Bash asked TGFV if he had Biden's approval to go big - way big. He said that Biden's given them a "serious and comprehensive blueprint" of where they want to go, and while there's an admittedly important inclination to "get bogged down in numbers,"
we got to look at what the needs are of the American people, what's going on right now. And what is going on right now, obviously, as everybody knows, very rich are doing phenomenally well. Corporate profits are soaring. And yet we have -- in terms of real wages for working people, it's lower today than it was 48 years ago. Half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck.
And then he ticked off the issues: childcare; housing; climate; paid medical leave; corporations not paying taxes; rich people not paying taxes.
So, all that the president is doing, all I am doing is taking a look at reality for working families, understand their needs have been ignored for decades. Now it is time to create good-paying jobs, millions of good- paying jobs, addressing health care, housing, infrastructure.
And about those Ds who are feeling queasy, is he willing to cut the price tag or edit the laundry list? He said the process is just beginning, and he plans on talking to everyone and trying to hammer things out, but again,
... I think that there is general agreement that the time is long overdue that we address many of the long-neglected problems facing the middle class and working class of this country.
TGFV does not support the bipartisan infrastructure bill, Bash noted. He said the bill "provides spending in some important areas," but the money is not adequate. He does think that raising taxes on wealthy people is ok, but that "raising the gas tax, or a fee on electric cares, or maybe privatization of infrastructure," which have been mentioned, are "bad ideas." He said he'd have to see how the bill is paid for, and added, again, the laundry list of his priorities which he clearly considers are everyone else's priorities.
And I can't help thinking, as I do every time he's interviewed, that he seems to forget that he lost - twice - to a less progressive candidate. And yet, he always seems to think that he's in the driver's seat. And if he's the one to kill a bipartisan infrastructure bill, he'll have proven that he's not president for a reason.
Down the hall, Chris Wallace asked Sen. Graham, one of the Group of 21 (10 Ds and 11 Rs) who have a $1T infrastructure plan, "how close are you to a deal with the White House? And what's the effective deadline for reaching an agreement?" Graham said that the group is willing to add more new money to the plan, whereas the previous group was not willing to do that. He also said that it's up to Biden, really.
...I am hopeful if the White House and Joe Biden stay involved, we can get there. I would just say this: President Biden, if you want an infrastructure deal of a trillion dollars, it's there for the taking. You just need to get involved and lead.
Graham's thoughts on compromising on infrastructure with the Dems, knowing that they're seemingly willing to go forward unilaterally with the $6T behemoth spending plan?
That could be very problematic. I'm going to sit down and talk with my colleagues. But $6 trillion being spent through reconciliation is more money than we spent to win World War II. Infrastructure to me is roads and bridges and ports -- and electrical vehicles are fine. I don't want to raise taxes to pay for it.
Well, except for things like the federal gas tax, which he said hasn't been adjusted for inflation since the 90s. He's also OK with using unspent COVID money to fund an 'infrastructure bank' but Wallace didn't ask for details on that, or even on what that money was originally intended for in any of the COVID relief packages. And, Graham threw in the talking points that are required every time an R gets in front of a microphone.
And what they're calling infrastructure, the liberal left, to me, is not remotely related to what's traditionally been called infrastructure. It's just -- it's just a power grab by the Democratic Party in every area of our lives.
Because affordable broadband and eldercare and whatnot didn't exist back in the day? Because investing in medical infrastructure for our aging population, or broadband for our poor children are just ways for the Dems to grab power? And adjusting a tax for inflation is a good idea, but fixing the minimum wage which is even older is a bad one? Who are these people?
Moving on to voting rights, Wallace asked Graham whether he'd support the Manchin plan, which is a heavily stripped-down version of SR-1, the For the People Act. Manchin's proposing making election day a holiday, at least 15 days of early voting, banning partisan gerrymandering, and requiring a voter ID.
Graham doesn't "like the idea of taking the power to redistrict away from state legislators," because
You're having people move from red -- blue states to red states. Under this proposal, you would have some kind of commission, redraw the new districts, and I don't like that. I want states where people are moving to have control over how to allocate new congressional seats.
So, he's a no on the plan, just as he's a no on SR-1
In my view, SR-1 is the biggest power grab in the history of the country. It mandates ballot harvesting, no voter ID. It does away with the states being able to redistrict when you have population shifts. And it's just a bad idea and it's a problem that most Republicans are not going to sign -- they're trying to fix a problem most Republicans have a different view of.
Wallace did do some fact-checking on Graham's statements, but it didn't matter. And then, he asked if the Rs run the risk of the moderate Dems throwing in the towel on bipartisanship and joining calls to change the filibuster.
Graham says he hopes not, noting that the two parties are close on police reform, and on infrastructure as they discussed, and that he's willing to work with Manchin. He also said when the Rs had Former Guy and majorities in both the House and Senate, there were "a bunch of Democrats" willing to sign a letter protecting the filibuster. They're hiding somewhere now, Graham thinks, but he's adamant on one thing.
Never once did I go to Joe Manchin or any other Democrat and say, if you don't do some of the things I want, I'm going to agree with Trump to change the rules. I'm not going to be extorted here. I'm asking no more of my Democratic colleagues then I ask of myself. It was very unpleasant to be beat on every day by the president of the United States, President Trump, and his allies, to try to change the rules in the Senate to have their way. I said no because it's bad for the Senate. I hope these Democrats understand it's bad for the Senate to change the rules, and I don't want to be extorted. I've got to give two or three things before they will not change the rules. I don't like that at all. I didn't do that to them and I wish they would not do this to me.
Unasked?
- Why aren't more Rs willing to compromise?
- Where is the Grim Reaper on all of this, encouraging his party to work together so that the rules could be protected?
- Why are the Republican so against these proposals which have broad support conceptually, even if not broad support on the money?
- Why, specifically, are the policies being proposed the wrong ones? Not the spending part, the policy part? How are these needs going to be met otherwise?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!