Sen. Joe Manchin says no to $2T bill: ‘I can’t vote for it’ (opens in new tab)

> He's completely corrupt by WV coal and other corporate interests

Or is he just representing the interests of the people of WV, as he is supposed to? Remember, his job is to represent WV, not to fall in line with Democrat party policy.

And according to a poll in November: "Nearly 74 percent of [West Virginia] voters also said Manchin should oppose the president’s Build Back Better plan."

https://wvmetronews.com/2021/11/15/wv-voters-slam-biden-appr...

Senate isn't gerrymandered.

I have not painted anyone as evil. I suggest you reread what I wrote and take it at face value. It appears to me that you are projecting and making some assumptions about my views that aren’t supported by anything that I wrote. My post is about imbalances in the present system. It is my view and contention that the current federal system for apportioning senators and representatives is not sustainable. Everyone is free to advocate/fight for what they believe. I’ve not suggested otherwise. A system in which a minority viewpoint regularly impedes the legislative spending agenda of the majority is not sustainable long term. There is a power imbalance. The problem of this imbalance will exacerbate largely along rural/urban lines until something gives.

> The US is a republic, not a democracy.

This pops up every now and then and is complete bullshit. A republic is a system of government with a parliament and an elected head of state. Being a republic and being a democracy are completely unrelated. There are republics that are oligarchies, dictatorships, or democracies. Similarly, there are monarchies that are oligarchies, dictatorships, or democracies.

You can discuss about legitimacy and the fact that the US is a federation of states instead of a government of citizens, but “it’s a republic not a democracy” is stupid. Using it as a way of justifying blatant undemocratic aspects of the way the US work is doubly so.

I dont remember seeing the word 'free' in the posted article anywhere related to the paying for this bill. In fact, it clearly states the cost will come from taxes on the wealthy ... whom Manchin represents.

The US is a democratic republic. Canada, the UK and a number of others are parliamentary democracy.

They are ALL democracies, and I'm unaware of a single country on the planet that is a pure democracy. All are representative in some way.

This bizarre "not a democracy" (for the oldest ongoing democracy) is not based in reality at all, but someone read it somewhere and just mindlessly repeats it.

> It's easy to win elections when you promise free healthcare, free education, free childcare,... The average person will vote in their immediate interest and not worry about the big picture

In reality the "average person" votes against their own interest -- both short and long term -- at virtually every turn.

I feel like I've been trolled.

> Nothing is free

That's what taxes are supposed to be for. What's the different if I pay 10k a year to an insurance company or the government for my family to have affordable access to healthcare? With the current system, I'm not even getting that, my entire family has never exceeded our crazy high deductibles. We have some form of control over who gets to run our government programs, no matter how small that form of control is, it's better than the zero control we have over the practices of private companies or the terrible choices private companies make about what insurance we get to even have in the first place.

It is democracy, but it also federal republic. Important qualifier is the federal. There are also lot of non-federal republics.

Exactly right. "Rural, low population states have far too much power in the present system. This is not sustainable" is wrong in that, pure democracy leads to pure majority rule, which causes stability issues in no time, history tells a lot of those stories.

There is a push to water down rural votes (typically conservative) as democrats feel they are not represented fairly among the senate. Arguing that Wyoming should not have the same power in the senate that California has with many more people. The US government was not set up as a pure democracy but rather a republic. They forget the founding fathers did this to prevent a tyranny by majority. The ones arguing for abolishing this process are ok with tyranny by majority rule only because they find themselves in the majority. But too quickly forget that one day they will likely find themselves in the minority. Wishing they had these protections back.

'incredibly irrelevant'? Wow...

There is no misunderstanding on my part. I’m pointing out why I think the current system is not sustainable. I’m complaining about the setup of the current system. Since the abandonment of state legislatures appointing senators I think it’s common to say senators represent the people of the state that elected them.

The House is not proportional to population since each state gets one member of the House regardless of population size. One Representative from California represents around 745,000 people and this number is greater than the population of 6 states.

This bill looks like its trying to give some of it back too. One of the few times a big bill like this goes to us rather than war, bank bail outs, or propping up some other country.

In a system that nominally purports to represent the will of the people it is not relevant that you are opposed to the spending. You are not the dictator of the country. The will of the majority is being thwarted consistently by a minority. This is not a sustainable way to run a representative form of government.

He represents his voters. Leftists (despite being right about BBB being good) never seem to realize that other people literally disagree with them and don't want BBB. They don't believe it would be good for them, nor do they care.

I still think something with the name will pass though.

his voter base.

indeed, very obvious

Oh well that's different...