Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Manchin, Schumer Agree on Bloated Economic and Climate Bill

Manchin, Schumer Agree on Bloated Economic and Climate Bill

The “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022” will definitely NOT reduce inflation. Raising taxes on job creators and spending a ton more money is not the way to do it.

https://twitter.com/RiegerReport/status/1224449680655802368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1224449680655802368&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Flegalinsurrection.com%2F2020%2F02%2Flive-trumps-team-house-managers-give-final-closing-arguments-followed-by-floor-speeches%2F

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) agreed with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on a different but still a big government “Build Back Better” bill.

Well, now it’s called the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 because if you oppose it, you must love inflation.

The bill forces a 15% tax, at the minimum, on companies worth more than $1 billion:

“I now propose and will vote for the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Rather than risking more inflation with trillions in new spending, this bill will cut the inflation taxes Americans are paying, lower the cost of health insurance and prescription drugs, and ensure our country invests in the energy security and climate change solutions,” Manchin said.

“President Biden, Leader Schumer and Speaker Pelosi have committed to advancing a suite of commonsense permitting reforms this fall,” he also said.

According to Schumer’s and Manchin’s offices, the bill will raise $739 billion in revenue through IRS tax enforcement, the corporate minimum tax and closing the carried interest loophole. It will spend $433 billion total, they said, on energy and climate change provisions and on the ACA extension.

The energy investments include fossil fuels, nuclear, and renewables:

The summary of the agreement from Senate Democrats doesn’t detail exactly what the energy money will fund. Lobbyists say that Mr. Manchin has been pushing to include tax credits for clean energy that have been part of ongoing negotiations for months. Some Senate Democrats believed they had previously reached an agreement with Mr. Manchin on tax credits for reducing carbon emissions.

Mr. Manchin said the proposed legislation would invest in technologies needed for cleaner production and use of fuel types including hydrogen, nuclear, renewables and fossil fuels.

“It is truly all of the above, which means this bill does not arbitrarily shut off our abundant fossil fuels,” he said.

On Thursday, we should get the GDP report. It will likely show that America is in a recession no matter how many times the White House tries to change the definition of recession.

So the Democrats want to pass a bill that will raise taxes. I mean…

The reconciliation process means the Senate can tie this bill to the budget and pass it with a simple majority.

A simple majority is not so easy. The Senate is split 50-50. Everyone has to agree on it because Harris could cast the tie-breaking vote.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Manchin is a munchkin

Always folds eventually

Personally I will NEVER drive an electric car

And I ride my electric bike daily

Raise taxes in the day the recession is official

Can’t make this crap up

      Ironclaw in reply to MrE. | July 28, 2022 at 8:52 am

      Yeah, that looks like a waste of $17000 since it could be done for half that with a combustion engine which would also give it unlimited range to boot.

        I was thinking more in terms of fun to drive and put it through the paces. Ultimately it’s impractical where I live; the one home is more weather friendly but too hilly for that thing. The other cold as hell in winter but flat as a pancake. It turned up while looking for a cheap vehicle for the pancake house, so we can fly and not drive the 2400 miles. If not for winter, we’d just ebike around town – about 3×3 miles square.

          RandomCrank in reply to MrE. | July 28, 2022 at 1:58 pm

          18 grand for a 3-wheeled vehicle without doors and what’s probably a 20 kWh battery? Nope.

    RandomCrank in reply to gonzotx. | July 28, 2022 at 1:09 pm

    Why ride an electric bike but not drive an electric car?

      That observation would be why I posted the FUV link. Design and cost are starting to bridge the gap between electric car and electric bike. A simple people mover that hauls parcels. Lacking complete enclosure and a heating system and the still-too-high price I wouldn’t buy one – but – the design and cost improvements are moving in the right direction. 100 mile range and charges on a 110 or 220 outlet. Fast acceleration with a top speed of 75mph. I’m encouraged, but not breaking out my checkbook just yet.

        RandomCrank in reply to MrE. | July 28, 2022 at 5:07 pm

        Your money, your rules. If I thought you were serious and if you lived in the Pacific NW, I’d give you a great deal on the EV I’m going to replace with one with a bigger battery. It would fit your requirements perfectly. But I’m in no hurry either. We live in the countryside, so I’ll probably just stick it on blocks in the meadow even though it runs just fine. LOL

          I’m rarely serious. But I do live in the PNW on the Olympic Peninsula. Admittedly I’m intrigued by EVs – while also flabbergasted by the disconnect between the state of the art / affordability and liberal wet dreams trying to push/sell a utopia that doesn’t exist.

          We have a 2nd house in the rural Midwest where my wife’s family lives. Going between homes has thrown some challenges at us – whether to drive or fly and buy a beater vehicle to leave in ‘Cornville’. The Brandon factor is pushing the cost up, a lot. I wouldn’t want an EV on OlyPen because I take my life in my hands pulling out onto US 101, even with a supercharged Park Ave. In Cornville I could get by with an eTrike or golf cart most of the time. Winter would be hard on the bod though. Fam is on the look out for a vehicle there. I didn’t think everything through before buying the 2nd house – it was a bit impulsive because my wife missed her family and I wanted her to have more time with her elderly mom while she can. We’ve gone back and forth between the PNW and Midwest several times – and been there for the passing of each parent. Mom is the last of them. Transportation to/from and some wheels there is a PIA right now. It is the kind of town where you see oldsters tooling around in a golf cart or mobility scooter while sitting on a lawn-chair in your garage and gawking at passers by.

          RandomCrank in reply to RandomCrank. | July 28, 2022 at 6:27 pm

          I just saw that they’re putting a $4,000 tax credit in there for used EVs. There’s an income cap (which I agree with), so if you’re eligible, the net cost of my EV will be zero. Hmm. Maybe I can pawn it off on someone around here. If Uncle Sucker wants to be this stupid, who am I to argue? LOL

        RandomCrank in reply to MrE. | July 29, 2022 at 7:52 pm

        Well, if you want my EV, it’ll be about 250 miles to pick it up. I’ve checked the bill, and there’s a $4,000 tax credit. It’s a lot of fun, and you’d like it a lot more than the 3-wheeler. Create an email address and post it, and we’ll talk. Why pay $18K when you can have something better for free?

        Trust me, I have plenty of other ways to get rid of it, but I like this site and most of the commenters. By the way, did you see my other reply where I guessed that the 3-wheeler has a 20kWh battery? I contacted the company, and they told me it’s got a 19.6kWh battery. I know EVs well.

        Your move.

Now watch as China, India and God-only-knows-who from the East offer huge incentives to snap up manufacturing and tech companies caught up in the Brandon Exodus.

It takes a special type of hubris to believe you can legislate climate change. One good volcano belch puts more CO2 in the atmosphere than the human race has in the past 1000 years.

Pure fantasy on the climate change front and the revenue generation

    InEssence in reply to buck61. | July 28, 2022 at 1:04 am

    The climate hoaxers use “models” to try to convince their right when their models have been wrong for 30 years and counting. A more astute mathematician would use the heat transfer equations (not a model – but a direct calculation). Those equations show that man-made CO2 cools the Earth by less than 1/1000th of a degree F. The effect lasts less than 3 years, and it agrees with climate data.

Close The Fed | July 27, 2022 at 10:20 pm

Okay, a little off topic, but I met the Professor and Kemberlee tonight, in an Atlanta suburb. The Professor gave a talk and took questions on CRT.

It was great! Also got an update on little Walt, the cutie we’ve all been keeping up with in the news.

Thanks, Professor, for your visit. It was superb!!! Loved your mention of your personal history with this site, since I read your very first post, when you posted it!

I have NO idea how I stumbled upon it, all those years ago.

Cheers!

I

WARNED

YOU

All of the morons bloviating about ‘well Manchin may switch parties’ were always just wishcasting. He’s a Democrat, and will always be a Democrat, he votes against The Party only when given PERMISSION to do so.

    maxmillion in reply to Olinser. | July 28, 2022 at 8:56 am

    More precisely, I believe, is in WV he wants to dominate BOTH SIDES, not just Democrats, something he has managed to do for a long time. He did this by calling himself a D, but behaving most of the time as an R. In a state like WV he could pull that off. What he did here is misread the tea leaves. There’s no way a threat from his left could take him out with brain-dead Biden as POTUS, because everything politically is trending to the right.

Manchin proves you never rest your hopes with a moderate.

there is a great deal of pressure on Republican Senators to vote for the bill codifying same sex marriage. According to Redstate, sponsors are just a few votes short. What happened with Manchin and Shumer holding this announcement until after the Senate passed the Chips bill ought to convince Republicans that they can never trust Democrats and cause them to kill the marriage bill. But it won’t. They want to be liked. Which is why I am no longer a Republican.

healthguyfsu | July 27, 2022 at 10:57 pm

They should be begging us to buy hybrids if they actually care about carbon emissions.

EVs are carbon positive until at least 150k miles compared to traditional cars. Their accounting trick of not counting production fuel is a cheap parlor trick. This also doesn’t count disposal costs for toxic conflict minerals that may also become much more difficult to acquire with Russia and China in charge of them.

Hybrids beat them all by using less of these conflict minerals, costing far less to produce, and destroying the charge inefficiency of highway miles by invoking the ICE at high speeds and battery at stop and go. Bonus that the ICE alternator (and the braking system) does the charging so no grid usage.

This isn’t rocket science (it’s more engineering anyways) so why are people on both sides being so intentionally stupid about it.

    Camperfixer in reply to healthguyfsu. | July 27, 2022 at 11:22 pm

    Then you buy one, leave the rest of us who need to haul livestock and materials alone with real workhorse vehicle’s. I don’t want a hybrid EV toy.

      Dimsdale in reply to Camperfixer. | July 28, 2022 at 10:44 am

      Or one of those CVT transmissions. When I see those on real trucks, I might, repeat, might, trust them in a light duty truck.

      RandomCrank in reply to Camperfixer. | July 28, 2022 at 1:40 pm

      I own a one-ton diesel work truck. If a hybrid truck sold for the same price and got even a bit better fuel economy, I’d see no reason for rejecting it. But if the hybrid costs more, then it becomes a calculation. I’m quite skeptical that there’d be much difference in fuel economy given how work trucks are used.

      I’m also skeptical of the idea of battery-only work trucks, the entries and announcements from Ford, Tesla, Rivian, and Chevy notwithstanding. For an electric work truck to be viable, it would need such a big battery that the low energy density (think kWh/lb of battery) relative to petroleum distillates would make it impractical.

      Thus, the electric trucks being promoted will wind up being grocery store queens and very light-duty, city vehicles. There are definite pluses to electric motive power (torque being the biggie), and electric would really shine in a work truck. Every Bubba would want one, except … it’s not going to be viable unless there’s a battery chemistry breakthrough that solves the energy density issue.

      In spite of all the hype about new and different batteries, no chemistry breakthrough has happened, and none is visible on any horizon that I know of.

    RandomCrank in reply to healthguyfsu. | July 28, 2022 at 1:27 pm

    I don’t care about CO2, but am planning to buy a Chevy Bolt for completely unrelated and totally non-political reasons. These are (to me) cars and not causes, whatever the drivetrains are.

    That said, CO2 gets mentioned all the time. My only interest there is to have the correct numbers on both sides of the equation. The allegedly higher CO2 emissions from EV manufacturing centers on the batteries, and specifically the CO2 emissions as a consequence of mining the materials in them.

    If that’s going to be included (and it ought to be, if studying the CO2 issue that I personally don’t care about), then the CO2 emissions involved in producing oil should go on the conventional car side of the equation. In the past, I’ve looked at the comparisons, and on the ICEV side all that’s included is direct emissions from burning it in the vehicle engines. Nothing included for extracting and refinining.

    Again, I think the whole CO2 craze is a pantload. My interest comes from two careers that were numbers-heavy. If you’re going to compare numbers, then get them right on both sides.

      Ironclaw in reply to RandomCrank. | July 28, 2022 at 2:10 pm

      Oh, they do.

      By the way, if we want to play with numbers. Real cars have a frame made of steel, ev’s have a frame made of aluminum. Aluminum takes nearly SIX times the energy to process as does steel by weight, and if you want the aluminum impregnated with silicates for extra strength, double it again. Now, your average car will get about 50k miles out of an average set of tires, your EV … 30k if you’re lucky. Those tires are made from … petroleum.

        RandomCrank in reply to Ironclaw. | July 28, 2022 at 5:19 pm

        Look, when it comes to this stuff, I know enough to make the zealots on both sides really mad at me. Specifically right now, there’s a lot of aluminum use in gassers, although (in spite of knowing a lot about EVs), I can’t wax eloquent about vehicle frames. Yes, EV tires are those “low rolling resistance” things, but you don’t have to use them.

        I wonder how much of an EV fuel economy penalty there is for using ordinary tires. I doubt a whole lot, but watch me be wrong. In any case, your post didn’t deal with my point about both sides of the equation.

        I truly am agnostic on EVs. I own one that I’m going to replace, but I also own an 8,000-lb diesel work truck that gets 16 mpg. They each have their own purpose. Some years back, I ran across a “study” out of Europe that claimed EVs are responsible for more CO2 emissions (which I repeat, I don’t personally care about) in manufacture than gassers.

        I single-handedly dove into the deep end of the pool, and that study had to be corrected. My point isn’t pro- or anti-EV, but only about including all the correct numbers on both sides of the equation, no matter what those numbers are. If CO2 from mining the ingredients for batteries goes on the EV side of the ledger, the CO2 from extracting and refining oil should go on the gasser side of the ledger.

        None of it will have the slightest impact on my purchase decision. That’s not my point. I’m a numbers hound from way back, and my posts on this little sub- sub-topic is about numbers and nothing else.

          CommoChief in reply to RandomCrank. | July 28, 2022 at 5:33 pm

          Volkswagen did a recent study that pointed out the break even point on their own EV v a diesel purchase would require it to be driven over 80,000 miles.

          Outside an urban area with minimal drive time EV are likely second vehicles not the primary. An EV might make sense in Boston or NY for an apartment dwelling single professional. If so they should buy it.

          In rural areas? Nah, not so much at least for me. A trip to the nearest Costco or Sams is over 90 minutes interstate drive time in any direction plus the 20 miles to town for me to access the US highway to get to the interstate. An ICE can do that roundtrip twice while an EV falls short of even one roundtrip.

          I don’t hate EV just the evangelical aspects of the EV crowd and their constant shilling and grifting for tax dollars to subsidize them while implementing policies to disfavor ICE vehicles.

          RandomCrank in reply to RandomCrank. | July 28, 2022 at 5:58 pm

          As I’ve noted, I think the subsidies are stupid. There might have been a reason some years back (debatable, for sure), but not now.

          As for break-even numbers, there are so many ways to skin that cat. If it really mattered to me, I’d do it again, but I think the comparison pretty much ignores the car buying mindset. Seeing as how I’ve been driving for almost 50 years and have owned 16 vehicles, I think I have a reasonable familiarity with the buying tunnel.

          People who want a new car might SAY they’re doing it for this or that practical reason, and occasionally they’re telling the truth. Usually they’re lying to themselves, otherwise they’d usually just go out and buy a lightly used one and skip the depreciation. (This varies depending on the state of the used car market, which currently is very distorted but won’t be for long.)

          Let’s imagine that diesel comes back down to, oh $4 and stays there. So every trip to Portland would save me about $35. That’s 500 trips to “break even.” (Voila! 80,000 miles. Score one for VW — by the way, I once owned a Phaeton W-12, and that was a huge score for VW.)

          It’s not why I’ll get a Bolt. I’ll get it because that first-gen EV, while fun, is tiny and won’t go far. I’m forever paying way, way, waaaaaay too much attention to its range. So the question is what to replace it with.

          Dirty little secret of EVs is that you really don’t want to buy a used one — battery degradation is a risk, and you just don’t know how that used one has been treated. So if I’m going to replace EV with EV, the replacement needs to be new. At $18K net of the stupid subsidies? Let’s just say that I have made harder buying decisions than that.

          Plus it’ll be a new car. Oh, that smell! LOL

          RandomCrank in reply to RandomCrank. | July 28, 2022 at 6:02 pm

          p.s.: Yeah, if that Costco run is more than a couple hundred miles, an EV would make no sense. Those advertised range numbers are overstated. To get one that will reliably get what sounds like closer to 300 miles roundtrip will cost too much. The day will come when that won’t be the case, but that day has not yet arrived.

I don’t care much about the corporate taxes as compared to what I’m hearing about taxes in cattle and swine.

They’re going to literally destroy livestock agriculture. Literally

Ahh, what’s a few billion of taxpayer money among friends? Or those tens of billions for The Zelenskyy theater?

Time to starve the beast and the grifters therein, and stop paying federal income taxes.

The reality-detached, self-serving stupidity of democrats never ceases to blow my mind. Or make my blood boil.

Colonel Travis | July 27, 2022 at 11:48 pm

We need a new Declaration of Independence and start over

More accurately named “The Inflation Expansion Act”.

well Manchin I hope you are proud of yourself, hope our constituents are proud of you, because you signed off on the beginning of a depression

    ronk in reply to ronk. | July 28, 2022 at 7:30 am

    I did forget something, don’t know what they promised you, but look back at the promises that were made for obamacare, how many did they follow through on.

The only way to get avoid stagflation is for Congress to slash spending and for the Fed to shrink its balance sheet. Get ready for a series of 1% rate hikes. This is a Treasury and Congress problem yet the politicians are piling while blaming Powell who can only do one thing: hike interest rakes until the inflation rate stops accelerating and then ebbs. Let’s see what the inflation numbers look like tomorrow. I’m expecting a market sell-off.

taurus the judge | July 28, 2022 at 8:45 am

Again, we must put this squarely at the foot of who is really behind this..

The RINO

For all the wishful thinking about Manchin (even I think he is a traditional left leaning “Democrat” but not a Socialist), This should surprise nobody that he had his price and it was met. ( He knows this bill will NOT ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING so this was a purely political move)

At the end of the day, the left is simply doing what the left has promised they were going to do. (One must really praise their honesty- they said they were going to “fundamentally transform” us and they have held fast to it) We cannot be angry because fish swim.

What I DONT hear is the equal “Conservative” RAGE from the RINO GOPe (like the left does when they don’t get their way)- where is all the opposition to everything the left does? Where is the rallying? All I hear is crickets and worn out sayings about “bipartisan whatever”.

I hear nothing n the J6 prisoners, holding accountable for the “Russian hoax”, Hunters laptop, Impeaching the current President or anything else.

To top it off, we would NOT be facing any of this in the first place if the RINO GOPe had not AIDED AND ABETTED the 2020 steal ( like some elements are trying to do now in key primaries)

Manchin is just a blip on the screen and his price point would eventually and inevitably be met. This should not surprise anyone.

If we fail to cull the RINO- nothing else matters

Same garbage, bright new package. Nothing good will come of this.

    Dimsdale in reply to Ironclaw. | July 28, 2022 at 10:48 am

    The more positive the name, the more destructive the legislation.

    See “Affordable Care Act,” or “Build Back Better.”

The d/prog have several absent members due to Rona. Plus Leahy had a second surgery on his injured hip which at 80+ is no small thing. They haven’t had buy in from Sinema who has opposed altering carried interest. The legislative calendar is growing short. This is far from a done deal.

I’m a cynic. I have to wonder how many billions in this bill got shunted into (insert nice word for kickbacks) that will wind up in the Dem Senators pockets, including Manchin and his family.

Manchin, you got played like a $2 fiddle by Schumer and whether you realize it or not, you acknowledged it in the statement you issued.
quote from the statement
“Most importantly, I am heartened by the bipartisan recognition that for America to achieve our energy and climate goals, it is critical we reform the broken permitting process. President Biden, Leader Schumer and Speaker Pelosi have committed to advancing a suite of commonsense permitting reforms this fall that will ensure all energy infrastructure, from transmission to pipelines and export facilities, can be efficiently and responsibly built to deliver energy safely around the country and to our allies.”

Where is there any evidence of these so called reforms you say exist, there is no guarantee that any bill will ever be written , debated or brought up for a vote. What evidence do you have from the Biden administration that they will follow any law if passed. They administration is committed to not drilling for fossil fuels. Why did you leave out refining capacity you can , this one one of the biggest long term issues facing this country..
You should have waited until the legislation was enacted and the administration changed course before endorsing anything.
What happens when your colleagues start adding amendments to your plan including even more spending and regulation, will you have the guts to walk away from this?

Can’t think of a better way to fight inflation than to add more.

For all his loudly-professed concern about inflation and profligate spending, Manchin ultimately proves himself to be just as much of a prosperity-destroying hustler and spendthrift as his contemptible and vile comrades in the Dumb-o-crat Party.

empiricallyobvious | July 28, 2022 at 3:12 pm

Here’s my opinion… So predictable. The Turtle got rope-a-doped again… Chuck-you Schumer played him…got Mitch to go along on first vote and then flipped dirty Joe “Mansion” for the 2nd. My contacts in WV tell me that Manchin and his whole family (remember his daughter…) are dirty and Chuck-you just played that card…funny, the same card the Russians and Ukrainians are playing on FJB.

    Schumer found Manchin’s price point and made the offer.
    Puglosi has already said she will throw out anything they don’t want, regardless of Manchin’s wishes. I hope the WV coal miners are waiting for Manchin with a daily truck load of coal at his doorstep.

RandomCrank | July 28, 2022 at 5:29 pm

So now they’re going to reinstate the $7,500 federal tax credit. Oregon (my other half’s legal residence, and where the Chevy Bolt EUV will be titled and registered) adds $2,500. The car stickers for a sliver above $28,000, so once GM can get off its ass and make more of them, it’ll cost $18,000.

That Bolt EUV is a tremendous value at sticker. It’s half the price of the Tesla Model 3s as they’re rolling off the lot. Having driven the Model 3 and looked at the Bolt, I’d prefer the Bolt anyway. I think those subsidies are stupid and shouldn’t be paid, but these blue morons deserve to have their pockets picked. LOL.

If I drive to Portland (I no longer venture downtown, but have other practical reasons to go there once a month or so) in my diesel truck, the trip will cost $62 at the latest price for diesel around here. Even before Senile Joe worked his magic, it would’ve cost around $20.

The Bolt, as opposed to the dinky first-generation, short-range EV that I bought out of bankruptcy 10 years ago, will cost about $4.25 for the same trip. And it’s much nicer, and much bigger. I’d never consider it if it were going to be the only vehicle, but as a supplement it’s great — and truly a no-brainer with those brainless subsidies.

    ConradCA in reply to RandomCrank. | July 28, 2022 at 9:39 pm

    If EV’s are so great they don’t need subsidies. Government should trust Americans to make the best choice without wasting taxpayer dollars on subsidies. This is especially true when we are suffering from massive deficits, ie government waste, 9% inflation.

    Government must stop wasting money, stop deficits and cut spending massively.

      RandomCrank in reply to ConradCA. | July 29, 2022 at 9:25 pm

      I agree. I oppose the subsidies, but if Uncle Sucker is stupid enough to give them, I’ll be happy to take mine. A fool and his money are soon parted, even when (especially when?) the fool is the federal government and the Democrats who control it. LOL

More deficit spending isn’t going to reduce inflation! The progressive can’t stand not sending us into the poor house. Every dollar of this deficit spending hurts Americans ore than it could possibly help.