, had a Raise The Wage amendment ready to offer if Scott ducked. That vote would have put everyoneDemocrats and Republicanson the record.

In future struggles, she added, the progressives will craft their provisions to fit into budget bills, especially reconciliation. That way, she hopes, parliamentary roadblockssuch as one that derailed Raise The Wage in the Senatewill fall.

The Progressive Caucus will use that leverage and those tactics for its other causes, said Jayapal, a longtime community organizer in her hometown of Seattle.

But itll have another type of leverage, too, said Paco Fabian, Our Revolutions Director of Campaigns.

He helped lead an Our Revolution rally outside the White House for raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.

I think itll be a key for Democrats in 2022, he said of next years off-year election. Walk away from Fight for 15 and youre turning your back on your base. And itll have more repercussions in 2024 for any Democratic candidate who is not for it.

Itll be a litmus test.

Link:
Not waiting around: Progressive Caucus already working on next stimulus package - People's World