♪♪
Judy: The apparent senate deal
to address health care costs and
climate change is not everything
president Biden wanted but it
does revive a sizable chunk of
his legislative agenda.
Meanwhile, the economy is
baffling experts as it lurches
further into uncharted
territory.
To consider all this, we turn to
the analysis of brooks and
Capehart.
That's New York Times columnist
David brooks and Jonathan
Capehart, associate editor for
the Washington post.
Hello to both of you.
Welcome on this Friday night.
It has been a full week.
Let's start with the Democrats's
deal.
Last Friday we all felt the
president's budget was dead, the
package with climate and health
care in it.
Little did we know that Joe
Manchin was having secret talks
with chuck Schumer.
They have cooked something up.
What does it look like to you
and what do you think the
prospects are?
Jonathan: I relearned a lesson
in Washington, which is never
say die.
When it seems like a deal is
done, it is over, there's no
movement, sometimes something
happens, like Saul this week.
Suddenly you realize these folks
have been meeting behind closed
doors and hammered out a deal.
The fact that Joe Manchin, who
killed what was called bill back
Manchin, and the president was
owing to go his own way, he was
the one to announce what has
been renamed the inflation
reduction act of 2022, and he
declared that build act better
is dead.
But there's climate provisions,
a prescription drug plan, the
50% corporate minimum tax.
There are all sorts of
incentives and rebates and
things aimed at clean energy.
It is not build back better, it
is not the big, transformative
bill the president wanted at the
beginning of his term, but in
the grand scheme of things, it
is most definitely better than
nothing.
Now, you asked me what are its
prospects?
The prospects are iffy.
We've also been so focused on
senator Joe Manchin that we
forgot that in the senate,
there's another senator who we
haven't heard from, and that is
senator Kyrsten Sinema of
Arizona.
She is still keeping her cards
close to the vest.
We have no idea whether she
supports this and that is
imperative and important because
Democrats will need all 50 votes
plus the vice president to pass
it out of the senate and get it
to the house, and that is a
whole other problem.
Judy: It is a shrunken version,
we just been hearing about
shrinkflation, this is not that.
What do you make of this?
It is a u-turn on the part of
Joe Manchin.
Does it look like something that
could be meaningful if they pass
it?
David: It is still a pretty
massive bill, the biggest
climate change bill in American
history.
Joe Biden was elected to give us
a pragmatic centerleft, and the
last couple of weeks, we've had
the chips act, for chip
production, and possibly sing
the passage of the significant
piece of domestic legislation.
That's what Joe Biden ran on.
His presidency to me is looking
a lot more successful than a
week ago.
It is a pretty strong legacy
going forward for him to say I
achieved some things, and for
structure bill and all this kind
of stuff.
-- Infrastructure bill and all
these kinds of stuff.
What struck me is there was a
big childcare piece, there was a
big helping senior citizens and
the care economy, and there was
a big let's invest in America.
The former two have not passed.
The last third appears to be on
the verge of passage, and that
is a significant achievement.
Judy: We don't know what's going
to happen.
We are waiting for Kyrsten
Sinema.
Meantime, a number of
Republicans are really unhappy
with Mitch Mcconnell, they think
he didn't handle this very well.
What do you think the political
fallout from this will be?
Jonathan: Senator Mcconnell is
the master of the dark arts,
dark parliamentarian arts in the
senate.
If he feels played, as the wall
Street journal editorial page
declared he was, that
Republicans were played, he will
exact some sort of revenge
against the Democrats.
It is just a matter of how is he
going to do it?
Will he be able to do it?
Could he exact revenge maybe not
on this bill but codifying a
burger fell and respect for
marriages act that Susan Collins
expressed concern that bill and
passage of that bill in the
senate could be victim to that?
We were talking about that bill
last week and there were five
senate Republicans that said
they would vote for it, meaning
all Democrats needed were five
more Republicans to say they
would vote for it and they would
clear the 60 vote threshold and
be able to get it passed.
Have not heard anything about it
since last week and most
definitely haven't heard
anything about it since the
inflation reduction act was
revealed and the chips act has
been passed.
The political fallout at least
in terms of the senate and what
senator Mcconnell will do
remains to be seen.
We have to remember something.
Just because there is a deal
with Joe Manchin doesn't mean --
and let's say Kyrsten Sinema
goes along with it -- when it
gets to the house, there was a
whole new ballgame that gets
played.
You've got moderate Democrats in
the house who are upset that
salt provisions are not in
there, state and local taxes are
not part of the inflation
reduction acts.
How do Democrats handle that
issue when the bill gets over to
the house?
That remains to be seen.
Judy: And David, again, on the
Republican disagreement over it,
the message it to be, if you
work with Democrats, you will be
punished.
David: That has been the message
for a little while.
Macconnell does not control the
senate.
It is a Democrat hold senate.
What strikes me is how Joe
Manchin looks skillful.
He took a lot of heat, more than
most human beings in the last
year, but when we come to this
deal at the end of the day, he
gets the investments he wants,
he gets expanded energy drilling
and things like that, he gets
genuine deficit reduction, and
no inflation.
And I think one of the things
that turned his mind is the
realization that his idea that
this was an inflationary bill
was economically wrong.
That if you raise taxes to pay
for spending, it does not
increase inflation.
I think he had an intellectual
awakening.
It shows all members of the
senate, and we pay too much
attention to leadership, that it
is 50-50, so any person willing
to take the heat has power.
Mansion is -- Joe Manchin is
willing to take the heat.
Judy: One of the measures that
hit a bump in the road after
this steel emerged was what is
called the pat act, providing
aid to military veterans who
were exposed to toxic chemicals
in the war in Iraq, and -- these
were veterans who came home with
serious medical problems.
This looked like it was on the
way to passage and Republicans
in this and in particular are
saying wait a minute.
It has caused a lot of reaction.
Jon Stewart, this is what he had
to say just outside the capital
yesterday.
>> These people thought they
could finally breathe.
You think their struggles and
because the pact act passes?
All that means is they don't
have to decide between their
cancer drugs and their house.
Their struggle continues.
These people will not give up,
they will not give in and they
will not relent.
This is an embarrassment to the
senate, to the country, to the
founders and all they professed
to hold dear.
Judy: He used much stronger
language in going after
Republicans, pat Toomey and
others, who he says are holding
this up.
What about this argument he is
making, that essentially they
said yes and now they are saying
no?
David: At best it is a mystery,
at worst it is mind-boggling.
The mystery is just a month ago,
the vast majority of Republican
senators voted for this thing, a
significant number have shifted
and are against it.
Is it payback for what Joe
Manchin and chuck Schumer did?
That would be mind-boggling.
You have minnen women who serve
the country -- men and women who
served the country suffering
from cancer and ailments and we
will take that away because of
legislative pique?
Who does that?
I think pat Toomey has some
reasons to do with budget policy
and that is one thing, but if
the votes were change because
Mitch Mcconnell said we need to
screw somebody, that would be
terrible.
Judy: Jonathan, what you say
about the so-called burn pits
legislation?
Jonathan: In a word it is
appalling.
To what David was talking about,
just in June, this bill passed
out of the senate with 84 votes.
84 went to the house.
The house made a minor change
and that's why it was back in
the senate for a vote.
25 Republicans who had voted for
it in June after senator pat
Toomey worked on them, opted to
vote against the bill.
Pat Toomey's arcane problem was
finding was being moved from
discretionary within the bill to
mandatory.
He was calling it a budget
gimmick.
You know who doesn't care
whether it is a budget gimmick?
Those families Jon Stewart was
talking about.
The veterans who worked in the
burn pits and are suffering the
ailments.
The families of those veterans
who are sick and/or have died.
It is their families who are
dealing with the financial
burdens of Jon Stewart was
talking about.
They could not care less about
whether it is discretionary or
mandatory.
The budget gimmickry going on.
They just want to know that
their government, that they went
overseas to protect and defend,
is going to protect and defend
them now that they are back
home.
The fact that a bill passed in
that chamber with 84 votes and
then could not get out of there
because 25 Republicans changed
their votes, it is on those
Republicans to explain to those
families -- not Jon Stewart --
those families white was more
important to vote against a bill
that would help them right now
than it was to do what they did,
as David did it, legislative
pique, because of budget
nonsense.
Judy: They say will come up for
a vote, be on the floor on
Monday and we will see what
happens.
I'm saving the last minute and
have to ask you to clarify what
is going on with the economy.
David, inflation is rising.
The federal reserve is focused
on THA.
Dark signals about a recession.
Corporate earnings are way up in
the stock market is up.
What is going on?
David: It is complicated, we
need more than 90 seconds.
Inflation is truly terrible and
I think the white house is being
too gentle and to up eat -- too
upbeat.
Gas prices are coming down.
Post-covid slowdown looks very
different.
The problem is it is hard for
the fed to bring down inflation
in a way that is a soft landing.
The historical record is not
good here.
So we may see something bumpier.
Judy: Jonathan, it is on you.
What is your forecast?
[Laughter]
Jonathan: I don't know.
Everything is so contradictory.
That pce number that came out,
the highest in 40 years, the
inflation marker that the fed
uses as a marker, 6.8%, that in
that same report, it showed that
wages are up.
Not as much as much as inflation
but wages are up.
Explain that, inflation is up,
we does her up, stock goods up
my gas prices coming down, that
are going into recession?
Judy: It is clear as mud.
[Laughter]
We figured it out.
Thank you both.