While Republicans have been busy canceling baseball and Coca-Cola, while also dealing with Gaetzgate , Democrats have been busy touting President Biden's proposed $3 trillion infrastructure bill . The bill, which is centered on modernizing and improving all sectors of infrastructure (transportation, energy, communication) by rolling back the 2017 GOP tax cuts for rich assholes, has met with the usual resistance from the likes of Mitch McConnell and other Republicans.
So of course, that's what the Sunday shows were about.
On CNN's "State Of The Union," host Jake Tapper interviewed Mississippi GOP Governor Tate Reeves about it. After some questions about vaccine hesistancy, which Reeves blamed on "both sides," Tapper asked Reeves about the proposed infrastructure plan that could provide up to $100 billion to fix Mississippi's road and bridges. While Reeves acknowledged that they could use the money, his tax-hating programming kicked in:
Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) suggests Democrats should pay for an infrastructure plan by ... cutting taxes and… https: //t.co/fh8LbzjpmR
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1617544269.0
REEVES: The problem with this particular plan, though, is, although the Biden administration is calling it an infrastructure plan, it looks more like a $2 trillion tax hike plan to me. That's going to lead to significant challenges in our economy. It's going to lead to a slowing GDP. And it's [...] going to lead to Americans losing significant numbers of jobs. [...] And there's no doubt that Mississippi, like virtually every other state, could use federal support. Infrastructure is a core function of government. It is something that the federal government, the state government, and local government should spend more of our resources on. But we don't have to hike taxes by $2 trillion to do it.
That seems like a very long way of saying, "Fuck your roads and bridges, Mississippians! Don't you know my corporate donors need a third yacht paid by tax cuts?"
Tapper asked the obvious question:
TAPPER: Well, how do you pay for it, then?
Such a simple question from Tapper. All Republicans, including Reeves, should be able to easily ans-
REEVES: Well, I think you pay for it in a number of different ways. One way you pay for it is by seeing significant improved economic growth. We saw that throughout the Trump administration, because the policies were pro-business, they were pro-growth, and revenues improved. Now, unfortunately, during those four years, like the four years before that, they did not in Washington get control of spending. [...] That is not sustainable over the long term.
Republicans fail to see that taking in less revenue (taxes) doesn't make any sense. You can't cut your way out of debt if your revenue stream stops or shrinks, which is why these supply-side proposals have never made sense. Hell, George Herbert Walker Bush once called supply-side economics by the admittedly problematic term "voodoo economics" ( before he tried to retract it ).
Tapper tried again to get a real answer:
TAPPER: Yes, that doesn't -- that doesn't really answer the question as to where -- how do you pay for it, though. It actually provides examples of how it's even more complicated than that.
MSNBC's Joy Reid responded to the clip with some facts to keep in mind when we try to take fiscal and governing advice from people like Tate Reeves.
Not sure we should be taking economic advice from the guy governing a state with the highest adult (19.6%) and chil… https: //t.co/hGu8yQsBkr
— Joy-Ann Pro-Democracy & Masks Reid 😷 (@Joy-Ann Pro-Democracy & Masks Reid 😷) 1617552644.0
Maybe Mississippi GOP Senator Roger Wicker had better luck explaining the opposition to what should be a bipartisan infrastructure bill on NBC's "Meet The Press."
NEW: Chuck Todd asks Sen. Wicker: “Big businesses that benefit from smooth running roads and really good ports ...… https://t.co/VV6OzXBqXE
— Meet the Press (@Meet the Press) 1617543162.0
Nope! Same bullshit as Governor Tate Reeves, but now on a different channel.
Maybe I was expecting too much from a senator who voted against the COVID stimulus bill, then tweeted this immediately to try to get some credit. (This tweet is STILL up.)
Independent restaurant operators have won $28.6 billion worth of targeted relief. This funding will ensure small b… https: //t.co/WDPDBPf0cn
— Senator Roger Wicker (@Senator Roger Wicker) 1615413600.0
Over on "Fox News Sunday," GOP Senator Roy Blunt tried to oppose the infrastructure bill in a different way, instead focusing on the national debt/deficit. Chris Wallace was ready for it.
CHRIS WALLACE: Haven't Republicans lost credibility on debt and deficits, given how they exploded during the Trump… https://t.co/UKDbeAA6Sj
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1617545989.0
Wallace demonstrated how the debt/deficit increased exponentially under Donald Trump, pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republican argument. But Republican lawmakers only have one solution to all fiscal issues: tax cuts. It's their Will Ferrell "cowbell" of governance. I'm surprised they haven't proposed a 18 percent corporate tax rate as the cure for COVID-19.
Let's conclude with Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. Secretary Pete appeared on multiple Sunday shows to both explain the infrastructure bill and debunk all the Republicans' massive lies about it. The best example is this are these clips of Buttigieg on ABC's "This Week":
Buttigieg: "The American people like this plan even more when you explain how we're gonna pay for it, and the reaso… https://t.co/rcS38ib88T
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1617548054.0
While calling out South Dakota GOP Governor Kristi Noem's ignorance on What Is Infrastructure, Secretary Buttigieg explained how "infrastructure week" will go from being a long-running Trump administration punchline to real action from the Biden administration.
Keep up the great work, Mayor/Secretary Pete!
Have a week.
Wonkette is fully funded by readers like you! If you love Wonkette, FUND WONKETTE.
Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons .
I suggest we cut republicans instead. Right out of office.
Well said, Natalie.