Democratic Voters Want Biden’s Big Spending Deal—and They’re Getting Impatient

[dan_bgblue]

Democrats in Washington remain divided over the scope of President Biden’s expansive domestic policy agenda. But their voters—both moderates and progressives—have largely rallied around the push to increase government spending and say they worry lawmakers will fail to come to an agreement.

Negotiations gained momentum this week after Mr. Biden in meetings with Democratic lawmakers identified programs that would likely be cut or shortened in the final bill to trim costs. Party leaders said they could have a framework for a deal by week’s end, though many major provisions—and how to pay for them—remain under discussion.

Several recent polls, bolstered by interviews with more than 50 Democratic voters across six swing states in recent weeks, indicate broad party support for legislation to expand social safety net programs and pass measures aimed at mitigating the effects of climate change.

Democratic leaders have proposed paying for well over a trillion dollars in expanded government services, in part, by higher taxes. Top Democrats acknowledge that would have been considered too liberal a few years ago but say that it now has broad party support. At least one Democrat in the Senate has voiced opposition to the idea.

Most of the Democratic voters interviewed said they believed that if their elected leaders didn’t act on the most ambitious legislation possible, the party risked losing congressional seats in next year’s midterm elections and the White House in 2024.

A CNN poll released last week found that 75% of Democrats preferred a bill that included all of the social safety net and climate-change provisions proposed by Mr. Biden. Another 20% of respondents backed a scaled-back bill that costs less. A Pew Research Center poll released in late September similarly found that among those who identify as Democrats or lean Democratic, 75% said they favored Mr. Biden’s initial $3.5 trillion package.

Continues at the Wall Street Journal

[KeithKSR]

Most of those 75% have no idea how much the bill will negatively impact their lives.

[catmanjack]

I find most of the democratic supporters are mindless zombies not fully understanding the impact Biden is having.

[Catonahottinroof]

I think that is a two way situation, both sides have that element. The only difference is the majority of media of firmly ensconced on one side.

I find most of the democratic supporters are mindless zombies not fully understanding the impact Biden is having.

[bigsky]

When a republic degenerates to where we are, a mob majority that can demand govt handouts, it is destined to fail.

[CitizenBBN]

People love to vote themselves dollars and benefits.

And they love to think they're being generous and caring and giving, and don't really care if the reality of their actions is in fact harmful. They feel better, so that's how they behave.

It feels good to talk about making "those rich people and corporations" pay "their fair share." Great slogan.

Also pure bull****.

Bezos and Zuckerberg do make a lot of money, but that money is mostly in stock value. What the rich make in direct income doesn't go into big vaults. it's not hoarded. It's called "capital", money they then invest in the markets which provides the funding so companies can borrow and raise money in stock sales to support expansion and updates.

So if you think the thousands of jobs Ford will bring with a new factory in Kentucky is a good thing, remember that factory only gets built if Ford can get the money. If they are taxed and that money is taken away, and the other people who put money into investments like bond issues Ford may offer in order to fund the construction are taxed, that is money that now doesn't go into building those factories.

It's never "free". It is actually just a transfer of power and wealth from the private sector, which will spend that money just as fast as the government, but they will spend it on investments in factories and such, whereas government will a) mostly hand it out to people who, if they had a job from Ford's factory, wouldn't need it, and b) they will waste up to 70% of it in the bureaucracy to manage it and get it to you.

So it's not about fair shares and sticking it to the rich.

It's about whether you want Washington DC deciding how to MANAGE and spend that money or do you want private markets deciding to put it into factories?

In an ideal world people would have the good sense to know that market based incentives enacted into law would be VASTLY superior in combating everything from climate issues to homelessness, but they aren't that smart. The idea of simply incentivizing the private sector into accomplishing goals would not involve nearly the bureaucratic overhead, or the corruption of government.

No, they would rather put Congress in charge of how to manage our nation's wealth, b/c, you know, they do such a great job at accomplishing things and putting the average American first.

What a load of crap. They don't give a damn about you or me, they care how you vote so they can stay in power and get rich and bang interns on their desks without reprisals and fly to the Hamptons on the weekend to schmooze with those same uber rich they claim are so evil.

The lack of basic understanding of economics in this country, including by many economists btw, is depressing.

[CitizenBBN]

Reminds me of the "fat cat" tax they put on luxury boats about 15-20 years ago. Yeah, we're going to stick it to those rich SOBs.

What happened? It put thousands of average workers out of work, b/c someone has to BUILD those boats. Those companies got scaled back or closed b/c people didn't buy those boats.

All it did was hurt average Americans, b/c the rich just didn't buy the fancy new boat.

And they'll avoid most of these taxes too, with a bevy of CPAs and tax lawyers both lobbying for loopholes and finding them after the fact.

But the average Americans who depend on the capital of the markets to fuel investment in this country will be hurt, and they won't even know they are cutting off their own nose to spite their face.

[Doc]

Reminds me of the "fat cat" tax they put on luxury boats about 15-20 years ago. Yeah, we're going to stick it to those rich SOBs.

What happened? It put thousands of average workers out of work, b/c someone has to BUILD those boats. Those companies got scaled back or closed b/c people didn't buy those boats.

All it did was hurt average Americans, b/c the rich just didn't buy the fancy new boat.

And they'll avoid most of these taxes too, with a bevy of CPAs and tax lawyers both lobbying for loopholes and finding them after the fact.

But the average Americans who depend on the capital of the markets to fuel investment in this country will be hurt, and they won't even know they are cutting off their own nose to spite their face.

I would add that the "loopholes" they talk about closing won't happen because the loopholes are created by congress to protect congress people and their friends-donors.

[KeithKSR]

Most taxes are ultimately paid by the working class.