Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Infrastructure

Cryptocurrency Fight Holds Up Infrastructure Bill

For now, the side that wants less cryptocurrency regulation and taxation lost.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 8.9.2021 9:47 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
zumaglobalten993025 | Cris Faga/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom
(Cris Faga/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom)

Cryptocurrency fight holds up infrastructure bill. Passage of President Joe Biden's $550 billion infrastructure bill was held up Sunday by a battle over new cryptocurrency rules. Ultimately, the side that wants less cryptocurrency regulation and taxation lost.

"Crypto got screwed tonight," tweeted Sen. Ted Cruz (R–Texas), in a thread proving he can occasionally still get something right. "There's a partisan disagreement on spending, so Dems objected to ALL further amendments. That means NO vote on Wyden-Lummis to lessen the damage this bill will do to crypto, & NO vote on the Cruz amd. to repeal the new crypto rules altogether."

"The result? The Senate's going to inflict billions of dollars of damage on the growing & exciting crypto industry & drive much of it overseas," added Cruz, accusing the vast majority of his Senate colleagues of knowing nothing about cryptocurrency.

The bipartisan amendment from Sens. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Cynthia Lummis (R–Wyo.), and Pat Toomey (R–Penn.) aimed to make sure new regulations in the infrastructure bill wouldn't affect cryptocurrency miners and software developers. "The amendment also includes a provision that the section on crypto brokers will not modify the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934, two major laws overseeing the federal securities markets," notes CoinDesk.

The Cruz amendment reportedly sought to strike from the bill the new cryptocurrency requirements, which are designed to make it easier for the IRS to catch people who don't pay taxes on cryptocurrency.

But neither amendment received a vote.

"What the Senate said tonight: Let's tax the hell out of something we know nothing about, so we can pass a giant bill we haven't read, and spend the American people's money on stuff we can't afford. It's reckless & harmful," Cruz concluded his Twitter thread. 

Members of the Senate eventually voted last night to shut down debate on the bill, with the new rules regarding cryptocurrency reporting left intact.

Eighteen Republicans joined all Senate Democrats in the 68–29 vote to close debate and move on.

"Final passage of the legislation is expected late Monday night, or the wee hours of Tuesday at the latest, unless a deal is reached among all 100 senators to speed it up," notes Politico. But "while Senate passage of the bipartisan infrastructure bill is imminent, the legislation still faces an uncertain future in the House."

"Regardless of the measure's ultimate fate, the fact that crypto regulation has become one of the biggest stumbling blocks to passage of the bill underscored how the industry has become a political force in Washington—and previewed a series of looming battles over a financial technology attracting billions of dollars of interest from Wall Street, Silicon Valley and financial players around the world, but that few still understand," suggests The Washington Post.

Kristin Smith of the Blockchain Association told Politico: "I think Washington is starting to see that crypto is more of a force than anybody ever anticipated."


QUICK HITS

• While some people won't get the COVID-19 vaccine once, others are doubling up.

• Telework forever? The new wave of COVID-19 infections is thwarting business plans to reopen offices in the fall.

• "The coronavirus pandemic in America has become a delta pandemic. By the end of July, it accounted for 93.4 percent of new infections," reports The Washington Post.

• Medical experts push back on the San Diego County Sheriff's Department's latest fentanyl scare tactic.

• What late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg really thought about Roe v. Wade.

• David French reviews Andrew Sullivan's essay collection Out on a Limb.

• Meet the woman who could replace New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

• Reason's Scott Shackford with more on Apple's new surveillance system: "The new systems announced this week may seem innocuous, but only to those who have not paid any attention to how tech surveillance systems can be abused."

Apple's doing the bidding of a gov't agency: the NCMEC. The group invented the stranger danger moral panic of the 80s and 90s. As @ENBrown has reported, they do absolutely nothing to find missing kids.
The NCMEC does pay huge salaries to career crony charities. 1/2 https://t.co/4v4UpowKOY

— Cathy Reisenwitz (@CathyReisenwitz) August 6, 2021

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Cuomo and Trump: Who Can Tell the Difference?

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

InfrastructureReason RoundupCryptocurrenciesBitcoinCurrencyMonetary PolicyTaxesRegulationFinancial RegulationSenateCongress
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (178)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    Ultimately, the side that wants less cryptocurrency regulation and taxation lost.

    They always do.

    1. Erica Burton   4 years ago

      Fantastic work-from-home opportunity for everyone… Work for three to eight a day and start getting paid inSd the range of 17,000-19,000 dollars a month… Weekly payments Learn More details Good luck…

      See……………VISIT HERE

    2. Ashley Mason   4 years ago

      Since I started with my online business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable YJm but you won’t forgive yourself if you don't check it out. Learn more about it here...

      This is what I do................ VISIT HERE

  2. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    The Senate's going to inflict billions of dollars of damage on the growing & exciting crypto industry & drive much of it overseas...

    We have to pass it to find out what's going all the way in your butt.

  3. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   4 years ago

    "What late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg really thought about Roe v. Wade."

    Like any serious legal scholar, she thought it was the most brilliant decision in Supreme Court history — and that it has attained SUPER-PRECEDENT status.

    #SaveRoe

    1. Rev. Arthur L. Kuckland   4 years ago

      If Ruth bater ginsber were alive today what would she say?
      Help help let me out!

      I kidd. In reality the best thing she did for the US is die

      1. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

        And with gracious timing.

  4. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    I think Washington is starting to see that crypto is more of a force than anybody ever anticipated.

    They gonna put y'all back in blockchains.

    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      Old bastards don’t know how the internet works, let alone cryptocurrency.

      1. Jerryskids   4 years ago

        They know cryptocurrency isn't under the total control of the government, what else do they need to know?

        1. ElvisIsReal   4 years ago

          Yup.

          Luckily I don't give a shit what they tell me the rules are. They don't even have a clue how much BTC I have, much less where it is.

        2. The Encogitationer   4 years ago

          We need to tell them the cryptocurrency is all down this great big tube and to go jump down and get it!

  5. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    While some people won't get the COVID-19 vaccine once, others are doubling up.

    Greedy Americans to the 3rd World: "Fuck you."

    1. mad.casual   4 years ago

      *AHEM* Some greedy Americans. Some of us aren't getting vaccinated until everyone living in poverty and those stuck under absurd socialized medicine regimes have all gotten the vaccines that they should already have access to. Thank you very much.

      I know all we unvaccinated people probably look the same to you but we are not a monolith.

      1. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

        Apparently Australia was one of the least vaccinated 1st World countries because all they had was the AstraZeneca vaccine, and their government initially told them it was shit and not to take it after the blood clot reports came out. They've been going back in to lockdown, with massive protests in reaction, so the government caved and released physicians from liability for giving people the jab.

        What a fucking shitshow.

      2. EISTAU Gree-Vance   4 years ago

        Refusing the jab as act of self sacrifice in the effort to help needy children.

        Damn that’s brilliant. Wish ida thought of it.

  6. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

    So can we follow the no masks example set by our betters at the Obama birthday bash?

    1. Sometimes a Great Notion   4 years ago

      Are you a rich politically connected Democrat? If no, fuck you, where your mask.

  7. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    The new wave of COVID-19 infections is thwarting business plans to reopen offices in the fall.

    Looks like Trump got out of commercial real estate and into politics just at the right time. Almost as though he planned it. Hmmm.

    1. mad.casual   4 years ago

      Oooh! Fauci and Trump colluded to crash the real estate market! I'm off to 4chan and then my Qanon meeting.

      1. Sometimes a Great Notion   4 years ago

        So that explains the CDC's eviction moratorium

        1. mad.casual   4 years ago

          ^This guy gets it.

          Why bother with eminent domaining anything when you can just effect emergency bureaucratic taking by decree?

          You can practically imagine Fauci 'thinking out loud' in the Oval Office.

  8. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    The coronavirus pandemic in America has become a delta pandemic.

    "And this reporter puts the blame squarely on you, the reader."

  9. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    Medical experts push back on the San Diego County Sheriff's Department's latest fentanyl scare tactic.

    I seized just watching that video.

    1. Sometimes a Great Notion   4 years ago

      If you drive through Baltimore you'll notice people on street corners wearing HAZMAT suits, they got the good shit.

  10. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/ZubyMusic/status/1424712256458199041?s=19

    Why is it that liberals and progressives generally believe 'the pandemic' is SO much more scary and deadly than conservatives and libertarians do?
    Different threat sensitivity?
    Personality types?
    Media sources?
    Groupthink?
    People are living in different realities.

    FYI this is a global phenomenon from what I have observed. Not limited to the USA or UK.

    I've also noticed that people who freaked out over Trump, Brexit and climate change also tend to freak out about 'the pandemic'.

    It certainly appears that some people need an 'existential threat' even if it's imaginary, or grossly exaggerated.

    1. Idaho Bob   4 years ago

      But 600,000 dead should make everyone lose their shit. Or so I keep hearing

      1. Ron   4 years ago

        I'm still surprised they haven't tried to claim the pandemic worse than the civil war since it took 4 years for that many to die in battle while it only took one year of Trumps incompetence for that many to die from covid.

        1. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

          No Trump vaccine for you!

    2. CE   4 years ago

      Conservatives tend to be afraid of certain groups of people: illegal immigrants, terrorists, criminals, etc., and are willing to surrender some of their liberty for protection from these bogeymen. They want a strong central government, but only want to use it against certain threats.

      Liberals tend to be afraid of all groups of people. They saw Thanos as the true tragic hero of the MCU, and humanity and progress as a plague upon Mother Earth. Since they are afraid of everyone, they want a strong central government to control everyone. Brexit was frightening to them because it rolled back the march toward one world government. Liberals also tend to reject religion, so fighting against imagined or exaggerated existential threats like slightly warmer weather or systemic racism gives their lives purpose, and assures them they are not one of the people who deserves to be snapped into dust by the one wearing the Infinity Gauntlet of unlimited power.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

        Conservatives favor social conformity, and fear those who would disrupt the conformity with heterodox ideas.

        Liberals favor diversity, and fear those who would try to narrow or stifle that diversity.

        1. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

          Who knew chemtard's lefty university professor allies were so conservative?

        2. 5.56   4 years ago

          Read fatjeffs comment for an example of the incredibly simplistic world views of a low intelligence, partisan hack.

        3. criticaljeff racial theorist   4 years ago

          Which is why today's left is so pro free--speech and freedom of religion, and respects minority political opinions

          1. 5.56   4 years ago

            demjeff radical shill also doesnt get that regulating cryptocurrency like the bill does is another attack on individual freedom, but ALL democrats and only 18 republicans voted to end the debate. And disrupting individuality is the bane of real diversity. Hes really not that bright.

      2. The Encogitationer   4 years ago

        Uh, the Marvel Comic Universe is just for entertainment. Neither Thanos nor God exist, M'Lady (hough Thanos and the Abrahamic and Vedic Gods are all assholes according to their legends.) The Universe is eternal and infinite. You don't have to get rid of half of life in order to save the Universe. Duh?

        Liberals and Conservatives can fight over what reason to expand government power. I'll continue to support refuting Supernatural Woo and limiting govenment.

      3. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

        Uh, conservatives more likely want to reduce the liberties of illegal immigrants, terrorists, and criminals. Themselves, not so much.

        Liberals, especially the self-righteous (and self-hating) variety, are very eager to reduce liberties for everyone.

    3. ElvisIsReal   4 years ago

      The libertarians went directly to the actual data sources and looked at real numbers in the real world? They know that every single antibody test result shows the virus is far more widespread than we thought and we had been living with it for months without noticing?

    4. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

      Modern liberals and progressives are the political choices (and outcomes) of nannies, Karens, and pussies. To them, EVERYTHING is a danger, and the only righteous strategy is to demand a risk-free existence.

      Remember your semi-senile grandma who worried about everything you did, and made you promise all kinds of asinine stuff?

    5. The Encogitationer   4 years ago

      A rational viewpoint is that COVID-19 is neither cancer and heart disease, but neither is it "like a cold, but the sniffles."

      And the rational libertarian response would have been to legalize and deregulate testing kits, PPE, sanitizer, abolish "certificates of need" for medical necessities. Quarantines only for the ill and at-risk, not for everyone. Then, as fast as a safe vaccine is developed, it's "over the counter with an Epi-Pen, pretty soon, everybody's well again." To use a technical term: Booyah!"

  11. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   4 years ago

    "'The coronavirus pandemic in America has become a delta pandemic. By the end of July, it accounted for 93.4 percent of new infections,' reports The Washington Post."

    As a Koch / Reason libertarian, I'll support almost anything Biden does to fight this virus — mask mandates, lockdowns, etc. But he must not even consider closing our southern border.

    #OpenBorders
    #(EspeciallyDuringAPandemic)

  12. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://davidrozado.substack.com/p/ppdwnmd

    It is noteworthy that prejudice-denoting words are markedly increasing in prevalence alongside long-term decreases in overt expression of prejudice [6]-[9] yet recent increases in the perceived prevalence of such prejudice among the general public. 

  13. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   4 years ago

    Gold fell to below $1700/oz yesterday. Oil and silver are falling fast. The US Dollar is strengthening again.

    And all the wingnuts are talking runaway inflation.

    THIS HAPERINFLATION IS FER REAL!

    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      SleepyJoe says we have a booming economy. Why are prices dropping?

    2. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   4 years ago

      And that's not all!

      Warren Buffett is up over $16 billion this year.

      When Obama was President, and you gave daily updates about how we were in the best economy ever, you used Buffett's net worth (instead of GDP growth) as your preferred metric. Well, Buffett is doing even better under Biden than he did under Obama.

      This means Biden has created the strongest economy in US history — surpassing even 2009 - 2016.

      #LibertariansForBiden

      1. Jerryskids   4 years ago

        Has Buffett made enough money that he's going to voluntarily pay taxes at the same rate as his secretary, or is he still just whining and crying over how unfair it is that the government doesn't force him to pay more taxes?

        1. Sometimes a Great Notion   4 years ago

          No, he's giving it all away before the death tax sends it all down the swamp drain. But Buffet can be trusted to do what he wants with the fruits of his labor unlike the rest of us.

        2. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

          How much more did Buffett cost the federal government than his secretary (cradle to grave)?

    3. Unicorn Abattoir   4 years ago

      Did the same thing in March and April. But hey, you've got one data point, so go with it.

    4. Sevo   4 years ago

      turd lies, always. If turd posts it, it's a lie or distorted enough to make if worthless.
      turd is a psychopathic liar.

  14. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/EricMMatheny/status/1424709819957710848?s=19

    The Liberal Elites are media savvy. They’re not lacking in self-awareness. They knew the optics of Obama’s massive unmasked/not socially-distanced event when people are being told to do precisely the opposite. They had the party on purpose; to remind you that you are not them.

  15. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   4 years ago

    "Meet the woman who could replace New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo."

    Cuomo will survive this. New York will eventually realize his accusers are all mentally unstable liars.

    #MaleDemocratsAlwaysRespectWomen

  16. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/LeonydusJohnson/status/1424707479712276480?s=19

    Apparently, we're just going to endlessly jump back and forth between race panic, COVID panic, and climate panic to keep people perpetually crippled by fear.

    "@AP
    A United Nations report released Monday warns that the Earth is getting so hot that temperatures will blow past a level of warming that global leaders sought to prevent in about a decade. [Link]"

    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      Next to the article was a picture of an old woman in front of a forest fire.

      1. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

        Was she wearing a mask?

    2. Zeb   4 years ago

      OK. If it's too late, can we stop fucking talking about it?

    3. CE   4 years ago

      9 years to go.
      When it's 1.5 degrees warmer, we're all doomed.
      Even though people have been moving to warmer climates for decades (since AC was invented).

      1. ElvisIsReal   4 years ago

        I'm pretty dumb but even I know that life likes heat more than cold.

      2. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

        So seriously, I wonder how much of this migration phenomenon has affected the perception of people about how "life has gotten warmer". Since people do not have factual memories, what they know about the past is more based on folklore and stories, including about how grandpa had to shovel snow off the roof (in Wisconsin) but now it hardly snows at all (in South Carolina).

  17. Fist of Etiquette   4 years ago

    Meet the woman who could replace New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

    But never in our hearts.

    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      How many innocents people will she be able to kill?

      1. Sometimes a Great Notion   4 years ago

        As many if not more then any man could, you sexist pig!

  18. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/university-spends-50000-removing-racist-boulder-campus

    Apparently a 'racist' boulder was making students at the University of Wisconsin's Madison campus feel uncomfortable to the point that the school actually spent some $50,000 removing it.

    The story is so utterly absurd that we wish we could claim satire, but as Fox News writes, "Chamberlin Rock, which rests atop Observatory Hill, is named after a 19th Century geologist and former university president, Thomas Crowder Chamberlin, whose work centered on glacial deposits, according to a bio on the university’s website."

    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      I’m literally shaking.

    2. Ron   4 years ago

      worlds biggest weather rock for sale cheap, must pay shipping

    3. Unicorn Abattoir   4 years ago

      And the funny thing is they didn't actually "remove" it - They moved it to another spot on campus.

      1. ElvisIsReal   4 years ago

        So now it can trigger a different set of students? How racist!

    4. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

      Duh, glaciology has been proven to be anti-feminist, so it probably is racist.

      https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0309132515623368

  19. damikesc   4 years ago

    "For now, the side that wants less cryptocurrency regulation and taxation lost."

    Congrats, Reason. This is what you wanted.

    1. Weigel's Cock Ring   4 years ago

      This can’t be repeated often enough. Elections really do have consequences!

      And “for now” will become “forever” when this shit-ass bill passes within the next couple of days. Which it will.

  20. Ken Shultz   4 years ago

    It appears that the infrastructure bill will get about 17 Republican votes in the Senate, which is disappointing. That being said, if 33 of 50 Republican senators vote against it, that will still mean the Republicans were 2-1 against the infrastructure bill.

    The infrastructure bill is supported by 50 of 50 Democrats, and those whose support was questionable was only questionable because they refuse to support this bill unless it's in addition to the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill.

    Regardless, every Republican senator who voted in favor of the infrastructure bill needs to be targeted for defeat in the Republican primaries--much like the Tea Party targeted Republicans who voted for TARP after 2008.

    1. damikesc   4 years ago

      Well, one (Graham) just got re-elected by lying about his conservative bona fides.

      "We have to show the Senate can get the 'big' things done"...something Democrats do not seem terribly concerned over when the GOP is is charge and why the Democrats always win.

      1. Ken Shultz   4 years ago

        To the extent that the Tea Party concentrated on eliminating Republicans in the primaries--who specifically voted for TARP--that was ingenious.

        Same thing is needed here.

        It isn't what they say or lie about. It's how they voted. Did you vote for the infrastructure bill or didn't you? If you did, the Republican tent shouldn't be big enough to include you.

        That how you get libertarians and others into the tent. We need to control it at the primary level, like the government employee unions do in the Democratic party.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

          Did you vote for the infrastructure bill or didn’t you? If you did, the Republican tent shouldn’t be big enough to include you.

          Vote out Republicans for doing what? For voting in favor of roads and bridges? (This is not the so-called 'human infrastructure' bill after all.) Trump talked endlessly about 'infrastructure week' after all. It's not like government-funded physical infrastructure is some crazy left-wing idea. It's hard to find a more mainstream idea than that.

          When did Republicans supposedly turn into Rothbardian anarcho-capitalists?

          1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

            “Roads and bridges.”
            As if.

            1. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

              LOL, no kidding. A bill for "roads and bridges" that runs 2,500 pages isn't limiting itself to just those items.

              chemsimp radical deathfat knows this, he's just doing his usual reflexive lefty apologia/anti-rightist bellyaching. The hilarious part is that Overt actually called out his methodology directly a few days ago, and here he is doing it again.

            2. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

              So they're voting against it because of all the wasteful spending? Uh-huh.

              1. Rev. Arthur L. Kuckland   4 years ago

                Jeff here is the epitome of retarded
                "the bill is titled flags for orphans! How could it be bad?"

                Umm it establishes concentration camps for political dissidents, creates a wealth tax, establishes a new unelected burocracy that has totalitarian control.

                Jeff: but it's called flags for orphans!

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                  Can you show in the bill where it establishes concentration camps or has bureaucracies exerting totalitarian control? Or, maybe it is a bill that is about infrastructure? Gee I don't know, which could it possibly be?

                  1. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

                    Here, chemsimp radical lefty dickmuncher treats Kuckland's mocking response literally because he knows his own argument was so intellectually stunted.

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                      Maybe the bill *actually is an infrastructure bill*, and is not a stalking horse for some other terrible idea.

                      It's not a good idea just because of whatever the title says, and it's also not a bad idea just because of whichever team is supporting it.

                    2. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

                      Maybe the bill *actually is an infrastructure bill*, and is not a stalking horse for some other terrible idea.

                      Maybe there's a lot of other bullshit in there, using "roads and bridges" as the lever to get it through.

          2. damikesc   4 years ago

            You know, there are breakdowns of what is in the bill.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

              Okay? Yes I agree that there is some nonsense spending in there, just like in every other spending bill. But it's basically "roads and bridges". Moreover, it's basically things that Trump would have supported with his supposed perpetual "infrastructure week". Even if anarcho-capitalists want to privatize the roads, it doesn't mean Republicans want to, and opposing this bill is just a statement of tribalism for them. This doesn't seem like a particularly smart hill for Republicans to die on. But who knows, more and more people are viewing politics as tribal warfare, so maybe Republicans will be rewarded for voting against roads.

              1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

                LOL.
                Keep flailing.

              2. damikesc   4 years ago

                "Moreover, it’s basically things that Trump would have supported"

                Using ASSUMPTIONS to criticize him is fun, ain't it?

                Good to see that a radical individualist does not mind the government spying on you and is, in fact, LOOKING to pay for it.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                  the government spying on you

                  What are you even talking about here?

                  1. damikesc   4 years ago

                    The money to start work on the government spying on you to determine how many miles you drive, for starters.

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                      Could you provide a citation for this claim?

                    2. damikesc   4 years ago

                      I'll go ahead and pretend you're asking a sincere question.

                      https://www.ibtimes.com/infrastructure-bill-2021-hides-pilot-program-track-drivers-travel-data-3267968

                2. Ken Shultz   4 years ago

                  “Moreover, it’s basically things that Trump would have supported”

                  Trump isn't dead, and he still has opinions. Here's his opinion of the infrastructure bill:

                  "Former President Trump on Saturday slammed the Senate's $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package just hours before the upper chamber is scheduled to vote on winding down debate, calling the bill a “disgrace” and pushing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to negotiate a better deal.

                  The ex-commander in chief issued the message from his Save America PAC, accusing Republican leaders of satisfying the policy agenda of Democrats and telling GOP senators to think “twice before you approve this terrible deal.”

                  ----The Hill, August 8, 2021

                  https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/566838-trump-slams-mcconnell-infrastructure-package-a-disgrace

                  If that's what ChemJeff said, then he's uninformed. If he made a claim that could be easily disproven with a simple search, he's worse than uninformed.

                  1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                    Sure. Trump opposes THIS infrastructure bill because he's studied all 2700 pages and has a detailed nuanced opinion on why it is inferior. It's not at all because he opposes it only because BLUE TEAM BAD

                    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

                      Did you read it?

                    2. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                      I read the summary, which is probably far more than Trump read about it.

                      Trump's opposing it because BLUE TEAM BAD and also because of his ego - he wasn't able to get an infrastructure bill through Congress and so he is going to attack the next guy who is currently succeeding in doing so.

              3. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

                chemsimp radical deathfat always stands up for his Democratic buddies.

                1. Ken Shultz   4 years ago

                  And he can't support his positions with facts and logic because they're uninformed and irrational.

                  1. Mike Laursen   4 years ago

                    Yes, that is true: Trump cannot support his views with facts and logic, because they are uninformed and irrational.

                    1. Red Rocks White Privilege   4 years ago

                      Demsimp #2 weighs in.

          3. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

            Your personal finances must be hilarious.

    2. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      BiPaRtiSaN!

    3. Mike Laursen   4 years ago

      “It appears that the infrastructure bill will get about 17 Republican votes in the Senate…”

      Are people allowed to call the bill bipartisan? Or are you still trying to control the definition of “bipartisan”?

  21. damikesc   4 years ago

    "David French reviews Andrew Sullivan's essay collection Out on a Limb."

    Not reading it, but "Man, that was well thought out" is not something you will see in any reviews of his work.

    French is now a meme.

  22. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/planefag/status/1424609055914475524?s=19

    This isn't an idle threat. [Link]

    1. mad.casual   4 years ago

      Huh. In some minds 'quarantine' is or became synonymous with 'prison camps'. Who could've foreseen this unintended consequence?

  23. Bill Godshall   4 years ago

    ENB wrote:
    '"Crypto got screwed tonight," tweeted Sen. Ted Cruz (R–Texas), in a thread proving he can occasionally still get something right.'

    In fact, left wing ENB is proving she can occasionally still get something right, while Cruz is correct most of the time.

  24. Sevo   4 years ago

    REPENT NOW!

    "U.N.-backed climate panel issues a dire report that contains a sliver of positive news"
    [...]
    "...United Nations Secretary General António Guterres called the report's findings "a code red for humanity" and said we owe it to "the entire human family" to cut emissions fast and sharply to avoid irreversible catastrophe...."
    https://theweek.com/climate-change/1003496/un-backed-climate-panel-issues-a-dire-report-that-contains-a-sliver-of

    Are you right with God?

    1. Jerryskids   4 years ago

      I wasn't in favor of nuking China, but now that stopping them from producing more CO2 is a Code Red, I guess we'll just have to suck it up and launch the missiles.

      1. Sevo   4 years ago

        Didn't read much of the report (pretty sure it could be cut and pasted from the ones published over the last 30 years), but unless there's a paragraph in there pointing out that nuclear power is a viable option, I can state that these are not serious people.

        1. Nardz   4 years ago

          Oh, they're serious about taking away your rights and freedoms

  25. Sevo   4 years ago

    76th anniversary of the Nagasaki nuke, where the US used high-tech weapons to end WWII and save millions of lives, including those of the Japanese.
    Normally we get some whining from those who have not answered this question:
    What alternative would have ended the war with fewer deaths?

    1. Commenter_XY   4 years ago

      No alternative, which is why we had to drop the bomb and end the war faster.

    2. mad.casual   4 years ago

      Can we instead have a discussion about how, a decade after we vaporized a city with an uncontrolled chain reaction, people were still living there and how they weren't dying, covered in tumors, hair and teeth falling out, skin sloughing off from radiation poisoning for the next 5,000,000,000,000,000,000 yrs.?

      1. Sevo   4 years ago

        And the survivors are yet gathering annually for pity parties!

      2. Nardz   4 years ago

        I say we apologize by nuking Portland

        1. mad.casual   4 years ago

          In a double-irony, we build a wall and only let people with Japanese passports and their direct descendents out.

    3. Rev. Arthur L. Kuckland   4 years ago

      None. And are you aware that the England bombing of dresden had more civilian casualties that both nukes?

      1. Sevo   4 years ago

        I've read some revised numbers which lower that count by quite a bit. The more recent books all have lower counts; R. B. Frank seems to have done good research for "Downfall" and he puts the Dresden deaths at some 60,000 (pg45).

      2. Sevo   4 years ago

        Oops.
        Just now reading Atkinson's "Guns at Last Light"; the most recent German estimate is 25,000 dead.

  26. Minadin   4 years ago

    Please stop calling something 'bi-partisan' every time a couple of republicans appear to support it. That's the gaslighting I expect from the crooked legacy media, not from Reason.

    My favorite legacy media headline from earlier this year:

    "Republicans Block Bi-Partisan Bill" . . .

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

      But that is what bipartisan means - it is supported by members of both sides.

      The problem is not that particular bills or votes are labeled as 'bipartisan' when they actually are supported by members of both sides, the problem is the inclination to think that 'bipartisan' means 'good'. As if a bad idea somehow becomes better if it is supported by people of different tribes.

      1. mad.casual   4 years ago

        The problem is not that particular bills or votes are labeled as ‘bipartisan’ when they actually are supported by members of both sides, the problem is the inclination to think that ‘bipartisan’ means ‘good’. As if a bad idea somehow becomes better if it is supported by people of different tribes.

        'The real problem with chickens is that the eggs come first.'

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

          I don't follow? There is nothing inherent about the word 'bipartisan' that implies that such a thing is necessarily good or positive. That is simply the meaning too many imbue into it.

          1. Dillinger   4 years ago

            is less "implied" than "expressed by corporate media for at least the last 30 years"

          2. mad.casual   4 years ago

            In a duopoly it's sloppy shorthand for 'unanimous' and while I agree that 67-33 is not the most egregious case of abuse of the notion 'bipartisan = unanimous', it's still an abuse when more than 50% of the opposition disagrees.

            More directly to my chicken-and-egg: Is it considered good because people just (fooled to) think 'bipartisanship' means something is inherently good [chicken] or is it considered good because people (are fooled to) think 'Hey, even the people who think most of my ideas are stupid think it's good!' [egg]?

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

              Then it's the "sloppy shorthand" that is wrong, not the word itself.

              I would imagine that the implication that "bipartisan = good" comes from the notion that if an idea is believed by a wider diversity of people, then it is less likely to be bad, because it has survived the rigor of criticism from different points of view. And in an ideal world, I suppose that would make sense. But that is not the case here - in this case, both sides are totally in favor of more spending, and so the fact that this bill increases spending is why they support it DESPITE the flaws.

      2. Minadin   4 years ago

        No it is not. There is one party that is responsible for crafting the bill, deciding what is in and what is out, and with the unilateral ability to pass it. Their members support the bill 100%.

        There's also a small minority of members from the other party, which isn't allowed to have any part of crafting the bill, and couldn't pass it on their own if they wanted to, who also appear to support it for some reason or another.

        The word 'bipartisan' is being used to misdirect from the fact that this is a democrat bill. It is a democrat bill. It was built by democrats. If it passes, it will be with 100% democrat support. Most republicans oppose it.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

          So by your reasoning, the PATRIOT Act wasn't bipartisan either, even though it was supported by 99% of Congress, because one party was in charge of writing the bill. Is that really your argument?

          You are conflating power with support. Yes one party has the power. That is not what bipartisan means though. It means if the bill has the support of members of both parties. And the answer here is yes.

          In your view, was the impeachment of Bill Clinton "bipartisan"? Yes or no?

          And are we going to be pretending now that Democrats did not actually compromise here in order to get Republican votes?

          1. Dillinger   4 years ago

            Susan Collins makes it bipartisan. lol.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

              Yeah it does.
              What it doesn't mean, is that just because Susan Collins might support something, doesn't necessarily make that thing better.
              Get it now?

              1. Dillinger   4 years ago

                shallow and pedantic. but watching you be wrong is half the fun of this place.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                  Also correct. Thanks for admitting that I'm right, in your own way.

                  1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

                    *Also I'm correct.

                    1. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

                      Lol

                    2. Sevo   4 years ago

                      You're full of shit.

    2. Dillinger   4 years ago

      >>I expect from the crooked legacy media, not from Reason

      the line where you should expect it from Reason was crossed a long time ago?

  27. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2021/08/08/coming-soon-for-the-unvaccinated-a-50-monthly-paycheck-deduction-from-your-employer/amp/?sh=16c79d6a47ae&__twitter_impression=true

    1. MT-Man   4 years ago

      Fat tax next?

  28. A Cynical Asshole   4 years ago

    For now all time, the side that wants less cryptocurrency regulation and taxation lost.

    FTFY. Seriously, when was the last time the side that wants less regulation and taxation of anything actually won?

    1. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

      You mean universal de-regulation or just some faction's pet priorities?

    2. criticaljeff racial theorist   4 years ago

      We had this President a while back, Worse than Hitler. but somehow taxes And regations both went way down during his reign of terror

      1. CE   4 years ago

        And he took advantage of a global pandemic to crack down on the states to ensure his reelection, no wait....

        1. Sevo   4 years ago

          And somehow killed millions of Americans by infecting them all!

      2. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

        B-b-b-but mean tweets!

  29. Earth Skeptic   4 years ago

    "While some people won't get the COVID-19 vaccine once, others are doubling up."

    I have heard from people who are convinced that the vaccine is a Trilateral Commission conspiracy, loaded with fluoride. And I have listened to my panicked (and already vaccinated) neighbors talk about how to scam the system so they can get another 2 or 3 (or 10) doses.

    Why are we surrounded with such fucking idiots?

    1. mad.casual   4 years ago

      Why are we surrounded with such fucking idiots?

      Lockdowns ended.

      1. Nardz   4 years ago

        For now...

  30. Dillinger   4 years ago

    Team Less Regulation and Fewer taxes = Washington Generals

    1. CE   4 years ago

      Libertarian moment was about 30 trillion dollars ago.

    2. Not Robbers=Nut Rubbers   4 years ago

      That's a terrible analogy....the Generals won once.

      1. Dillinger   4 years ago

        I was counting the '95 "Budget Balance" ... but Clinton will probably also tell you he's Chelsea's pop, so grain of salt and all ...

  31. criticaljeff racial theorist   4 years ago

    Ted Cruz getz stuff right on "occasion" about 20x more frequently than ENB does, or Welch or Fonzie these days. Maybe he should be in charge here.

    (But think of the sexworkers!)

    No one is perfect

  32. CE   4 years ago

    "Eighteen Republicans joined all Senate Democrats in the 68–29 vote to close debate and move on."

    Finally, some real bipartisanship. I guess both sides can agree on spending money we don't have and taxing any industry that still has a pulse.

    1. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

      Eighteen Senate Republicans and sixty-eight Democrats didn't do their job and failed their electorate.

  33. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

    A win for property rights in Florida.

    https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/566946-judge-rules-florida-cant-ban-norwegian-cruise-line-vaccine-passport

    A judge ruled on Sunday that Norwegian Cruise Line is permitted to ask customers to show proof of vaccination before boarding a ship, dealing a blow to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s (R) law that prevented "vaccine passports" from being utilized in the state.

    The nearly 60-page preliminary ruling from U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in the Southern District of Florida said that the state law barring the use of vaccine passports is likely unconstitutional under the First Amendment and jeopardizes public health.

    The weird thing though is that the ruling claimed that the 'vaccine passports' violated the First Amendment's speech provision, because it "blocked communication between business and customers". I mean, sure, but I would have imagined that private property and association rights should have led the way here.

    A win is a win, though, I suppose.

    1. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   4 years ago

      I guess that's good news.

      However Florida won't be truly libertarian until all K through 12 public schoolchildren are required to take critical race theory classes.

      #RadicalIndividualistsForRacialCollectivism

    2. Nardz   4 years ago

      "Vaccine passports are freedom"

      1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

        Discrimination is good now.

      2. Unicorn Abattoir   4 years ago

        Freedom is compliance!

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   4 years ago

          Clearly, freedom is subverting the property rights of all businesses.

          1. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

            Who's property rights? The shareholders? The Directors? The CEOs?

            1. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

              Please tell me you think that a multinational corporation is a person.

              1. Peter Mathewson   4 years ago

                Testing more stuff

          2. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

            Also, explain to us how mandatory vaccination actually benefits these companies bottom lines (I'm looking forward to this. Please infer that somehow a consumer would know or care that every single employee was vaxxed).

  34. jimc5499   4 years ago

    "in a thread proving he can occasionally still get something right."
    Can a writer at Reason get through an article without making a smartassed snide remark?

    1. Mike Laursen   4 years ago

      No. Snarkiness directed toward politicians has always been part of Reason’s M.O.

  35. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/ZubyMusic/status/1424747431774892033?s=19

    The way they have been flagrantly breaking all of their own rules throughout, whilst performing such obvious charades, and yet millions of people STILL trust them is quite impressive.
    I actually respect the psyop.
    [Video]
    People laugh at this video, but this is the exact same thing that millions of people do when they enter restaurants... All over the world.
    It's ALL performative. Nothing scientific nor logical about this.

    1. Don't look at me!   4 years ago

      but this is the exact same thing that millions of people do when they enter restaurants…
      Not me.

    2. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

      I actually respect the psyop.

      It's not that they think we're idiots. They know we recognize their middle school-level sophistry. They enjoy parading their lack of accountability. It's a show of power.

  36. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1424737737882624000?s=19

    Don't get sucked into the fake (in the present media circumstances) climate change "debate." That's getting led around by the nose and playing on their turf. The arguing is the reflexive move. It's how the dialectic progresses. Call it what it is: a narrative pivot for control.
    There are definitely real issues to discuss and debate about the climate and related phenomena. Now, during an attempted reflexive media push, is not the time. Discipline yourself. Do not take the bait. Deflate their political warfare balloon. Then you can talk about it.
    They will try to say it's conservatives' fault for not wanting to have the conversation so they can maintain the status quo (dialectical manipulation). Of course they will. They will not acknowledge that they're forcing the conversation on illegitimate terms.
    All delay in any necessary conversations about climate change and related issues are being caused by the side using them as yet another narrative-driven political weapon.
    If Leftists really care about the climate, they must stop this BS immediately. They're causing the delay.
    People who take the issue seriously don't need reflexive political warfare to discuss it and refuse to discuss it in those manipulated circumstances. When the reflexive push stops, we can start to talk. Understand the moment in history you are living in.
    The people pushing a reflexive narrative don't care about reality. You know this. They only care about making the debate itself a thing so they can polarize and scoop up sympathizers while identifying "dangerous" dissidents and naming them as enemies. Name the game. Don't play.

  37. Nardz   4 years ago

    https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1424730656861478922?s=19

    We learned all the wrong lessons after WW2, thanks to people who tried very hard to find language they thought could explain the Nazis but didn’t condemn the Soviet Union.

    "@walterkim
    One problem with our historical sense of totalitarian horrors is that we learn of them in summary, as outcomes, & can’t imagine ourselves ever condoning such outcomes again, forgetting that these disasters appeared beforehand very differently, as attractive but deceptive choices"

  38. Mother's Lament   4 years ago

    David French reviews Andrew Sullivan's essay collection

    Cripes! Does it get much more establishment than that?

  39. onebposhop   4 years ago

    It appears that the infrastructure bill will get about 17 Republican votes in the Senate, which is disappointing. That being said, if 33 of 50 Republican senators vote against it, that will still mean the Republicans were 2-1 against the infrastructure bill.

    The infrastructure bill is supported by 50 of 50 Democrats, and those whose support was questionable was only questionable because they refuse to support this bill unless it’s in addition to the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill.

    Regardless, every Republican senator who voted in favor of the infrastructure bill needs to be targeted for defeat in the Republican primaries–much like the Tea Party targeted Republicans who voted for TARP after 2008.

    1. Mike Laursen   4 years ago

      So, you are either Ken’s sock puppet, or you and Ken are copying and pasting the same conservative talking points from the same source. Interesting.

    2. Mike Laursen   4 years ago

      https://reason.com/2021/08/09/cryptocurrency-fight-holds-up-infrastructure-bill/#comment-9036951

  40. VanceRiggle   4 years ago

    LIFE CHANGING OPPORTUNITY BE an Internet HOME-BASED real Earner.I am just working on facebook haq only 3 to 4 hours a Day and earning $47786 a month easily, that is handsome earning to meet my extra expenses and that is really life changing opportunity. Let me give you a little insight into what I do….. http://Www.SmartPay1.com

  41. Oliver   4 years ago

    Thank you for sharing such a useful information.

  42. Loker Bandung   4 years ago

    Currently, users must bid for how much they’re willing to pay to have their ether transaction picked up by a miner, which can be extremely costly. Under EIP-1559, this process will be handled by an automated bidding system with a set fee amount that fluctuates based on how congested the network is.

    It's just another point of view ^_^

    Loker Bandung

  43. Peter Mathewson   4 years ago

    Testing stuff and things.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Freedom Lovers Can Reckon with Addicts and Addiction

Daniel Akst | 6.15.2025 7:00 AM

Ross Douthat on Digital Alienation, Birth Rates, and Demographic Collapse

Liz Wolfe and Zach Weissmueller | From the July 2025 issue

More Than 1,800 'No Kings' Protests Aim for Nonviolent Pushback Against Trump Policies

Nancy Rommelmann | 6.14.2025 10:10 AM

Have Presidents Grown Too Powerful To Be Removed From Office?

Gene Healy | 6.14.2025 8:00 AM

Some Federal Agencies Are Actually Getting More Efficient

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 6.14.2025 7:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!