周四，十名共和党和民主党参议员准备乘飞机离开华盛顿，进行为期两周的休会。他们松了一口气，终于达成了一项两党基础设施协议，一些人甚至还没有登机，共和党人就乔·拜登总统声明的将协议与一个单独的、更大的一揽子计划联系起来的意图进行了反击，该计划有可能使刚刚宣布的计划泡汤。

然后，在一个澄清声明拜登和一些人在周末共和党谈判者的新乐观主义，两党协议似乎又回到了正轨。

但周一，参议院少数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔(Mitch McConnell)利用民主党不稳定的政治局势，对拜登提出了更高的要求，坚持要求他告诉参议院多数党领袖查克·舒默(Chuck Schumer)和众议院议长南希·佩洛西(Nancy Pelosi)也放弃将这些方案捆绑在一起的计划。

亚历克斯·王/盖蒂影像公司

参议院少数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔在每周参议院会议后的新闻发布会上倾听...

麦康奈尔的言论，加上周末挥之不去的困惑，留下了关于该协议能否承受竞争利益的悬而未决的问题，尤其是在国会要求在夏季结束前推进基础设施建设的压力越来越大之际。

我以为有交易?

曾经有过——直到现在几乎没有——而且离达成协议还很远。

周四，拜登走出椭圆形办公室，走向白宫车道，在10名两党参议员的陪同下，微笑着向记者宣布，他们已就1.2万亿美元的基础设施提案达成协议。

该提案由两党小组共同提出，将为道路、桥梁和水路等核心基础设施提供资金，据说将在不增加税收或征收通行费等使用费的情况下全额支付。

杰奎琳·马丁/美联社

乔·拜登总统和一群两党参议员在华盛顿白宫外发表讲话...

议员们称赞该协议是两党合作的光辉典范，也是拜登的一大胜利，他承诺让跨通道工作成为华盛顿的支柱。

但就在两个小时后，在白宫晚些时候宣布该协议的活动中，拜登告诉记者，他不打算签署两党协议，除非同时有一个单独的、更大的一揽子计划提交给他。

民主党人表示，他们打算推进几个月的一揽子计划，将侧重于拜登的美国家庭计划的其他方面，如就业、住房和医疗保健。民主党人表示，他们打算使用一种称为和解的快速预算程序来通过该法案，这种程序允许他们绕过国会通过法案所需的通常的60票门槛。

“如果这是我唯一想到的，我不会签署它，”拜登说，指的是基础设施一揽子计划。“是一前一后。”

对一些在白宫车道上与拜登站在一起的共和党人来说，这相当于否决威胁。一些人威胁要撤回他们的支持。

随后的争夺如此激烈，以至于周六，拜登不得不发布了一份有点冗长的澄清，他在澄清中表示，他无意制造否决威胁的意图。

“我表示，如果没有我的家庭计划和其他优先事项，包括清洁能源，我将拒绝签署基础设施法案。拜登写道:“这一声明让一些共和党人感到不安，他们认为这两个计划没有联系，这是可以理解的。”。“我们的两党协议不排除共和党人试图击败我的家庭计划;同样，他们也不应该反对我为通过家庭计划和其他提案所付出的努力。我们将让美国人民——以及国会——来决定。”

现在温和的共和党人在说什么?

周日，周四在白宫会见拜登的几名共和党参议员表示，在拜登的澄清下，他们有信心两党协议回到正轨。

“我很高兴看到总统澄清了他的言论，因为这与我们一路上被告知的一切都不一致。”俄亥俄州共和党参议员罗布·波特曼告诉美国广播公司“本周”联合主播乔纳森·卡尔。“很明显，我们可以推进一项两党法案，这项法案不仅在国会议员中广受欢迎，而且在美国人民中也很受欢迎。”

但周一，麦康奈尔坚决反对更大的一揽子计划，并显然意识到民主党人之间的分歧，他说拜登需要做更多的工作来安抚共和党人。

麦康奈尔在一份声明中呼吁总统敦促舒默和佩洛西承诺解除两党计划与和解方案的联系。两位领导人此前都表示，他们看到这两项计划在“两条轨道”上同时进行。

麦康奈尔说:“我很欣赏总统说他愿意单独处理基础设施，但他不能控制国会和议长，以及多数党领袖。”

安德鲁·凯利/路透社

参议院多数党领袖查克·舒默和美国交通部长皮特·布蒂吉格在参议院发表演讲...

舒默没有直接回应麦康奈尔的呼吁，但他周一在纽约重申，他致力于通过两党法案和和解方案。

周一，白宫新闻秘书珍·普萨基(Jen Psaki)一再回避拜登将如何推进的问题，称他已与议员们进行了交谈，并将把法案的时间留给国会。

“我知道我们有时非常关注过程，我知道法案成为法律的过程很重要，但总统打算将两项立法都签署成为法律。他渴望这样做，”普萨基说。

埃文·武奇/美联社

6月28日，白宫新闻秘书珍·普萨基在白宫的新闻发布会上发言...

第二个“人力基础设施”支出计划不是一直摆在桌面上吗?

几周以来，民主党人一直明确表示，他们打算采用所谓的“双轨”方法，让拜登的基础设施优先事项——核心物理基础设施和人力基础设施——在今年获得通过。

尽管一些共和党人对两党法案与和解工具的捆绑表示愤慨——允许民主党在没有共和党投票的情况下通过预算措施——但许多共和党谈判者已经接受了民主党作为多数党有权寻求和解的事实。

“我无法控制民主党人做什么。天哪，如果我可以，他们不会是民主党人，参议员比尔·卡西迪，共和党人。他是两党谈判小组的一员我认为，即使舒默——多数党领袖舒默决定推进另一项——和解法案，我们也取得了进展。"

这位参议院议员已经批准了这一程序性举措的使用，这一举措与拜登在3月份通过的大规模新冠肺炎支出法案相同，今年将再次使用。对民主党人来说，下一个和解方案是在中期选举前推进拜登一些关键竞选重点的一个重要机会。

一些温和的民主党人对寻求第二个和解方案以通过“人类基础设施”优先事项持怀疑态度，尽管一些坚持己见的人，包括西弗吉尼亚州温和的民主党人乔·曼钦，最近对此有所升温。

然而，民主党人对这一方案应该有多广泛还远未达成一致，他们所有的50人需要达成一致才能完成这一目标。

参议院预算委员会主席伯尼·桑德斯。他希望达成一项高达6万亿美元的和解协议。对于像曼钦这样的温和派来说，这几乎肯定是不可能的。曼钦周日告诉卡尔，他可能支持和解，但只有一个可以可信地支付的方案。

“我想确保我们为此付出代价。我不想增加更多的债务。曼钦说:“因此，如果这是1万亿美元、1.5万亿美元或2万亿美元，无论结果是10年以上，我都会投这个票。”。

拜登最近没有说他希望在和解协议中达成什么，但他的美国家庭计划价值1.8万亿美元，白宫认为和解方案是通过两党基础设施协议中剩余的其他措施的机会。

Evelyn Hockstein/路透社

参议员伯尼·桑德斯在华盛顿参加参议院委员会会议时走过走廊..

进步民主党呢?

民主党领导层在这方面走得很好，因为对于每一个威胁说，如果两党计划与更大的支出方案挂钩，他们将拒绝支持的共和党人来说，有一个进步的民主党人，对他们来说，获得更大的方案是他们支持两党方案的先决条件。

“让我明确一点:如果没有一项能够大幅改善工薪家庭生活、应对气候变化的生存威胁的和解法案，就不会有两党基础设施协议。没有和解法案，就没有交易。桑德斯周日在推特上写道:“我们现在需要变革。”。

马萨诸塞州参议员伊丽莎白·沃伦。周四表示，“我们的核心小组承诺，一个部分不会前进，其余部分会留在火车站。”纽约州参议员柯尔斯顿·吉利布兰德(Kirsten Gillibrand)对美国广播公司(ABC News)表示，承诺和解是她支持两党法案的一个要求。

如果进步人士不支持两党法案，它可能达不到在参议院推进该法案所需的60票。即使有足够多的共和党人支持这项两党法案，以抵消潜在的进步叛逃者，目前还不清楚舒默是否会提出一项在自己的核心小组中没有广泛支持的法案。

我们什么时候能看到这些法案的进展?

前进道路的确切时间尚不完全清楚，但舒默上周表示，他计划在参议院7月4日为期两周的休会结束后，将两党基础设施一揽子计划和和解一揽子计划提交讨论。

这个时间表可能有点雄心勃勃。和解是一个多步骤的过程，需要几个参议院委员会的工作和两个公开的修订过程。

尽管如此，民主党人和拜登已经明确表示，他们希望在今年夏天推进基础设施建设。

所以，为华盛顿的一些政治戏剧系上安全带——在七月。

After Biden's cleanup effort on infrastructure deal, McConnell presses for more

As a group of ten Republican and Democratic senators got ready to jet out of Washington on Thursday for a two-week recess, breathing a sigh of relief that at long last, a bipartisan infrastructure deal had been struck, some had not even boarded their planes before blowback from Republicans over President Joe Biden’s stated intention to link the agreement to a separate, larger package, threatened to sink the just-announced plan.

Then, after aclarifying statementover the weekend from Biden and somefresh optimism from Republican negotiators, the bipartisan deal seems to be back on track.

But on Monday, taking advantage of the shaky political situation for Democrats, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell demanding even more from Biden, insisting that he tell Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to also back down from their plans to tie the packages together.

McConnell's comments, coupled with the lingering confusion from the weekend, leave outstanding questions about whether the deal can withstand competing interests, especially as pressure mounts for Congress to move on infrastructure before the summer ends.

I thought there was a deal?

There was -- until there almost wasn't -- and it's still far from a done deal.

On Thursday, Biden, walked out of the Oval Office to the White House driveway, and flanked by a group of 10 bipartisan smiling senators, announced to reporters they had reached a deal on a $1.2 trillion infrastructure proposal.

The proposal, workshopped by the bipartisan group, would provide funding for core infrastructure such as roads, bridges and waterways, and, it was said, would be fully paid for without raising taxes or instituting user fees like tolls.

The lawmakers hailed the agreement as a glowing example of bipartisanship, and a big win for Biden, who ran on a promise to make across-the-aisle work a Washington mainstay.

But just two hours later, during a late-added White House event to out the deal, Biden told reporters he had no plans to sign the bipartisan deal unless a separate, larger package came to his desk at the same time.

That package, which Democrats have said they intend to move forward with for months, would focus on other aspects of Biden’s American Families Plan - things like jobs, housing, and health care. Democrats have said they intend to pass it using a fast-track budget procedure called reconciliation, which allows them to bypass the usual 60-vote threshold necessary to pass bills in Congress.

"If this is the only one that comes to me, I'm not signing it," Biden said, referring to the infrastructure package. "It's in tandem."

To some of the Republicans who had stood with Biden in the White House driveway, this was tantamount to a veto threat. Some threatened to withdraw their support.

The ensuing scramble was so significant that on Saturday, Biden had to issue a somewhat lengthy clarification in which he stated he had no intention of creating the intention of a veto threat.

“I indicated that I would refuse to sign the infrastructure bill if it was sent to me without my Families Plan and other priorities, including clean energy. That statement understandably upset some Republicans, who do not see the two plans as linked,” Biden wrote. “Our bipartisan agreement does not preclude Republicans from attempting to defeat my Families Plan; likewise, they should have no objections to my devoted efforts to pass that Families Plan and other proposals in tandem. We will let the American people—and the Congress—decide."

What are moderate Republicans saying now?

On Sunday, several of the Republican senators who met with Biden at the White House on Thursday said that with Biden’s clarification, they are confident the bipartisan deal is back on track.

“I was very glad to see the president clarify his remarks because it was inconsistent with everything that we had been told all along the way,"Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, told ABC "This Week"co-anchor Jonathan Karl. "It's very clear that we can move forward with a bipartisan bill that's broadly popular not just among members of Congress, but the American people.”

But on Monday, McConnell, who is dead-set against opposes the larger package and apparently sensing an opening to divide Democrats, said Biden needed to do more to reassure Republicans.

In a statement, McConnell called on the president to urge Schumer and Pelosi to commit to unlinking the bipartisan plan from a reconciliation package. Both leaders have previously stated they see the two plans moving together on "two tracks."

"I appreciate the president saying that he is willing to deal with infrastructure separately, but he doesn't control the Congress and the speaker, and the majority leader,” McConnell said.

Schumer hasn’t directly responded to McConnell’s call, but in New York on Monday he reaffirmed that he was committed to passing both the bipartisan bill and the reconciliation package.

On Monday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki repeatedly dodged questions about how Biden would proceed, saying he has spoken with lawmakers and will leave the timing of the bills to Congress.

"I know that we're quite focused sometimes on process in here, I understand that the process of a bill becoming a law is important, but the president intends to sign both pieces of legislation into law. He is eager to do that,” Psaki said.

Hasn't a second "human infrastructure" spending package always been on the table?

Democrats have been clear for weeks they intend to use a so-called "two-track" approach to getting Biden’s infrastructure priorities -- both core physical infrastructure and human infrastructure -- passed this year.

Even though some Republicans have expressed outrage over the tying of the bipartisan bill to the reconciliation tool -- allowing Democrats to pass a budget measure with no GOP votes -- many of the Republican negotiators have been resigned to the fact that Democrats have the right, as the majority party, to pursue reconciliation.

"I cannot control what Democrats do. My gosh, if I could, they wouldn't be Democrats, Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., who is part of the bipartisan group of negotiators, said on Fox News last week. "I think we've made progress even if Schumer -- Majority Leader Schumer decides to proceed with another -- a reconciliation bill."

The Senate parliamentarian has already green-lit the use of this procedural move, the same one that was used to pass Biden's massive COVID-19 spending bill in March, for an additional use this year. For Democrats, this next reconciliation package is a major opportunity to move some of Biden's key campaign priorities before the midterm elections.

Some moderate Democrats had been skeptical of pursuing a second reconciliation package to pass "human infrastructure" priorities, though some holdouts, including West Virginia Moderate Democrat Joe Manchin, have recently warmed to it.

However, Democrats are far from united on how expansive this package should be, and all 50 of them will need to be on the same page to pull this off.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has said he wants a reconciliation deal costing a staggering $6 trillion. That’s almost certainly a non-starter for moderates like Manchin, who on Sunday told Karl he may support reconciliation, but only a package that can be credibly paid for.

"I want to make sure we pay for it. I do not want to add more debt on. So if that’s $1 trillion or $1.5 trillion or $2 trillion, whatever that comes out to be over a 10 year period, that’s what I would be voting for," Manchin said.

Biden hasn’t recently said what he would want in a reconciliation deal, but his American Families plan is worth $1.8 trillion and the White House views a reconciliation package as an opportunity to pass other measures left on the cutting room floor of the bipartisan infrastructure deal.

What about progressive Democrats?

Democratic leadership is walking a very fine line here because, for every Republican who is threatening to withhold support if the bipartisan plan is linked to the bigger spending package, there is a progressive Democrat for whom getting the bigger package is a prerequisite to their supporting the bipartisan package.

"Let me be clear: There will not be a bipartisan infrastructure deal without a reconciliation bill that substantially improves the lives of working families and combats the existential threat of climate change. No reconciliation bill, no deal. We need transformative change NOW," Sanders tweeted on Sunday.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said Thursday that "there's commitment in our caucus that one pieces is not going to go forward and leave the rest of it back in the train station." Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., told ABC News that commitment to reconciliation is a requirement for her support of the bipartisan bill.

If progressives don’t back the bipartisan bill, it could fall short of the 60 votes necessary to move it forward it in the Senate. Even if enough Republicans got behind the bipartisan bill to counteract potential progressive defectors, it’s not yet clear if Schumer would bring a bill to the floor that doesn’t have broad support within his own caucus.

When do we expect to see movement on these bills?

The exact timing on a path forward isn’t entirely clear, but Schumer said last week he plans to bring both the bipartisan infrastructure package and a reconciliation package to the floor when the Senate returns from its two-week July 4 recess.

That timeline may be a bit ambitious. Reconciliation is a multi-step process requiring work by several Senate committees and two open-amendment processes.

Still, Democrats and Biden have been clear they want to move on infrastructure this summer.

So, buckle up for some Washington political drama -- in July.