In Case You Missed it (v109)

I managed to get three posts out last week - here's your recap, in case you missed anything.

For your Sunday School, I hung out in the Fox News Sunday classroom where host Shannon Bream talked with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV). He talked about his desire to get permitting reform passed; getting that considered was the deal he made for his vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, a deal that strongly perturbed his Republican colleagues. 

Bream was armed with a lot of ammo on that.

... Well, certainly, you understand where Republicans don't think they should be the ones to come across the aisle to vote for a measure that primarily benefits you, which was done in exchange for your vote on a measure they didn't support -- not a single one of them vote for the Inflation Reduction Act.

And there's more - she quoted something in 'Politico' from Sen. John Cornyn, "Given what Senator Manchin did on the reconciliation bill, it's engendered a lot of bad blood. There's not a lot of sympathy on our side to provide Senator Manchin a reward." The point of that? Why should the Rs help him now?

Manchin pointed out that the Rs, with his support, have been fighting for - for years - to get this done. 

He gently reminded any Rs watching that they weren't successful last time around.

When they had everything, when they -- in 2016 to 2020, Shannon, they had Republican president, Republican House, Republican Senate, we couldn't -- we couldn't move it because I was the only Democrat. Now we're in a position where we have a majority Democrats and our Republican friends can take it across the line.

His closing remarks were also spot on; let me know what you think.

Picking up where Manchin left off, for your Extra Credit,  I wandered down the hall to the State of the Union classroom. Jake Tapper talked with two former Tennessee governors, one of each flavor. Phil Bredesen (D) and Bill Haslam (R), are co-hosting a podcast called You Might Be Right.

Tapper delved into the perceived difficulties of trying to have a bipartisan conversation on critical issues in a time of great partisan divide. Here was his first attempt, which Haslam mostly dodged. 

Tapper asked Haslam what he'd say to folks who say it's not possible to find common ground "with people who are literally trying to undermine democracy?"  Tapper was referring to the many Rs, including the top leaders in the House, who push the Big Lie and, "in the view of many critics, don't seem to have a real commitment to democracy."

He asked it again, suggesting "it's difficult to have an argument" about important topics like taxes, foreign policy, abortion and so on "if the other side won't even accept the results of a free and fair election." 

Bredesen took the question this time, pointing out that "if we get stuck on that" there won't be a lot of progress made.

What Bill and I are trying to do is to say, look, there are some issues there that are -- they're very difficult and people are in hard corners, but there's a lot of issues in this country having to do, I mean, with the debt and with the environment and so on, that there are real problems that need solutions. And trying to explore with the public at large, not necessarily with the Congress, but the public at large, as to what some of those common grounds might be, I think, is important.

He also pointed out the difference between two governors talking, and Congress.

I mean, we both were in the business world before politics. We both were mayors and then governors. I mean, those are all jobs where you actually have to do something Monday morning. If there's a problem out there, you're expected to do something to begin to -- begin to solve it. That's just a very different environment than you have in the Congress, for example, where there's very little problem-solving going on, but there's a lot of posturing going on and working to the base. So, I hope that the combination of experiences of the two of us bring something a little different to the discussions as well.

Compare this line of thinking to the utter pettiness of Sen. John Cornyn in the Sunday School recap...  maybe Cornyn and the rest of the folks in DC should tune in to the podcast. 

I did a few good week/bad week mentions for your TGIF post; here are a couple of them.

Speaking of the gaffe master, he might have exceeded our wildest imaginations at a White House hunger conference this week, when he called out for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, who was killed in a car accident in August. Walorski was a co-chair of the Hunger Caucus, and was one of the folks who introduced the bill that led to the conference. And, of course, the pack of reporters, hungry as always for a sound-bite and air time, undertook "a series of tense exchanges" trying to get an answer as to why Biden, well, pulled a Biden. Is an answer necessary?

Supreme Court Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was formally sworn in this week, and will take her seat on the bench on Monday, at a time when 60% of us believe the Court is "out of touch" and 66% believe there should be term limits for Justices.  Those sentiments aren't indicative of KBJ, of course, but she's coming on the Court at a difficult time, with some tough cases on affirmative action and college admissions, LGBTQ rights, and election issues, among others.

That's a wrap on the week -- I'll be back later, hopefully with a fuller slate of posts and an empty drafts folder. 

Wish me luck. 

Sunday School 8/7/22: Extra Credit

The Sunday School lesson came from Meet the Press, winner of the lucky classroom drawing. For today's Extra Credit, we're wandering down the hall to the CNN State of the Union classroom to catch Dana Bash and Sens. Dick Blumenthal (D-CT) and Lindsay Graham (R-SC).  I know, I'm breaking with my new 'one classroom policy' but I thought this one was interesting.

Bash asked Blumenthal how the Inflation Reduction Act would help Americans. He spoke about cuts in drug costs, energy costs, and "greater tax fairness" because corporations with assets or earnings of more than a billion dollars "currently paying nothing will have to pay at least 15%." He said gas prices will continue going down, and "necessities" will also decline. Altogether, he said, "I think Americans will see historic results."

Graham chimed in, saying "this is not the bipartisan part of the interview," and proceeded to slam the American Rescue Plan ("it became a recession plan") and the new bill, which he said "is going to make everything worse." And even though he voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the gun bill, he's a no on this.

... If a company buys a piece of equipment, they could expense it under the 2017 tax cut in the same year they bought it. That goes away. So, CBO says it disincentivizes companies for building factories, buying equipment, which would help us get out of recession. There's a 16.4% tax on imported barrels of oil that are going to increase cost at the gas pump. Subsidies for Obamacare go to families making $304,000 a year, which I think is ill-conceived. And the bottom line, it's not going to help inflation.

Bash didn't question Graham's claim on the subsidies, nor did she ask if the Rs have an alternative for the estimated 3 million people who would lose insurance, or the 10 million who would see a sharp increase in their premiums this fall.

Graham is upset that the deficit is only being reduced by $100B, while the spending is about $750 trillion. And, about the subsidies, he said "we all know they're not going to go away. So, if they stayed in place for 10 years, it would add $280 billion to the deficit. So, it's a gimmick.... no Republican is going to vote for it."

Blumenthal said "one thing where I think we can agree... is the IRS is going to have resources it needs to go after the highest-income Americans that are cheating on their taxes right now. And that will mean more money for the government." And, he continued,

 ... the average American sitting at their kitchen table deciding whether they can buy medicine, pay their mortgage, or go to the grocery store and get the food they need, they're going to be able to get that medicine much more cheaply…Overwhelmingly, the American people want to cut the cost of prescription drugs. This measure does it through enabling Medicare to do what the VA does, what the Department of Defense does, negotiate for lower prices. And that will affect the entire course of inflation.

 Graham wasn't having it.

... They take 15 drugs, and they put a limit on what you can charge. That sounds good, until pharmaceutical companies invent less new drugs. Remember COVID? Well, it was the American pharmaceutical industry that got us the drugs that keep us out of the hospital and keep a lot of us alive. This is price-fixing. It has never worked for us. It's not going to work now. Hiring 86,000 more IRS agents, if that makes you feel better, you have missed a lot. They're coming after waitresses, Uber drivers and everybody else to collect more taxes. So, if you think growing the IRS is good for you, you're wrong.

Blumenthal thinks that's just silly. Uber drivers and "everybody else" is going to be OK, because the IRS will be targeting the "highest-income Americans." 

The idea that there's going to be this army of IRS agents defending -- descending on the average American is just preposterous. Tax fairness is what we need. And for the biggest corporations in this country to pay no taxes, for them to do stock buybacks that benefit the shareholders, but, for example, in the case of oil companies, they are making three to four times what they did just last year. What are they doing with those excess windfall profits? Lowering gasoline prices? No. They aren't doing stock buybacks. They ought to pay a tax on it. And I think there ought to be rebates to consumers from those excess profits.

Let's move to the bipartisan part of the interview, where there's agreement that:

• we should label Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, that we need to provide more military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, and we need more sanctions on Russia. 
• Nancy Pelosi's trip to Taiwan wasn't a mistake; Blumenthal said "...the Chinese can't tell our legislators or any American citizens where to travel." Graham suggested her visit sends a message to Iran and Russia, not just China, adding we need Taiwan economically, and we need to provide it more economic and military support.
• we need to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, but not with a national red flag law, with incentives to states to help them to what they need to do - and due process must be a part of whatever that looks like.
• they'll both support their team's presidential candidate in '24; Graham wants Trump to be the candidate, as long as he doesn't talk about 2020, while Blumenthal wasn't definitive in whether he wanted Biden to run.

I'll leave it here

Graham: So, there are plenty of us up there (DC) who fight and work together. I just want the country to know that all is not lost in Washington.

Bash: Well, that's why we have you on... we all agree this is good for the country to see that you can disagree without being disagreeable, but also work together where you see those issues.

Blumenthal: And working together is what the American people really want. 

That's it, in a nutshell: work together, on behalf of the American people, not on furthering you party's interests.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 7/31/22

CBS won the billion-dollar classroom lottery today, so we'll have highlights from Face the Nation for Sunday School and your Extra Credit. John Dickerson sat in for Margaret Brennan. 

We'll start with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), and then listen in as Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) chimes in. 

Manchin denied that he had "changed his mind" on anything; rather, the Inflation Reduction Act he agreed to with Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer fights inflation, which is what he wanted. And, he said, the bill doesn't raise taxes.

...the corporate tax in America in 2017, before the Republican tax cut, was 35 percent. They cut it to 21 percent, 14 percent reduction. All the people that I know are paying 21 percent or more. All the even larger corporations, but some of the largest corporations of a billion dollars of value or more don't even want to pay the minimum of 15 percent.

He said he "never thought" people (I think he meant corporations) weren't paying at least 21%. Has he had his head in his state's coal dust for the last decade or more? I mean, I did a post on GE not paying any federal income taxes back in 2011, for heaven's sake. And West Virginia's almost heaven, so Manchin clearly should have known about this.

Dickerson explained the "Republican criticism" that closing loopholes increases taxes which hurts supply, and during inflation you need a lot of supply. Manchin, sounding almost like a Democrat, said

In the last two years, there have been massive record profits across the board by these largest corporations, massive record profits. And it's been the lowest capital expenditure in the last two years, so that didn't drive it...

Dickerson said Manchin's GOP colleagues think he and Schumer "did something underhanded" by saying 'no deal' and then making a deal. He quoted Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) who said this was "a declaration of political warfare." Manchin's reaction?

It's such a shame. John Cornyn is a good friend of mine. He's such a good man. And for the politics to be so toxic right now, first of all, I never thought this would come to fruition. I never spoke with anybody about it, any of my colleagues, because they were frustrated that nothing happened for so long on the other. 

And, Dickerson pressed yet another GOP argument.

-- you made certain representations, they would say, to Republicans, then broke your trust... Susan Collins said: "It's a very unfortunate move that destroys the many bipartisan efforts that are under way," in other words, whether it's on election reform or same-sex marriage, that the well has been poisoned.

Manchin said he considers Collins a "very dear friend," but said he "never told anybody" he wasn't going to do something. 

If I had a chance to fix the energy policy of the United States of America, and I didn't do it, shame on me. If I had the chance to reduce the amount of inflation that people in West Virginia and across the country are enduring right now, shame on me... we were able to provide these solutions. Let's not make them political, John." 

Next up? Sen. Toomey, and Dickerson stayed with the Inflation Reduction Act, asking for Toomey's "principal critique."

Well, it's going to make inflation worse, actually. So, they've got a big corporate tax increase that's going to probably make this recession that we're in worse... this spending is unnecessary. It's going to exacerbate inflation. It is not going to reduce the deficit.

He's a big fan of his friend Joe Manchin, but said Manchin "got taken to the cleaners." He agreed to a bunch of bad policy, and in return he was promised "there's going to be some kind of pro-energy infrastructure bill sometime in the future."

Dickerson noted that The Committee for a Responsible Budget, a "fan" of Toomey's, said that this new bill "would be the first time in many years" that reconciliation was used for deficit reduction. Others have said the same thing, but Toomey disagrees.

... they use the same gimmick that Sen. Manchin said he was opposed to in the past. They claim the revenue over a 10-year window from their big tax increase, and their price controls. And then the expenditure that they acknowledge, they pretend is only going to be for three years. That's the Obamacare subsidies for wealthy Americans. That's an obvious political payoff. The last time they had to do this, they said it would only be for two years. It's about to expire. And they can't - - they can't have it expire before an election. So, they're extending it, but only for three years. They have no intention of ever ending the Obamacare subsidies. Over a 10- year window, that wipes out the purported deficit reduction.

Dickerson didn't question the comment about "wealthy Americans" getting the health insurance subsidies, or the fact that many very much not wealthy Americans would lose their insurance without the subsidies; I wish he had.

Toomey said the supporters of the bill aren't "taking into account how much our economy will slow down from this big corporate tax increase that will mostly hurt manufacturing and domestic investment..." And he explained how the GOP tax cut was supposed to work, how allowing businesses to make capital investments (new plants, new equipment, etc.) and deduct the cost in the same year caused a "huge surge in capital expenditure" and the Dems will "raise the cost of investing in a business."

Folks at the Brookings Institution who studied this would disagree with Cornyn, as would the IMF, but I'm sure he has experts that would say he's right.

They moved on to the PACT Act, which would provide health care to veterans who were exposed to dangerous toxins from burn pits. The Senate shot the bill down, even though they voted for it in June. Cornyn said they want an amendment to "change a provision that has nothing to do with veterans' health care," because the Dems added a provision that's "designed to change government accounting rules, so that they can have a $400 billion spending spree."

Toomey said that the Rs are "fully accepting" the deficit will grow due to the PACT Act - "we accept that as a price we have to pay for people who serve the country." He objects to

a budgetary gimmick, a sleight of hand in accounting rules, that will allow totally unrelated spending of $400 billion over the next 10 years. 

There was more discussion, where Toomey accused Dickerson of being "totally incorrect" in his assessment of Toomey's amendment; Dickerson said "it actually caps annual expenditures for the toxic fund. And after 10 years, it goes away."  However, Toomey argued,

What it caps is how the government accounts for these transfers, but there is no cap on the amount of money that goes over. There is no cap on the total program. Look, if -- honest Democrats evaluating this will tell you, if my amendment passes, not a dime change in spending on veterans' programs. What changes is how the government accounts for it.

Dickerson noted Cornyn may be consistent on the deficit, but many of his colleagues aren't, and asked "why is it important to be fastidious when it comes to veterans, but less so when it comes to, say, supporting chip manufacturers?"

Because, John, once again, you're completely mischaracterizing this... most Republicans think we shouldn't loosen up the budget rules so that Democrats can go on a spending spree on things that have nothing to do with veterans' health care.

To which Dickerson responded,

 Of course, Democrats have to be in charge in the future when that spending happens, and they may very well not be. 

See you around campus.