Biden

by

What is is Biden’s $2.6 Trillion Infrastructure Plan?


Republicans recently declared that only 7-8% of Biden’s $2.6 trillion request will actually go to infracture claiming the rest will go to Democrats pet projects. So what is the truth.

First off, I cannot see how Republicans came up with 7-8%. The bill calls for 24% to go to our nation’s transportation: roads, bridges, public transit, rail, ports, waterways, airports and electrical vehicles. The only portion of that which is questionable is the investment in electic vehicles unless it is directed towards the government’s purchase of such vehicles. The other parts are unquestionably urgent infracture needs.

Then there is $400b for home care services and workforce. I think this portion, though a good investment, belongs in a different congressional request.

Then there is $300b for manufacturing. Biden and the Democrats need to remove this portion as well and present it as another bill. Those two, the $400b for home care/workforce and $300b for manufacturing, reduce the bill to $1.9t, already more platable to Republicans.

Next there is $180b earmarked for research and developement. The idea behind this portion is to help in climatology and other notable projects. This part is tangentally important to infrasture but again needs to be part of a different bill.

There is also $100b for digital infrastructure. Again, tangental to into main infracture but important in its own right, not here.

Then there is $100b for workforce developement. This most certainly does not belong here. That is $1080b which should be removed for this bill and takes us down to $1.5t. Please do not worry that the numbers I have put for do not add up, that is intentional. This is just to show that Republicans are at least partially correct in pointing out that this bill, as presented, does not accurately or properly state pure infrastructure needs, those that the public at large need now.

In 1933-35 President Roosevelt got three bills passed to help the nation recover from the depression, the National Recovery Act (NRA), the Works Progress Administration (WPA) of 1935, and the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). The WPA built many of the roads and bridges still in existence today which puts them at 90 years of age. Engineers were reluctant then, as now, to allow for anything they built to have more than a 50-year life span. We are long overdue.

In 1953, drawing upon his experience as a General in Europe, and seeing Germany’s autobahn, Eisenhower helped develop today’s Interstate Hiway System. In each case of the afore mentioned project, millions of Americans were put to work. Biden’s bill will do the same as our infracture, both transport and utility, is in desperate need of either replacement or upgrading, will put million of Americans to work for years to come. It is a worthy bill but each side, Democrat and Republican must accede, and find a middle ground where both sides are relatively happy. More importantly, that Americans will quickly see a strong positive result.

by

The Perfect Democrat Candidate


Like everyone in America, I have a certain bias towards one of the many Democrats running for President right now. But to start with, I think the perfect Democrat candidate would have the following on his/her resume’: be a veteran, have held a political office either for a long time or where a large number of people were his constituency, has no skeletons in his closet or other characteristics that Donald Trump can use as a cudgel, and someone who speaks well and can hold his own in a debate. Additionally, the ideal candidate will be between 40 and 56.

There is no one now running who has all those characteristics. There are two veterans among them, Pete Buttigieg, and Tulsi Gabbard. Each of these candidates have a problem which Trump will, even improperly, use against them. Ms. Gabbard lacks name recognition and her views are largely unknown. Mr. Buttigieg is gay and as disgusting as it is, Trump will use that to whip up the prejudices of those who either do not like gays or who have a religious complaint. That, in my opinion, puts them in a poor position to win.

Tom Steyer has a great message but no government experience. For going on four years now, we have seen what someone with no governmental experience can do and that is unacceptable. The same applies to Andrew Yang.

Bernie Sanders has a good message but by describing himself as a democratic socialist makes him easy canon fodder for any Republican who feels like calling him a Communist regardless of the lack of truth. Most Americans do not understand the difference between socialism and communism. As an aside, this country has had socialist representatives.

Elizabeth Warren is faring poorly in a state adjacent to her own, New Hampshire to Massachusetts, where traditionally candidates do well. Not only is this a sign of her being unelectable but highlights a public view of her as being an intellectual elitist. She also tends to be “preachy” which most Americans find condescending.

Joe Biden is burdened with the Ukrainian controversy even though there is no truth to it. Trump has never had a problem promoting a falsehood to whomever will listen and for Biden, he can expect that to continue. In my opinion, when speaking, Biden does not come across as someone who inspires confidence.

This leaves us, basically, with Amy Klobuchar and Mike Bloomberg. I like both of these candidates. Amy is both a veteran and a U.S. Senator which checks off two of the important boxes. She is 59, slightly older but still at a younger age than her male rivals. I think her problem is simply one of name recognition and her positions.

I think Mike Bloomberg is easily the most electable of all the candidates. To start with, as Mayor of New York City, were New York City a state of its own, he would have headed the 11th most populous state in the union. He also had an extremely impressive business background having come from a middle class family to the highly success multi-billionaire he is today. Bloomberg is a very good speaker who would easily hold his own against a Trump onslaught. And finally, he has made his positions very well-known. His only downside is his age and his, thus far, inability to connect with the youth of the nation. Still, I do believe that Mike Bloomberg would win the presidency in a landslide.