\n\n“Biden left negotiations with Manchin this week thinking the two men could cut a deal next year on his sweeping agenda. Then the West Virginia Democrat bluntly said he is a \u201cno\u201d on the $1.7 trillion in an interview on \u201cFox News Sunday.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIf I can\u2019t go home and explain to the people of West Virginia, I can\u2019t vote for it. And I cannot vote to continue with this piece of legislation. I just can\u2019t. I\u2019ve tried everything humanly possible. I can\u2019t get there,\u201d Manchin said. \u201cThis is a no on this piece of legislation. I have tried everything I know to do.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Those comments prompted an immediate war with the White House, who took personal aim at Manchin for what officials saw as a breach of trust. White House press secretary Jen Psaki released an unusually blunt statement saying that Manchin’s comments “are at odds with his discussions this week with the President, with White House staff, and with his own public utterances.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In announcing his opposition, Manchin raised the same concerns about the bill that he\u2019s had all along: inflation, rising debt and a mismatch between the package\u2019s 10-year funding and its shorter-term programs. But until Sunday, Manchin had never taken a hard line on the legislation. In the past week, he\u2019s spoken directly to Biden several times, with the president and other Democrats furiously lobbying him to support the bill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With an evenly split Senate, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer needs every Democrat to go along with the legislation, which only requires a simple majority vote. That dynamic gives Manchin enormous leverage over Biden’s agenda, allowing him to single-handedly sink a priority that Democrats have spent much of the year working on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Manchin\u2019s rollout on Fox News infuriated Democrats Sunday morning. Psaki said that the senator had brought Biden an outline of a bill similar in size and scope that “could lead to a compromise acceptable to all.””If his comments on FOX and written statement indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the president and the senator\u2019s colleagues in the House and Senate,” Psaki said. “Just as Senator Manchin reversed his position on Build Back Better this morning, we will continue to press him to see if he will reverse his position yet again, to honor his prior commitments and be true to his word.”
And while the centrist senator\u2019s staff informed White House and Democratic aides about his forthcoming blow to Biden\u2019s agenda, some Democrats were steamed that Manchin himself hadn\u2019t called Biden or Schumer.”
…
“now may be an opportunity to revisit a concept of the bill that included fewer programs but was paid for over more years \u2014 an option that moderate House Democrats and party leaders such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi had pushed for previously. Centrist New Democrat Coalition Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) said in a statement Sunday that including fewer programs in the legislation but for longer durations \u201ccould open a potential path forward for this legislation.\u201d”
…
“The West Wing saw Manchin’s Sunday comments as a shocking about-face \u2014 White House officials believed he had been sending signals that a deal could eventually be struck.”
…
“Manchin\u2019s position is a validation of progressive fears \u2014 they believed passing that infrastructure bill was a mistake without an explicit guarantee from all 50 Democratic senators to support the rest of Biden\u2019s agenda. Progressive House Democrats fumed at Sunday\u2019s developments, though the nearly 100-member caucus had not regrouped to find a path forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI wish we would have kept both bills together. That was the plan throughout several months of negotiation,\u201d Bowman said. \u201cI was frustrated then and obviously frustrated now that we decided to decouple those bills, because, as Manchin has shown in the past, we cannot just take his word for something.\u201d”<\/p>\n\n\n\n