More stories

  • in

    Is Joe Biden about to show up to Cop26 empty-handed? | Kate Aronoff

    OpinionCop26Is Joe Biden about to show up to Cop26 empty-handed?Kate AronoffThe tools at Biden’s disposal to limit dangerous global heating are enormous. If he wants it, he can do it – but does he want it? Thu 28 Oct 2021 09.24 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 12.39 EDTAfter months of bullish rhetoric about the United States’ climate leadership, the US could still show up to COP 26 empty handed. That doesn’t have to be the case – whatever charismatic obstructionists like Joe Manchin or Kyrsten Sinema have to say about it. The climate certainly isn’t waiting on them to change: the UN Emissions Gap Report released this week finds that the world is on track to warm by a catastrophic 2.7C degrees.The White House has pegged its Paris Agreement success on being able to pass an ambitious spending package, with plenty of money built in for key climate priorities. In recent weeks the administration pegged its audacious goal, of slashing emission by at least 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, to something called a Clean Electricity Payments Program (CEPP). That’s out. And even if the compromise $55bn a year of climate spending the White House promised on Thursday makes it through to legislation, carrots for green spending can only go so far. The US will still not have picked up critical sticks needed to go after the polluting industries driving up temperatures. The dirty dozen: meet America’s top climate villainsRead moreThey’re desperately needed. According to the UN-backed 2021 Production Gap Report, the world’s governments are on track to produce double the amount of fossil fuels than is consistent with capping warming at 1.5C degrees. In the US, oil and gas production are now on track to expand by 17 and 12%, respectively, by 2030.The United States showing up in good faith to Glasgow will require it to step on the third rail of both US and global climate politics: going after fossil fuels. Those words don’t appear in the Paris Agreement itself. But rapidly winding them down is essential to achieving its goals of limiting warming by “well below” 2C degrees, with an aspiration (repeated frequently by the Biden administration) to limit temperature rise to just 1.5C degrees.The Biden administration is also on track to approve more oil and gas drilling on federal lands than any president since George W Bush. Sadly, this is not the first time Democrats have let us down on climate action. It was just days after the Paris Agreement that the Obama administration quietly repealed the 40 year-old crude oil export ban as part of an omnibus, must-pass spending measure in 2015. In the four years after its passage crude oil exports expanded by 750%, allowing the US to eventually cross the threshold to becoming a net oil exporter in the winter of 2020. The same year the United States was the world’s third largest gas exporter.This trajectory is plainly out of step with a liveable planet. Indigenous leaders who converged in Washington under the banner of People v Fossil Fuels earlier this month were joined by 13 members of Congress recently in calling on the administration to use the full extent of its powers to start treating the climate crisis like the emergency it is, putting a stop to fossil fuel expansion. The tools at Biden’s disposal, as they note, are enormous.The EPA has the power to stringently regulate carbon dioxide and methane, which it’s expected to make steps toward soon. By declaring a national emergency, Biden could reinstate the crude oil export ban virtually overnight, stemming the flow of US fossil fuels being burned abroad to make a handful of executives here rich.Such a declaration would unlock the power to finally put the US on a wartime footing to rapidly deploy renewable energy and create millions of union jobs in the process, rather than relying only on piecemeal measures like tax credits. The Department of Energy could reject export permits under the Natural Gas Act. The Department of Interior could stop selling below-market rate leases to drill on public lands, activity that accounts for roughly a quarter of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions.There’s plenty of other low-hanging fruit, too: Biden could move to cancel the Line 3 pipeline, along with the Dakota Access Pipeline, Line 5 and the Mountain Valley Pass Pipeline. A recent analysis by Oil Change International, in fact, found that the White House has to prevent 1.6bn metric tonnes of emissions per year by rejecting those and another 20 fossil fuel projects. Existing laws like the Clean Water Act and National Environmental Policy Act grant the executive branch broad authority to do so. Internationally, the administration could join the UK and Italy at the G20 this week in pushing to phase-out coal and formally end overseas financing for all oil and gas projects through the US Export-Import Bank, as well. The State Department could drop its longstanding objections to concrete discussions of loss and damage financing and historical responsibility for rising temperatures at the UN climate talks in Glasgow.Joe Biden and members of his administration have frequently called climate change an “existential threat.” If the White House wanted to act like that’s true – and assert real US leadership at COP 26 – it could.
    Kate Aronoff is a staff writer at The New Republic. She is the co-author of A Planet To Win: Why We Need A Green New Deal (Verso) and the co-editor of We Own The Future: Democratic Socialism, American Style (The New Press)
    TopicsCop26OpinionClimate crisisJoe BidenUS politicsUS foreign policyJoe ManchincommentReuse this content More

  • in

    The 2009 financial crisis taught us hard lessons. Have Democrats learned them? | David Sirota and Alex Gibney

    OpinionUS politicsThe 2009 financial crisis taught us hard lessons. Have Democrats learned them?David Sirota and Alex GibneyThe political meltdown of a decade ago crushed faith in hope and change, and led to Maga and mayhem Thu 28 Oct 2021 06.37 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 07.07 EDTA first-term Democratic president with a majority in Congress and an uncompromising Republican opposition. A country disillusioned by a previous administration’s corruption and mismanagement. A working class traumatized by an economic downturn. An establishment calling not for aggressiveness and boldness, but for half measures and compromise.Democrats’ tax plan to pay for Biden agenda would affect 700 of America’s super-richRead moreIf this sounds familiar, it is not only because it describes this current moment, but because it is the experience we lived through 12 years ago – a political meltdown that destroyed many Americans’ remaining faith in their government, and ultimately birthed Donald Trump’s presidency.That meltdown crushed faith in hope and change, and led to Maga and mayhem. And if Democrats continue making the same choices again, we should expect the same results – or worse.2009 was not 2021, but history tends to rhyme. Back then, the contagion wasn’t a virus, it was a financial panic brought on by the collapse of what had been the American economy’s most stable pillar: the mortgage. But the homes were built atop a precarious foundation. After a spate of bank deregulation, Wall Street giants had transformed themselves into the newest peddlers of the old swampland-in-Florida schemes, enticing borrowers and pension funds to bet life savings on unsustainable housing prices and debt.When enough homeowners couldn’t make their payments and home prices cratered, millions faced foreclosure, retirement systems faced huge losses on mortgage-related investments, 401k plans faced stock market declines, and banks faced the prospect of insolvency.Amid this financial pandemic, though, there was a glimmer of something better – Barack Obama, who had campaigned on an inspiring promise to “bring a new era of responsibility and accountability to Wall Street and to Washington”.That FDR-esque rhetoric resulted in a 2008 election landslide, a huge Democratic congressional majority, and high hopes that a new administration would fight the Great Recession with the same kind of robust New Deal that Franklin Roosevelt deployed to successfully combat the Great Depression.But that didn’t happen.Obama had helped the Bush administration forge the Troubled Asset Relief Program (Tarp), whose name seemed to promise assistance for homeowners, but which instead provided most of its benefits to a handful of financial institutions. When he took office, Obama could have changed how Tarp money was being spent, but he and his administration kept funneling the cash to Wall Street. The relative pittance that trickled out to aid borrowers mostly stretched out foreclosures to “foam the runway” for financial institutions, as Obama’s treasury secretary Tim Geithner reportedly said.Soon after, the Wall Street-bankrolled Obama administration scaled back its economic stimulus plan, backed off its promise to reform bankruptcy laws, refused to prosecute bankers, abandoned legislation to limit the size of too-big-to-fail banks, and allowed bailout money to subsidize lavish executive bonuses.Some lonely voices in Washington tried to sound an alarm. Tarp Inspector General Neil Barofsky warned that the opaque bailout was being misused. Congressman Brad Miller, a Democrat from North Carolina, tried to hold Obama to his promise to let judges write down mortgagors’ loans. And Senators Carl Levin and Ted Kaufman, a longtime aide to Joe Biden, pressed their party to prosecute and break up the banks.They were largely ignored – and Obama later justified the brush-offs by insisting that doing anything more would have “required a violence to the social order, a wrenching of political and economic norms”.But defending the banks and failing to deliver material gains to a nation ravaged by corporate malfeasance gave conservatives a political bailout, allowing them to further shred the social fabric once stitched together by a belief in shared sacrifice.Boosted by Glenn Beck’s blubbering broadsides and Rick Santelli’s CNBC dog-whistle rant against mortgage “losers”, Republicans were able to divide the country and portray themselves as populists – and shellack Democrats in 2010’s Tea Party election.A few years later, Democratic leaders confidently predicted that they would be able to overcome working-class rage with support from wealthier suburbanites. After all, the top 10% of income earners saw their fortunes rise by 27% during Obama’s presidency.But every other stratum saw incomes decline, and countless neighborhoods were eviscerated by more than 6m foreclosures, dooming families to losing battles with bank bureaucracy, government red tape, and a judicial foreclosure machine.There was Detroit’s Sandra Hines, who tearfully told a congressional committee about being thrown out of her home in the dead of winter after she fell behind on her mortgage payments.There was Florida oncology nurse Lisa Epstein, who, just after giving birth to an infant daughter, faced foreclosure and then endured a Kafkaesque struggle to expose fraudulent mortgage practices – which resulted in a slap-on-the-wrist settlement that netted her just $600.These experiences, repeated ad nauseam as Wall Street executives swelled their stock portfolios, convinced many to view the past promises of “hope and change” as a ruse. The subsequent outrage helped Republicans complete their takeover with Trump, a billionaire charlatan ginning up racial animosity and depicting himself as singularly able to “make America great again.”The throughline from the financial crisis to Democrats’ failure to deliver help to the rise of Trump is evident in a study from the Center for American Progress. The Democratic thinktank found that “larger proportions of underwater homeowners were prominent features” of more than a third of the 206 counties won by Obama in 2012 that flipped to Trump in 2016.“The legacy of the financial crisis is Donald J Trump,” concluded Trump consigliere Steve Bannon.For today’s Democrats, the takeaway is not merely that Trump is a pathological liar, a racist and an anti-democratic menace who exacerbated the problems he diagnosed. The lesson is more elemental: when America votes for hope and change and is instead force-fed more of the same, the backlash can be swift – and can benefit conservative opportunists who will make things worse.A dozen years later, with Democrats assuming power amid another national crisis, there were initial signs that this lesson had been learned: the Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer said at the outset of the Biden presidency that Democrats must pass bills that are “big and bold and strong”, and he added that “we will not repeat that mistake” of watering down legislation. The child tax credit in the initial Covid relief package was a solid victory – it significantly reduced child poverty, and a recent poll shows less anti-Biden animus among Trump voters who received it.However, much of the direct aid in that legislation has been stalled, cut off or scheduled for expiration – even as nearly one in five households lost all of their savings during the pandemic. Worse, Biden and Democrats have been considering big cuts to their already scaled-back package of housing, anti-poverty and climate initiatives. They’ve also pondered defanging provisions to reduce drug prices, and considered adding means-testing and work requirements that could make direct aid more difficult to access.Taken together, it feels like 2009 all over again.Billionaires are doing better than ever, while more and more Americans are getting economically pulverized – and simmering with rage. Just a year out from the midterm election, the latest polls show Biden’s approval rating plummeting, with particular erosion among Democratic constituencies who were promised change, but seem to be feeling like they’re only getting more of the same.Once again, progressive voices sounding the alarm are getting drowned out by conservative Democrats, their corporate donors, and pundits demanding surrender. Meanwhile, Trump and his Republican mini-mes are barnstorming the country preening as populists, all while a new crop of rightwing media hucksters are converting popular discontent into increasing support for rightwing authoritarianism.But let’s remember: the past does not have to be prelude. If the Democrats are willing to learn from recent history, they still have time to make different choices.In Congress, Democratic lawmakers can realize there is no “middle-ground” compromise with Republicans or corporate greed. They can end the filibuster and ignore the business lobbyists and the donors trying to halt their legislative program, which may be the last chance to help workers and ward off a climate cataclysm.In the White House, Biden can break from Obama’s fetishization of bipartisanship. He can instead try to be a modern-day Lyndon Johnson, arm-twisting his recalcitrant party members into embracing real hope and change.Though none of this would guarantee success, it would at least give the party a fighting chance to enact its agenda and materially improve people’s lives.That simple objective is often obscured in the social media-driven miasma of politics. But history suggests that going big and delivering tangible help to a nation in need is probably the only way to restore some faith in government, ward off an authoritarian takeover and end the meltdown of disillusionment that threatens to incinerate our democracy.
    Investigative reporter David Sirota and Oscar-winning documentarian Alex Gibney are the executive producers of the new podcast series Meltdown, which explores the aftermath of the financial crisis
    This essay is being published in conjunction with the launch of Meltdown. Find the podcast episodes here
    TopicsUS politicsOpinionDemocratsFinancial crisisJoe BidencommentReuse this content More

  • in

    Democrats’ tax plan to pay for Biden agenda would affect 700 of America’s super-rich

    US SenateDemocrats’ tax plan to pay for Biden agenda would affect 700 of America’s super-richProposed tax on wealthiest people in the US would include Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Charles Koch Lauren Aratani and agenciesWed 27 Oct 2021 15.05 EDTFirst published on Wed 27 Oct 2021 08.13 EDTSenate Democrats on Wednesday unveiled a new billionaires tax proposal, an entirely new entry in the tax code, designed to help pay for Joe Biden’s sweeping domestic policy package and edge his party closer to an overall agreement on a shrunken version of the administration’s $3.5tn flagship legislation.‘If we had a deal we would tell you’: disagreements rage over Biden agenda despite White House assurances – liveRead moreThe proposed tax would affect those with more than $1bn in assets or incomes of more than $100m a year, and it could begin to shore up the ambitious social services and climate plan Biden is racing to finish before departing this week for the global climate summit, Cop26, in Scotland.Democrats behind the proposal say that about 700 of America’s super-rich taxpayers would be affected by the new tax proposal.The wealthiest people in the US include household names such as Tesla’s Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, who is worth almost a quarter of a trillion dollars. Also included are Jeff Bezos, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin of Google, investor Warren Buffett, the Walton family members behind Walmart, and the industrialist and libertarian activist Charles Koch.Reports show that the wealthiest Americans became even richer during the pandemic, with the 400 richest seeing a 40% rise in their wealth as the pandemic shuttered large parts of the US economy.“The Billionaires Income Tax would ensure billionaires pay tax every year, just like working Americans,” said the Democratic senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the chairman of the Senate finance committee who authored the new billionaire tax proposal. “No working person in America thinks it’s right that they pay their taxes and billionaires don’t.”However, the proposal drew doubts and criticisms from Republicans and some Democrats, including Joe Manchin, a centrist who has been central to efforts to slim down the reconciliation bill.Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, the West Virginia senator said wealthy Americans should pay a “patriotic tax” of 15% to ensure that all citizens are giving something back to their country.But when it comes to the billionaire tax, Manchin said: “I don’t like it. I don’t like the connotation that we’re targeting different people.”Wyden’s House of Representatives counterpart, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal, said the billionaire tax “will be very difficult because of its complexity.”Later, the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, was asked whether the administration was confident that Democrats’ plan would withstand legal scrutiny.“We’re not going to support anything we don’t think is legal,” she said. “But I will tell you the president supports the billionaire tax. He looks forward to working with Congress and Chairman Wyden to make sure the highest-income Americans pay their fair share.”At the heart of the proposal is a change in what the federal government considers income for the wealthiest individuals. Rather than just basing tax on the paycheck a billionaire receives from a company, the tax would target the unrealized gains of billionaires, which includes the billions of dollars of shares they hold in their companies.Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, for example, makes a salary of about $80,000 a year, though his Amazon stock holdings increase in value over $10bn a year.“If Mr Bezos does not sell any of his Amazon shares in a given year, the income tax ignores the $10bn gain, and effectively he is taxed like a middle-class person making $80,000 a year,” wrote Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities thinktank, in a Twitter thread explaining the Democrats’ proposal.This happens, Marr said, because the federal government does not treat gains made on stocks as income until the stock is sold. What billionaires do to get money is take out huge personal loans, using their shares as collateral. ProPublica revealed that Tesla’s Elon Musk pledged 92m shares of Tesla stock, currently worth over $1,000 a share, as collateral for personal loans.“Why do wealthy people take out these loans? A big reason is to avoid paying taxes they would have to pay if they sold some of their assets,” Marr wrote. “With this proposal, policymakers, in effect, are acknowledging that this is a glaring loophole in the income tax that needs to be closed.”Musk took a dig at the plan on Twitter, responding to a user who expressed concern that the proposal, if passed, would open the door to future tax hikes that would cover a wider range of middle-class Americans with investments.“Exactly. Eventually, they run out of other people’s money and then they come for you,” tweeted Musk, who could owe as much as $50bn in taxes under the proposal.Coupled with a new 15% corporate minimum tax, the proposal would provide alternative revenue sources that Biden needs to win over one key Democrat, Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who had rejected the party’s earlier idea of reversing the Trump-era tax breaks on corporations and the wealthy to raise revenue.Biden met late on Tuesday evening with Sinema and Manchin at the White House.With the US Senate split 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats, Biden needs every Democratic senator on board to pass the budget bill with the allowable simple majority, using the so-called reconciliation process – with Vice-President Kamala Harris the casting vote in the traditional role of president of the Senate.“No senator wants to stand up and say, ‘Gee, I think it’s just fine for billionaires to pay little or no taxes for years on end’,” said Wyden.Biden and his party are homing in on at least $1.75tn in healthcare, childcare and climate change programs, scaling back what had been outlined as a $3.5tn plan, as they try to wrap up negotiations.Taken together, the new tax on billionaires and the 15% corporate minimum tax are designed to fulfill Biden’s promise that no new taxes hit those earning less than $400,000 a year, or $450,000 for couples. Biden insists all the new spending will be fully paid for and not added to the national debt.TopicsUS SenateUS CongressDemocratsJoe BidenUS taxationUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Biden condemns ‘acolyte of Trump’ in crucial Virginia governor’s race

    Joe BidenBiden condemns ‘acolyte of Trump’ in crucial Virginia governor’s raceAt rally for Democrat Terry McAuliffe, president paints tight election as referendum on his own tenure David Smith in Arlington, Virginia@smithinamericaTue 26 Oct 2021 22.28 EDTLast modified on Tue 26 Oct 2021 23.13 EDTJoe Biden has framed a nail-bitingly close race for governor of Virginia as a referendum on his young presidency and an opportunity to rebuke his predecessor, Donald Trump.Seemingly liberated from the formal trappings of office by a return to the campaign trail, Biden used a rally in Arlington, Virginia, to launch an unusually scathing and sustained attack on the former president.Why Virginia holds the key to the 2022 US midterms: Politics Weekly Extra podcastRead moreBiden had made the short journey from Washington to speak in support of the Democrat Terry McAuliffe, who faces a tight election against the Republican Glenn Youngkin next week.“Just remember this: I ran against Donald Trump,” he told an estimated 2,500 people gathered in a park on a chilly Tuesday night. “And Terry is running against an acolyte of Donald Trump.”The election in Virginia is seen as the most important of the year, offering a window on to public sentiment about Biden’s first nine months in office and a preview of what to expect in next year’s midterm elections for Congress.McAuliffe, a former governor seeking to return to the post, is a career politician and establishment Democrat long associated with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Youngkin, by contrast, is a business executive who has never held elected office.Polls once gave McAuliffe a clear lead in a state where no Republican has won statewide office since 2009, and where Biden beat Trump by 10 percentage points last year. But Youngkin has been closing the gap, hammering away at “culture war” issues in schools as part of a bid to peel off suburban votes.Biden, speaking at a McAuliffe rally for the second time, was greeted by enthusiastic cheers but also heckled by climate activists during his remarks. He said: “It’s not a Trump rally. We let ’em holler.”He went on to confirm that the state-level race has taken on a national significance. Biden ran through McAuliffe’s accomplishments as governor, for example on gun safety, and his own presidential record on issues such as the coronavirus pandemic.He also noted how Youngkin has been walking a fine line between accepting Trump’s endorsement and barely mentioning him in speeches, a sign that the former president is toxic to most Virginians.Youngkin had begun his campaign calling for “election integrity” to ally himself with Trump’s “big lie”, the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen, Biden said. “It was price he had to pay for the nomination and he paid it. But now he doesn’t want to talk about Trump any more. Well, I do.”The president elicited laughter from the crowd by saying: “Talk about an oxymoron: Donald Trump and election integrity?! I can’t believe he put the words Trump and integrity in the same sentence.”Biden lambasted Trump for his “offensive words” following the deaths of Colin Powell, the former secretary of state, and Senator John McCain. “That’s who Donald Trump is,” he said. He also pointed to the examples of Florida and Texas, where Republican leaders have shifted right, and urged Virginians to avoid a similar fate. “The Republican party nationally is for nothing. Not a joke. Nothing.”But Biden’s sinking approval rating in recent weeks makes it unclear how much of a boost he can offer McAuliffe, who also enlisted Barack Obama last weekend to help him fight apathy and election weariness among Democratic voters. A loss by McAuliffe on 2 November would cause deep anxiety among Democrats and spell trouble for Biden’s presidency.In the final days of the campaign, both candidates are focused on turning out their base supporters, with Republicans pressing culture war issues, prompting a debate over banning books in high school classrooms. On Monday the Youngkin campaign released an ad featuring a mother who once sought to have the novel Beloved by Toni Morrison banned from classrooms. The mother’s advocacy led to state legislation, vetoed by Governor McAuliffe in 2016 and 2017, that would have let parents opt out of their children studying classroom materials with sexually explicit content.Democrats attacked Youngkin’s ad and accused him of trying to “silence” Black authors. McAuliffe’s campaign highlighted the controversy during his rally by passing out copies of Beloved to reporters.Biden said: “He’s gone from banning a woman’s right to choose to banning books written by a Pulitzer prize and Nobel prize-winning author, Toni Morrison.”McAuliffe said that Youngkin “is ending his campaign the way he started it: with divisive dog whistles”. He added: “He wants to bring his personal culture wars into our classrooms. Folks, we will not allow Glenn Youngkin to bring his hate, his chaos, into our Virginia schools.”TopicsJoe BidenVirginiaUS politicsDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Pelosi ‘very confident’ Democrats will reach deal to salvage Biden agenda

    Joe BidenPelosi ‘very confident’ Democrats will reach deal to salvage Biden agendaDemocratic infighting has threatened to upend Biden’s ambitious domestic agenda less than a year after taking office Richard Luscombe@richluscSun 24 Oct 2021 15.44 EDTLast modified on Sun 24 Oct 2021 15.45 EDTHouse speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed confidence on Sunday that a deal between Democrats to salvage Joe Biden’s ambitious social agenda was “pretty much there”, paving the way for a possible vote in Congress later this week.Her upbeat words came as the president was meeting in Delaware with the Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic holdout Joe Manchin to put the finishing touches on what has become a scaled-back package central to Biden’s Build Back Better initiative.Manchin, of West Virginia, was one of two moderate Senate Democrats, along with Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema, resisting the original $3.5tn cost of the social spending bill. Manchin had indicated he would be more comfortable with something closer to $1.5tn, and raised objections over Biden’s flagship clean power plan (CPP) that would have imposed emission controls on power companies.“We will have something that will meet the president’s goals, I feel very confident about that,” Pelosi said on CNN’s State of the Union.“We’re almost certain [we have a deal], it’s just the language of it. It will not offend, shall we say, the concern that Senator Manchin had about the CPP. The point is to reach your goals, and the president’s goals of reaching the emissions, the pollution and all the rest … there are other ways to reach the goal.”The Democratic infighting had threatened to upend Biden’s domestic agenda less than a year after taking office. The votes of both Manchin and Sinema, who has insisted she would oppose any effort to reverse Trump-era tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations, are crucial in a divided 50-50 Senate.Adding to the administration’s frustration has been the blocking by Democratic House progressives of a parallel $1tn bipartisan infrastructure bill until the Senate approves the massive social spending package touted by those on the left of the party, particularly the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders.Pelosi, who had set a 31 October deadline for the infrastructure bill to pass, did not disclose what elements of the original social safety net bill would have to be compromised or dropped to meet the lower price tag acceptable to the moderates. But she indicated that welfare components such as expanded healthcare and the child tax credit would likely survive.Possibly on the chopping block, however, were long-held Democratic goals such as paid family leave and expanding Medicare for hearing, vision and dental. Pressed on whether those elements would survive, Pelosi was non-committal, using phrases including: “That’s our hope,” and “That’s what we’re fighting for.”“Right now Senate leader Schumer, Senator Manchin and the president are having the meeting on some of the particulars that need to be finalized, and I’m optimistic that we can do that,” Pelosi said. “One basket was climate, the jobs bill, a bill for the children, for the future of healthcare, strengthening the affordable care act, expanding Medicaid and Medicare.”Pelosi also insisted that the administration had “an array” of alternative options to “probably more than pay for the plan” even if Sinema’s opposition ruled out a reversal of the Trump tax cuts.“We had the rescue package at $1.9tn, we have the infrastructure bill over a trillion dollars, [so] that’s around $3tn. And we’ll have this in at $2tn,” she said. “Nobody has done anything that remarkable. So while it isn’t everything that was put out originally, it takes us down a path where we can continue investments.”Pelosi was asked if she supported the prosecution and jailing of those who resisted congressional subpoenas to testify before the House committee investigating the 6 January insurrection. Last week the House held Trump ally and former adviser Steve Bannon in criminal contempt for ignoring a subpoena.“I do,” she said. “People said well, this hasn’t happened before, [but] we haven’t had an insurrection incited by the president of the United States and [with] one of his toadies having advanced knowledge.“It’s important for us to find the truth about what happened on 6 January and the assault on the constitution, our congress and our capital, but it’s also important in terms of the separation of power and the checks and balances of the constitution.”TopicsJoe BidenNancy PelosiUS politicsUS CongressDemocratsHouse of RepresentativesUS SenatenewsReuse this content More