Infrastructure Biden-Style

That’s what his latest tax-and-spend multi-trillion dollar bill that he’s masquerading as an infrastructure bill is—a misleading mess of profligacy. Here’s some of what’s in it besides actual infrastructure monies.

  • $174 billion for electric vehicles
  • $400 billion on home-based care for the elderly and disabled
  • $25 billion on child care facilities
  • $50 billion on “research infrastructure” at the National Science Foundation
  • $213 billion for home sustainability and public housing
  • $35 billion+ for climate change R&D
  • $50 billion to create a new office at the Department of Commerce to “dedicated to monitoring domestic industrial capacity and funding investments to support production of critical goods”
  • $30 billion to prepare for future pandemics
  • $45 billion so the Feds can buy “clean energy goods”
  • $14 billion “to bring together industry, academia, and government to advance technologies and capabilities critical to future competitiveness”

That’s more than $1 trillion out of Biden’s $2 trillion demand for his bill. Many of these things might actually be worthy projects—depending on pesky details—but they have no place in a real, legitimate infrastructure program.

And there’s this non sequitur that has no immediate cost, but it will reduce take-home pay of non-union members to no useful purpose and greatly limit our economy and drive up prices through greatly increased union costs:

[T]he PRO Act, which would essentially override right-to-work laws in states across the country, allowing unions to extract dues from workers who do not want to be members.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, KY):

It’s like a Trojan horse. Its called infrastructure, but inside the Trojan horse it’s going to be more borrowed money, and massive tax increases on all the productive parts of our economy.

Indeed. Dollars—trillions of dollars—out of our economy immediately and trillions more for the foreseeable future.

Questions for Biden

Mollie Hemingway has quite a few over at The Federalist. Read them all.

I have a couple more:

Joe—can I call ya Joe?—you’ve said the new Georgia voting law is Jim Crow on steroids because, in part, it closes voting polls at 5pm. Quote the paragraph in the law that does that.

Joe, you’ve said the new Georgia voting law is too restrictive and suppressive of voters. Compare Georgia’s voting law with Delaware’s on:

  • number of days for early voting
  • no excuse absentee ballots (compare with New York’s voting law, too)

Joe, identify the party that invented Jim Crow laws.

Gross Misunderstanding

And a key distinction between what the Left and their Progressive-Democratic Party want and what Conservatives and, to an extent, the Republican Party want. President Joe Biden (D) fronts for this…position…and his Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen made it explicit last Tuesday in front of the House Financial Services Committee:

We’ve had a global race to the bottom in corporate taxation and we hope to put an end to that.

The fact—I claim—is that the race to the bottom is a National Good, not a National Bad. Our Constitution specifies only three things our Federal Government is allowed to spend money on: to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States. The general Welfare is further specified by the remaining clauses of that Article I, Section 8.

The only legitimate purpose for taxing is to raise revenue for those three narrowly specified items.

Above that low floor (or it would be low were we not living in a dangerous world with many enemies for whom the vasty oceans no longer represent serious barriers and were it not for out Government having been so profligate with spending for so many decades), the more money left in the hands of We the People in our private economy for our spending decisions, the better.

So, yes—a race to the bottom is good for our nation, the prattle of the Yellons and the Bidens and the Party notwithstanding.

What Biden Hath Wrought

Two little girls—3yrs old and 5yrs old—were dropped over a 14ft fence from the Mexican side of our southern border onto the American side.

In the middle of the night.

In the middle of the desert.

With no supplies—no water, no food, no means of shading themselves from the coming sun.

With no one—not an adult, not a teenager, not anyone—to take them into care or custody, to take them to safety.

They were just dumped and left to die in the coming day’s heat (yes, in Arizona even this time of year) and aridity, whether from dehydration, overheating—or being coyote or bobcat food.

See a video of Biden’s child abuse here.

It’s just the little girls’ blind luck that they weren’t injured from the fall. It’s just the little girls’ blind luck, and God’s overwatch, that Border Patrol had surveillance drones in the area and happened to see the atrocity. As a result, they were able to rescue the girls.

Sadly, this is typical, not extreme—it’s just what happened to be spotted along our now deliberately porous border.

One Party Reign

Congressman Don Beyer (D, VA), Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, has this on working with Republicans to do things (assuming “things” need doing, which isn’t always the case, especially by Government):

I would personally prefer that it [President Joe Biden’s multi-trillion dollar “infrastructure” plan] was fully paid for but I’m not going to insist on it. If we can get it half paid for, that’s a huge step forward….

Debt profusion doesn’t matter. It’s only money.

Working with Republicans on actual infrastructure? Here’s Beyer again:

[W]e’re not going to not do it because they won’t come along. … But at the end of the day, if they’re going to say no, then we will proceed with the reconciliation.

Come along. Either do things our way, quietly, or we’ll simply ignore you. That’s the Progressive-Democrat view of unity.

And it’s not just on infrastructure. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) is pushing for robo-reconciliation. Here’s the current rule [emphasis added]:

Under the 1974 Budget Act, Congress once each fiscal year can pass via simple majority vote a budget resolution for federal revenue and outlays.

And

Mr Schumer’s office is telling the Senate parliamentarian he wants more. His claim rests on Section 304 of the Budget Act, which allows for “a concurrent resolution on the budget which revises or reaffirms the concurrent resolution on the budget for such fiscal year most recently agreed to.” In English, Mr Schumer says he should be able to pass more bills with a mere 51 votes as “revisions” to underlying budget resolutions.

No need to talk to Republicans at all on money matters. They’re obstructionist tightwads, anyway. Again, it’s only money. Especially since it’s OPM.

Progressive-Democrats aren’t interested in bipartisanship.