Why I Won't Support Spending Another $3.5 Trillion

[Celerity]

Amid inflation, debt and the inevitability of future crises, Congress needs to take a strategic pause.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/manchin-pelosi-biden-3-5-trillion-reconciliation-government-spending-debt-deficit-inflation-11630605657



The nation faces an unprecedented array of challenges and will inevitably encounter additional crises in the future. Yet some in Congress have a strange belief there is an infinite supply of money to deal with any current or future crisis, and that spending trillions upon trillions will have no negative consequence for the future. I disagree. An overheating economy has imposed a costly “inflation tax” on every middle- and working-class American. At $28.7 trillion and growing, the nation’s debt has reached record levels. Over the past 18 months, we’ve spent more than $5 trillion responding to the coronavirus pandemic. Now Democratic congressional leaders propose to pass the largest single spending bill in history with no regard to rising inflation, crippling debt or the inevitability of future crises. Ignoring the fiscal consequences of our policy choices will create a disastrous future for the next generation of Americans. Those who believe such concerns are overstated should ask themselves: What do we do if the pandemic gets worse under the next viral mutation? What do we do if there is a financial crisis like the one that led to the Great Recession? What if we face a terrorist attack or major international conflict? How will America respond to such crises if we needlessly spend trillions of dollars today?

Instead of rushing to spend trillions on new government programs and additional stimulus funding, Congress should hit a strategic pause on the budget-reconciliation legislation. A pause is warranted because it will provide more clarity on the trajectory of the pandemic, and it will allow us to determine whether inflation is transitory or not. While some have suggested this reconciliation legislation must be passed now, I believe that making budgetary decisions under artificial political deadlines never leads to good policy or sound decisions. I have always said if I can’t explain it, I can’t vote for it, and I can’t explain why my Democratic colleagues are rushing to spend $3.5 trillion. Another reason to pause: We must allow for a complete reporting and analysis of the implications a multitrillion-dollar bill will have for this generation and the next. Such a strategic pause will allow every member of Congress to use the transparent committee process to debate: What should we fund, and what can we simply not afford? I, for one, won’t support a $3.5 trillion bill, or anywhere near that level of additional spending, without greater clarity about why Congress chooses to ignore the serious effects inflation and debt have on existing government programs. This is even more important now as the Social Security and Medicare Trustees have sounded the alarm that these life-saving programs will be insolvent and benefits could start to be reduced as soon as 2026 for Medicare and 2033, a year earlier than previously projected, for Social Security.

Establishing an artificial $3.5 trillion spending number and then reverse-engineering the partisan social priorities that should be funded isn’t how you make good policy. Undoubtedly some will argue that bold social-policy action must be taken now. While I share the belief that we should help those who need it the most, we must also be honest about the present economic reality. Inflation continues to rise and is bleeding the value of Americans’ wages and income. More than 10.1 million jobs remain open. Our economy, as the Biden administration has correctly pointed out, has reached record levels of quarterly growth. This positive economic reality makes clear that the purpose of the proposed $3.5 trillion in new spending isn’t to solve urgent problems, but to re-envision America’s social policies. While my fellow Democrats will disagree, I believe that spending trillions more dollars not only ignores present economic reality, but makes it certain that America will be fiscally weakened when it faces a future recession or national emergency. In 2017, my Republican friends used the privileged legislative procedure of budget reconciliation to rush through a partisan tax bill that added more than $1 trillion to the national debt and put investors ahead of workers. Then, Democrats rightfully criticized this budgetary tactic.

Now, my Democratic friends want to use this same budgetary tactic to push through sweeping legislation to make “historic investments.” Respectfully, it was wrong when the Republicans did it, and it is wrong now. If we want to invest in America, a goal I support, then let’s take the time to get it right and determine what is absolutely necessary. Many in Washington have convinced themselves we can add trillions of dollars more to our nearly $29 trillion national debt with no repercussions. Regardless of political party, elected leaders are sent to Washington to make tough decisions and not simply go along to get along. For those who will dismiss my unwillingness to support a $3.5 trillion bill as political posturing, I hope they heed the powerful words of Adm. Mike Mullen, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who called debt the biggest threat to national security. His comments echoed the fear and concern I’ve heard from many economic experts I’ve personally met with. At a time of intense political and policy divisions, it would serve us well to remember that members of Congress swear allegiance to this nation and fidelity to its Constitution, not to a political party. By placing a strategic pause on this budgetary proposal, by significantly reducing the size of any possible reconciliation bill to only what America can afford and needs to spend, we can and will build a better and stronger nation for all our families.

[femmedem]

1. I don't recall him being so concerned about dropping the corporate tax rate.

Or even asking for any analysis after the fact about how dropping the corporate tax rate has or has not benefited the majority of Americans.

I hope when he does his next media tour an astute interviewer quotes this op-ed and asks why he refuses to raise the corporate tax rate back to 2016 levels.

[OneBro]

2. MAGA Manchin Makes McConnell Merry

Manchin should disclose which right-wing “think” tank wrote that for him.

[everyonematters]

3. If they end up passing neither bill, that would be a political travesty.

I hope they at least pass the hard infrastructure bill.

[WHITT]

6. You Mean

the one that imposes ten of billions of fees and tolls on working people and adds hundreds of billions to the federal debt?

Try door number two instead.

[everyonematters]

7. How are you going to get that passed?

We haven't had a major infrastructure bill in decades.

[WHITT]

9. Well

How are you going to get that passed?

Either you have Schumer link the two together in one vote, or you put the reconciliation bill on the floor, and you tell Manchin & Sinema if they vote against it, whatever infrastructure bill that ends up getting passed will have WV and AZ zeroed-out. Simple as pie.

We haven't had a major infrastructure bill in decades.

And the Corporate Repub bill still isn't a major infrastructure bill. According to Senator Blumenthal, it's actual infrastructure spending is so skimpy, he plans to submit an amendment to the reconciliation bill to add more hard infrastructure spending.

[WHITT]

4. Problem Is

it's the Corporate Repub bill that he and Sinema support that is NOT paid for and adds to the federal debt. The reconciliation bill is paid for.

There's the rub. He doesn't like how it's paid for. It raises taxes on the Rich & Corporate, which is wildly popular with the American people, but he and Sinema choose to protect the millionaires and billionaires instead.

[Celerity]

5. +1

[doc03]

8. Someone needs to have a talk with him. There has to be

some kind of dirt, something he wants for WV or maybe an ambassadorship or something for his dauther (that worked before).

[WHITT]

10. Just Call His Bluff

WV is the most desperate for infrastructure spending of all 50 states. He either goes along or he gets nothing.

[MichMan]

12. Back in the day, the FBI would be tasked with digging up dirt on him or his family

for blackmail purposes. Just sayin'

[doc03]

14. That's how The Loser kept Lindsey in line nt

[FakeNoose]

13. His daughter is already a multi-millionaire

I think she has more dough than he does, after the Mylan deal last year. I just don't understand why Joe Manchin still calls himself a Democrat.

[doc03]

15. If he called himself a Republican he would just be another Senator from a

state with only 5 electoral votes, next election just 4. As a Democrat he can screw up the entire Democratic
agenda and just be a general pain in the ass.

[bullwinkle428]

11. I literally called this months ago right here at DU. I predicted he would say

something like, "The small bill is more than enough infrastructure for now - why do we need to go into further debt with the larger bill?"