Earlier we had shared some
preliminary details about the Biden
administration's proposal to beef
up the United States
infrastructure.
This is an effort to modernize
the US infrastructure,
focus on converting things over
to renewable energies.
And this is also coupled with
the fact that there should be
the creation of millions of jobs.
Yes, they're construction jobs.
Yes, they're short term jobs.
But you're likely to see
this being framed,
if not by the Biden administration.
By reporters as, this new deal type
effort to kind of get the us
economy back on track,
for ordinary Americans.
We know the economy's doing real
well for people at the very top,
even during a global pandemic.
Now it comes with a $2 trillion
price tag,
when we had initially reported
the story to you guys we mentioned
that the price tag was $3 trillion.
But what it appears is going to
happen is they are going to come
with a infrastructure
bill that would be
proposing $2 trillion in spending.
And then there would be a second
bill that would help with things
like universal childcare paid,
family leave,
it would make the child tax credits
that just passed under the recent
relief bill permanent.
And that would again have a price
tag about about $1 trillion.
I don't know if I agree with
the strategy of trying to pass two
separate bills.
I think that, might have some
political capital issues with it,
but we'll talk about that later.
For now let's focus on what
the infrastructure bill includes.
It would rebuild 20,000 miles of
roads, which I don't know if
you've been driving around in
the United States recently, but
we can certainly use that.
It would repair 10 of the most
economically important bridges, but
that's not where it stops,
they plan on repairing other
bridges as well but there
is a focus on some of the more
economically advantageous bridges.
They would eliminate this is
very important lead pipes, and
service lead pipes,
and service lines from the nation's
water supply, which is clearly
an important objective to have when
you consider how dangerous lead is.
Especially to children as they're
developing it, they would shift
over to clean energy sources
modernize the electric grid,
possibly with weatherizing
equipment.
So, we don't deal with what Texas
recently dealt with as a result of
them privatizing and deregulating
their independent energy grid
there, and in the process of doing
all of this it could potentially
create millions of jobs.
Now, Biden's administration has
named this the, quote, American
Jobs Plan, echoing the $1.9
trillion pandemic relief bill that
Biden signed into law this month,
known as the American Rescue Plan.
And the spending in the plan
would take place over eight years.
We'll get to how Biden proposes to
pay for this in just a minute.
But so far,
what are your thoughts John?
>> Yeah, I think how he plans to
pay for in terms of the timeline I
don't particularly care about,
except the fact that I like that it
shows a willingness as you'll get
into in terms of the taxes.
I think that the political
implications for that being a part
of the bill in terms of how it
might influence the possibility
of getting Republicans on board is
the important part.
In terms of what's in it,
pretty much everything that's in it
that I've seen, I like, and
it's shocking that it's taken to
this point to get at the idea that
Republicans, under like unified
Republican control, weren't able
to get probably some much smaller
infrastructure bill passed?
Like even just pragmatically being
able to campaign on having done
that seems like it would have been
a great idea.
But I guess it's
the government doing something for
the country and they're sort
of viscerally opposed to that.
Yeah, the repairing of the roads
is great.
Every day we drive on roads, I
mean, the the four or five I cannot
believe that someone could fly into
a major U.S. city and drive on
a highway like that and think, this
is what America thinks of itself?
And the bridge is obviously a huge
safety concern, some of
the electrification of school
buses, and we talked on the TDR
about the establishment of a half
million strong EV charging network.
That's great, as you pointed out
the lead pipe removal finally
getting that done again.
How could that not have been done
already?
All of this is good.
It's just that for all the good you
can fit in your $2 trillion bill,
arguably you can fit about twice as
much at a $4 trillion bill, and
when we're talking about this being
over the course of 10 years.
It doesn't seem like,
it doesn't seem irrational and
maybe we're not going to hit
the AOC request of 10 trillion, but
Joe Manchin was asking for
more than what Biden is currently
targeting.
And so what we talked about in TDR
and I'm curious in your opinion,
is the process of actually getting
this passed, reconciling
the house and the Senate versions.
Do we think that it's likely that
they might produce something more
like what we'd want?
>> I think that, well, I mean,
you're asking one of the most
pessimistic cause on this network,
I don't think that a single
Republican is going to vote in
favor of this legislation.
They would have to do this through
reconciliation.
I think that discussions about
policy, especially right now end up
getting, I guess bogged down with
annoying procedural debates and
that's going to continue being
a problem.
So, they might be able to pass this
through reconciliation.
I don't know how much of a problem
people like Sinema and Manchin
plan on being in the Senate.
But what I do know is that,
there needs to be something done in
regard to the filibuster.
Because this goes
beyond the infrastructure bill.
It goes beyond, the other bill that
Biden's planning on rolling out.
If they want to do anything to
reform our democracy, which
is an incredibly important agenda
item, they're not going to be able
to do that through reconciliation.
They would have to do that through
reforming the filibuster, and
in the very least reforming
the filibuster.
And I don't know if
the will to do that is there,
I know that Biden has hinted that
he's willing to do it.
But right now, in terms of actual
steps forward with that,
we haven't seen anything yet.
The one thing that I do want to
caution people about is the way
that this proposal is being framed.
I think this is a good first step,
but this certainly is not like
a holistic approach to the economic
woes that Americans
are facing right now.
Because when you frame this, whew,
it's like the new, new deal.
It's just an exaggerated claim
to make.
>> Yeah, totally. >> I think that
it's influenced by the new deal.
But remember
Franklin Delano Roosevelt not only
focused on rebuilding and
revolutionizing the infrastructure
here in the United States.
He reformed the banking industry,
and he had no problem with really
increasing taxes on the wealthy.
In this case, yes, there is
a proposal to increase like, for
instance, the corporate tax rate,
but Biden is not proposing to
increase the corporate tax rate to
what it was before the Trump
administration, which was 35%.
He's proposing to go from 21% to
28%, and I mean, in my opinion,
if you're really trying to
create a more equitable system in
the U.S., going halfway between
Trump what the tax rate used to be
just doesn't go far enough.
I wanted to share this video with
you guys real quick, although,
it's not really quick.
I know it's a longer video, but
the Smithsonian puts out these
incredible documentaries they're
titled, America in Color, and they
did a great documentary about the
1930s, and the influence of FDR.
And there were flaws,
don't get me wrong, there were
certainly flaws with the new deal
which we'll talk about in a second,
flaws in which it looks like Biden
tried to correct in his proposal
pertaining to race.
We'll talk about that in just
a minute but
first take a look at what,
happened during the new deal era.
>> Roosevelt tries everything he
can, to make good on his campaign
promise of work for those who need.
[MUSIC]
He forms the civilian conservation
corps, the CCC, and
offers jobs to 250,000 young men.
[MUSIC]
They earn in 30 bucks a month,
25 of which is sent back home.
[MUSIC]
They reshaped the American
landscape with new roads,
800 parks and 3 billion trees.
[MUSIC]
In 1935, another new deal project
the Grand Coulee Dam is the biggest
building site in the world,
employing 11,000 men.
[MUSIC]
In Washington State,
they excavate nearly 63 million
tons of the conveyor belt two
miles long transports the debris.
In some 24 million tons of
concrete, pour into the Columbia
Basin to down the river.
>> I'm sorry but the working men of
that era they can get it.
I'm just going to say that
real quick.
But,- [CROSSTALK] >> As soon as I
saw that arm I looked at
the preview of you and
I like I knew she was
embarrassed by that she did.
You did not fail, Kasparian.
[LAUGH] >> Apologies, apologies.
But you can see the influence of
the new deal era in what Biden is
proposing here, but it certainly
does not go far enough, right?
So there's that issue,
however, I do want to give Biden
credit because the one area where,
it really has become a stain on
FDRs leadership, it was the fact
that the new deal era didn't really
consider black workers.
In fact,- >> Yeah.
>> It kind of left them behind.
And so Biden's proposal, very much
puts racial equality front and
center, and
I think that's an important,
part of this as well.
There shouldn't be a difference in
how white workers are treated
versus black workers, and
he wanted to make sure that that
was part of the legislation.
So that's, positive as well.
So, John,
did you want to say anything else?
>> Yeah, I think that is
a component of it
is very important to bear in mind.
You know what the priorities of
the federal government and regular
people were back then, almost
certainly the worker with the nice
arms prior hardcore racist.
Let's just keep it real.
He was almost certainly,
[CROSSTALK] >> You do not know
about that.
>> But he probably was.
Yes, so that's good.
And then also,- >> 1930s.
>> Exactly, yeah,
no look at him, go on.
Anyway, [LAUGH] that they focused
on that.
But also, but we know that Biden
likes this idea that he's
going to be bolder than Obama,
and all of that.
And then it's the second new deal,
but like I'm just doing
rough numbers and
I'm not an expert on this.
But as a percentage of the GDP,
it is based on the different
sources I'm looking at.
At least 1/5 the size,
possibly 140 of the size each year
then the new deal, so
significant and that's good.
But I don't know,
if you're going to compare it to
that, I think you got to get
that number up higher.
And if you really want that,
then why are you so hesitant to,
like engage with people,
like AOC and others, that think
that we should incorporate what is
being turned, I'm seeing a lot of
talk about this.
The human infrastructure element
and that we should prioritize that
as much as the physical
infrastructure element.
>> Yeah, that's such a great point,
John and look at one other thing
that I would caution the audience
about, or to pay attention to this
because this is important.
It's not just about how much
spending you're willing to commit
to, it's also about,
how that spending will be used.
And I'm not even talking about
the objectives,
I'm talking about is this going to
turn into some sort of giveaway to
private companies, right?
And we've seen that problem in
California with the construction of
affordable housing,
affordable housing.
I mean, there was a Los Angeles
City Council member who got
arrested by the FBI, because he was
engaging in a pay-to-play scheme.
Where these developers were getting
these, sweetheart deals, of course,
paid for by California's taxpayers
to build affordable housing.
And what they would do is
they would inflate the costs of
construction, and of course,
we're footing the bill for that.
And so, I got a little worried when
I saw that, investors,
I was reading some of these
financial publications and
they're just like, these fine.
These investors are getting real
excited about what this means for
the stock market and it's like,
that's not a good sign.
So but look, I don't want to be
too harsh, I just think that,
that's something that we should be
paying attention to moving forward.
And so far based on where his
priorities are, it seems like he
has good intentions.
Not big enough,
I certainly think that it could be
a problem to try to pass multiple,
big agenda items through multiple
bills.
I thought that this was all
going to be combined into one piece
of legislation, but that's not the
case and so we'll see what happens.
But I think,
anyone who thinks working with
Republicans is feasible,
is being incredibly naive,
they're going to be a problem,
even though Biden has committed to
keeping the corporate tax rate low.
Really lower than,- >> Yeah.
>> It was before Trump.
>> Exactly, exactly and that's,
I mean, at the time that they were
debating the Trump tax cuts,
that's what we were saying.
Someday some centers damages would
be like, I raise the taxes but
in the end, from the perspective of
10 years ago, it's still a cut.
They still got their cut,
it didn't matter which party was
in charge in that respect.
And I, in hindsight, I feel a bit
stupid, because Brett and I had a
bit of a debate this morning about
whether you might be able to get
some Republicans on board, because
it's an infrastructure bill.
It's going to put a lot of money
and create a lot of
jobs in their districts.
But it is at the end of the day as
he points out going to be funded
via tax increases, and
there's virtually no Republicans,
and potentially even some Democrats
that you're going to lose
as a result of that.
Even if they're not bringing
the taxes back up to where they're
at pre-Trump, and they're possibly
reimposing, certain sorts of
loopholes and things like that.
You're still going to lose a lot of
politicians, no matter how
much economic stimulus it gives to
their district.
Especially when the new strategy,
is vote against it and
then just say that you voted for
it for the good stuff.
That's what they've started doing
for the stimulus bill,
for the COVID bill,
they can just do that for
the infrastructure bill as well.
>> Yeah, now, you're right.
Well, Brett's right.
I don't know why you're debating
with that point,
that's actually [CROSSTALK] that
was only a good point.
>> It's mostly me.
>> [LAUGH] No, I mean,
Mitch McConnell has already come
out and he's already on record
wherever where I live talks
with the tax cuts, tax increases.
So, there's no working with them.
I mean, even when Obama offered,
additional tax cuts to Republicans
in the stimulus bill,
that he had passed, right?
They're like, no, we don't want to
work with him, okay?
So let's not make
that mistake again, okay.
And let's please do something about
the filibuster otherwise,
any discussion about the pro-act,
any discussion about for
the people act, which would reform
our democracy, all of that stuff,
it means nothing.
It means nothing, unless Democrats
are willing to do what it takes to
get rid of this ridiculous
arbitrary process in the Senate.