Biden infrastructure/tax increase megathread

[It’s so Joever]

Are we finally leaving the Reagan slump?

[Red Velvet]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1382347919454474243

Wow. I’m surprised, in a positive way. Didn’t expect this fiber from democrats. Good for them!

They’re still imperfect but they’re moving in the right way. If I were an independent left wing voter flirting a bit with Trump populism, that certainly would make me shift to democrats if they keep this attitude for next four years.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Every NY House Dem except AOC & Rice is drawing a hard line in the sand on repealing the SALT cap.

Bowman too? Dang.

Weird how a DSA member wants tax cuts for wealthy people.

As I've said before, the SALT cap as enacted puts a pressure on higher tax blue states to lower their taxes. These are the states that have more generous programs for those that need them, including Medicaid and other social welfare programs. Note how many low tax red states have restrictive Medicaid programs and have refused federal money to expand it as per the ACA. I don't necessarily support eliminating the cap, but I would support raising it to affect only the highest of earners.

It doesn't; the small number of voters affected by it (who make up a greater proportion of donors) do. State legislators should have the spines to not cut taxes almost exclusively for the rich, and Congress should not cover for weak state legislators or pander to these donors.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1382023333672316932

So, more popular than not, but not the obvious slam-dunk political winner the ARP was? That sounds about right to me.

Agreed, but it’s not clear how all those unsure people will shake out.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1382347919454474243

Keeping the foot on the gas, you love to see it.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3695

INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN

A plurality of Americans (44 - 38 percent) support President Biden's $2 trillion infrastructure plan, while 19 percent did not offer an opinion.

However, support grows for the infrastructure plan if it is funded by raising taxes on corporations, as Biden has proposed. In that scenario, a majority support the infrastructure plan 53 - 39 percent, with 9 percent not offering an opinion.

"The president's infrastructure bill, a $2 trillion national makeover, gets a lukewarm go ahead from Americans, but a warmer reception when the suggestion that big corporations, not taxpayers, should be forced to front the funding," added Malloy.

TAXES & SPENDING

Over 6 in 10 Americans (62 percent) support raising taxes on corporations, while 31 percent oppose it. A similar number support raising taxes on people earning more than $400,000 a year, 64 - 31 percent.

President Biden has said he will not raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000 a year. When it comes to believing Biden, 48 percent of Americans say he will raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000 a year, while 44 percent say he will not.

When it comes to general views on spending, 48 percent say the Biden administration wants to spend too much money, 37 percent say it wants to spend the right amount, and 8 percent say it wants to spend too little.

People wants infrastructure plan payed by taxing the Rich! (a repeal of the SALT cap would do the opposite FWIW).

[Frodo]

So-called Senate GOP 'moderates' will be proposing a non-starter of a counter-offer that cuts Biden's infrastructure plan by more than half, as well as shift the financial burden away from the wealthy and corporations to everybody else.  And following their playbook from the Obama years, they will vote against their own plan should it come close to becoming law even if Democrats adopt it:

A bloc of Senate Republicans prepare their own infrastructure plan as Biden tries to ramp up outreach

The Republican alternative is expected to be less than half the size of the White House’s plan, according to party lawmakers, who in recent days have suggested its total price tag could ultimately cost between $600 billion and $800 billion.

Moderate GOP members of Congress also have pledged to narrow their focus to include only the elements they consider traditional infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, while jettisoning the corporate tax increases that Biden has endorsed in favor of other ways of financing the overall package.

Capito explained that most of the money would go toward roads and bridges and not items many Republicans allege are unrelated to infrastructure. And she joined Republicans in blasting Biden’s proposed tax increases as a nonstarter for the GOP, echoing the staunch opposition earlier this week from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Romney later said the $800 billion price tag may be “a little high,” though he said the proposal is likely to include funding for highways, railways, airports, water and sewer systems, and Internet connectivity. The GOP lawmaker said he hopes to finance it through fees on the users of those services, a category of revenue-raisers that could include higher payments on drivers of gas-powered or electric vehicles. Democrats largely have resisted the idea, fearing it may encroach on Biden’s pledge not to raise taxes on Americans who make under $400,000 per year.

As many of us suspected from the start, they are clearly more interested in playing gotcha games than in governing.  

[brucejoel99]

So-called Senate GOP 'moderates' will be proposing a non-starter of a counter-offer that cuts Biden's infrastructure plan by more than half, as well as shift the financial burden away from the wealthy and corporations to everybody else.  And following their playbook from the Obama years, they will vote against their own plan should it come close to becoming law even if Democrats adopt it:

A bloc of Senate Republicans prepare their own infrastructure plan as Biden tries to ramp up outreach

The Republican alternative is expected to be less than half the size of the White House’s plan, according to party lawmakers, who in recent days have suggested its total price tag could ultimately cost between $600 billion and $800 billion.

Moderate GOP members of Congress also have pledged to narrow their focus to include only the elements they consider traditional infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, while jettisoning the corporate tax increases that Biden has endorsed in favor of other ways of financing the overall package.

Capito explained that most of the money would go toward roads and bridges and not items many Republicans allege are unrelated to infrastructure. And she joined Republicans in blasting Biden’s proposed tax increases as a nonstarter for the GOP, echoing the staunch opposition earlier this week from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Romney later said the $800 billion price tag may be “a little high,” though he said the proposal is likely to include funding for highways, railways, airports, water and sewer systems, and Internet connectivity. The GOP lawmaker said he hopes to finance it through fees on the users of those services, a category of revenue-raisers that could include higher payments on drivers of gas-powered or electric vehicles. Democrats largely have resisted the idea, fearing it may encroach on Biden’s pledge not to raise taxes on Americans who make under $400,000 per year.

As many of us suspected from the start, they are clearly more interested in playing gotcha games than in governing.  

This literally reads like "COVID Package 2: Electric Boogaloo." Even the numbers are copy/pasted: $600B!? If congressional Republicans really wanna do the same exact dance that we just went through on the COVID package, then they'll really be doing nothing but proving that all of this is just one of the most hilarious charades of all-time.

[Badger]

Every NY House Dem except AOC & Rice is drawing a hard line in the sand on repealing the SALT cap.

Good for AOC and Rice, and I'm extremely disappointed, albeit not super surprised, with all of the Democrats who want to die on this hill. The defense that Suozzi gives for gutting the cap is basically that Trump instituted it for the wrong reasons, which is almost certainly true but does not at all speak to the actual merits or demerits of the policy.

I am at best neutral about the salt cap. However, is absolutely not worth killing the stimulus bill over.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Tax the Rich! Keep the cap! Real America has spoken.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/npr-pbs-newshour-marist-poll-biden-approval-rating-and-infrastructure/

[Pericles]

So Republicans are now the party of increasing taxes on ordinary people, Biden is the populist low tax President? Wow.

[Badger]

So Republicans are now the party of increasing taxes on ordinary people, Biden is the populist low tax President? Wow.

Thats been the case for over 40 years at least.

[Pericles]

Lol McConnell is having a terrible year so far, his past actions just keep coming back to bite him.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1382800107846897668

Progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Biden’s infrastructure-and-spending plan shouldn’t be held hostage to demands to repeal the cap on deductions for state and local taxes that are being made by some of her fellow New Yorkers and other representatives from high-tax states.

She called abolishing the $10,000 limit on SALT deductions “a giveaway to the rich.” The New York representative said that while there could be “a conversation” about adjusting the cap to help taxpayers who are deeply affected -- mostly in Democratic-run states like New York, New Jersey, California and Illinois -- a full repeal is going too far.

“I don’t think that we should be holding the infrastructure package captive for a 100% full repeal of SALT,” she said. “We can have a conversation on the policy, but it’s a bit of an extreme position, to be frank.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks came shortly after a group of Democratic and Republican House members announced they were forming a caucus to push to lift the limit and threatening to vote against Biden’s plan to use the tax code to fund his proposal unless the repeal is included. That caucus numbered 32 by late Thursday afternoon. -- Billy House

Senator Chris Coons, a key ally of President Joe Biden, said Thursday he’s talking with Republican senators about breaking up the president’s infrastructure-led economic package into two bills, and passing a bipartisan bill first.

“That could end up being an $800 billion to $1 trillion bipartisan bill,” the Delaware Democrat said. Coons said that would include such items as roads, bridges, airports, water projects and rural broadband that have support from both sides of the aisle. “If there is a pathway towards a robust infrastructure package with Republicans, I will support and urge that the Biden administration embrace splitting this into two bills.”

He suggested Democrats should then pass a larger, follow-on package with Biden’s many other priorities that aren’t backed by the GOP, via a reconciliation package, which would only need a simple majority of votes in the Senate.

Coons said he spoke Wednesday with West Virginia Republican Shelley Moore Capito, who floated a $600 billion to $800 billion bipartisan package shorn of many of Biden’s spending and tax proposals that Republicans either oppose or don’t think should be included in an infrastructure bill.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

So-called Senate GOP 'moderates' will be proposing a non-starter of a counter-offer that cuts Biden's infrastructure plan by more than half, as well as shift the financial burden away from the wealthy and corporations to everybody else.  And following their playbook from the Obama years, they will vote against their own plan should it come close to becoming law even if Democrats adopt it:

A bloc of Senate Republicans prepare their own infrastructure plan as Biden tries to ramp up outreach

The Republican alternative is expected to be less than half the size of the White House’s plan, according to party lawmakers, who in recent days have suggested its total price tag could ultimately cost between $600 billion and $800 billion.

Moderate GOP members of Congress also have pledged to narrow their focus to include only the elements they consider traditional infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, while jettisoning the corporate tax increases that Biden has endorsed in favor of other ways of financing the overall package.

Capito explained that most of the money would go toward roads and bridges and not items many Republicans allege are unrelated to infrastructure. And she joined Republicans in blasting Biden’s proposed tax increases as a nonstarter for the GOP, echoing the staunch opposition earlier this week from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Romney later said the $800 billion price tag may be “a little high,” though he said the proposal is likely to include funding for highways, railways, airports, water and sewer systems, and Internet connectivity. The GOP lawmaker said he hopes to finance it through fees on the users of those services, a category of revenue-raisers that could include higher payments on drivers of gas-powered or electric vehicles. Democrats largely have resisted the idea, fearing it may encroach on Biden’s pledge not to raise taxes on Americans who make under $400,000 per year.

As many of us suspected from the start, they are clearly more interested in playing gotcha games than in governing.  

I must say 'water-pipes and hospitals aren't infrastructure' is possibly the dumbest 'centrist' concern I've seen yet, and a perfect encapsulation of the Very Serious mindset

[Virginiá]

What is the point of this? Republicans have made it clear their ceiling on spending is nowhere near the Democrats, and their method of paying for it, to the extent they even have one (because the modern GOP largely doesn't pay for its policies), is the polar opposite of what the Democratic Party promised to do.

And even if you put aside these policy disagreements, you still have the fact that the last time Democrats tried to work with Republicans from a position of power, Senate Republicans just dragged out negotiations, watered the legislation down, and finally, when it went to the floor, they voted against it even when many of their amendments passed. Once you engage in this level of bad faith lawmaking, there is really no way to trust you again, particularly when the same Republican who is responsible for that scorched earth strategy still leads their caucus!

This is just the dumbest, most nonsensical charade we could have, all so we can placate one or two Democratic Senators who care more about their own image than actually making law.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's good to see that Governor Fee Fi Fo Fum still has his old favorite means of raising revenue even now that he's a senator from another state. Some things never change!

[roxas11]

What is the point of this? Republicans have made it clear their ceiling on spending is nowhere near the Democrats, and their method of paying for it, to the extent they even have one (because the modern GOP largely doesn't pay for its policies), is the polar opposite of what the Democratic Party promised to do.

And even if you put aside these policy disagreements, you still have the fact that the last time Democrats tried to work with Republicans from a position of power, Senate Republicans just dragged out negotiations, watered the legislation down, and finally, when it went to the floor, they voted against it even when many of their amendments passed. Once you engage in this level of bad faith lawmaking, there is really no way to trust you again, particularly when the same Republican who is responsible for that scorched earth strategy still leads their caucus!

This is just the dumbest, most nonsensical charade we could have, all so we can placate one or two Democratic Senators who care more about their own image than actually making law.

Joe Manchin has all the dems tap dancing for him lol

[Anti-Trump Truth Socialite JD Vance Enjoying Juror]

100% agree with AOC, and disagree with the other NY Dems. That’s probably a first.

If the administration stands its ground on this I don’t see the congressmen actually stopping the bill. They’d have to be pretty stupid to blow up the infrastructure bill over the SALT cap.

[Badger]

What is the point of this? Republicans have made it clear their ceiling on spending is nowhere near the Democrats, and their method of paying for it, to the extent they even have one (because the modern GOP largely doesn't pay for its policies), is the polar opposite of what the Democratic Party promised to do.

And even if you put aside these policy disagreements, you still have the fact that the last time Democrats tried to work with Republicans from a position of power, Senate Republicans just dragged out negotiations, watered the legislation down, and finally, when it went to the floor, they voted against it even when many of their amendments passed. Once you engage in this level of bad faith lawmaking, there is really no way to trust you again, particularly when the same Republican who is responsible for that scorched earth strategy still leads their caucus!

This is just the dumbest, most nonsensical charade we could have, all so we can placate one or two Democratic Senators who care more about their own image than actually making law.

Joe Manchin has all the dems tap dancing for him lol

As we knew would be the case the moment the networks called the election for Osoff

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/WSJPolitics/status/1384230884723683338
Smaller Corporate Tax Increase Floated at White House Infrastructure Meeting
President meets with lawmakers of both parties about potential changes to $2.3 trillion proposal

WASHINGTON—President Biden and a bipartisan group of lawmakers discussed alternative ways to pay for infrastructure spending, including a smaller increase in the corporate tax rate, as Republicans and Democrats aired possible changes to the size and scope of the package.

The White House has proposed raising the corporate tax rate to 28% from 21%, along with increasing taxes on U.S. companies’ foreign earnings, to cover the cost of Mr. Biden’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure proposal. At the meeting Monday, lawmakers and Mr. Biden discussed a more modest tax increase, according to multiple attendees.

Rep. Charlie Crist (D., Fla.) said lawmakers discussed the potential for some “compromise wiggle room” on raising the corporate rate to help pay for the plan. “You could see a 2 or 3% increase—maybe not all the way to 28 but 25,” he said of the percentage rate.

Mr. Biden has held a series of meetings with lawmakers of both parties about his proposal, which offers funding for improving transportation, expanding access to broadband, rebuilding schools and funding elder care, among other priorities. The White House has indicated Mr. Biden is open to breaking his proposal into smaller parts and is considering different ways to pay for it, amid a swirl of proposals from lawmakers of both parties.

Republicans have indicated that they would want to focus on spending money on building roads and bridges, along with expanding access to broadband, while excluding other parts of Mr. Biden’s plan, such as providing $400 billion for caring for elderly and disabled Americans. Lawmakers at the White House Monday discussed whether certain provisions of Mr. Biden’s proposal should be considered infrastructure, with Republicans also moving to dissuade Mr. Biden from raising the corporate tax rate and instead focus on user fees.

The GOP lawmakers were “more in favor of user fees so that whoever was benefiting from that particular infrastructure project would be paying for it in the long run,” said Rep. Carlos Giménez (R., Fla.). Mr. Giménez said Mr. Biden indicated that he hoped to see a counteroffer from Republicans by mid-May.

Hopefully, it means the repeal of the cap is DOA.


https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/1384296023875493893

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

The more Mitch McConnell suffers, the happier I am.

[Frodo]

White House considers splitting $3 trillion recovery plan into two bills

The Times reported that the president’s advisors will bring him a plan as soon as this week that would divide the recovery proposal into two planks. One would put money into boosting manufacturing, improving transportation systems, expanding broadband access and reducing carbon emissions, according to the newspaper.

The other would focus on reducing economic inequities through investments in paid leave, universal pre-K and community college, the report said. The administration is leaning toward pursuing a bipartisan infrastructure bill first, then trying to pass larger pieces of the economic package through budget reconciliation, which would only require Democratic votes in the Senate, according to NBC.

[President Johnson]

White House considers splitting $3 trillion recovery plan into two bills

The Times reported that the president’s advisors will bring him a plan as soon as this week that would divide the recovery proposal into two planks. One would put money into boosting manufacturing, improving transportation systems, expanding broadband access and reducing carbon emissions, according to the newspaper.

The other would focus on reducing economic inequities through investments in paid leave, universal pre-K and community college, the report said. The administration is leaning toward pursuing a bipartisan infrastructure bill first, then trying to pass larger pieces of the economic package through budget reconciliation, which would only require Democratic votes in the Senate, according to NBC.

That may actually be a good strategy. Republicans also wouldn't have an excuse to vote against the first bill.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1385633568903270404
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1386360856758292486

King!