SoylentNews

upstart [soylentnews.org] writes:

████ # This file was generated bot-o-matically! Edit at your own risk. ████

AOC: $1.7 Trillion Over 8-10 Years 'Is a Very, Very Low Amount of Money' [cnsnews.com]:

(CNSNews.com) - A bipartisan, $1.2 trillion infrastructure proposal doesn't go far enough for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who represents the far left of her party.

She's sticking with the Democrats' $1.7 trillion plan because it's actually "a very, very low amount of money."

Dana Bash, host of CNN's "State of the Union," asked Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday if she would vote yes or no on a bipartisan, $1.2 trillion infrastructure package, which reportedly includes $600 billion of new spending and no tax hikes:

You know, I think from what we've seen so far, and particularly the lack of climate action as well, I think adding to the severe lowering of our scope and scale in what we're seeking to do on ambition, I doubt it, frankly, in the current state of that proposal," Ocasio-Cortez responded:

And I think one of the things that's really important to communicate is that this isn't just $1.7 trillion. This is about an overall investment spread out over anywhere between eight and 10 years, which is a very, very low amount of money.

It's not going to create the millions of union jobs that we need in this country, particularly to recover from the pandemic. And it's not going to get us closer to meeting our climate goals, which are crucially important at this point in time.

And if $1.2 trillion is the best Democrats can get? Bash asked the congresswoman:

"Well, I think the thing is, is that this isn't the best that we can get," Ocasio-Cortez replied:

"And I do think that we need to talk about the elephant in the room, which is Senate Democrats, which are blocking crucial items in a Democratic agenda for very -- I think, for reasons that I don't think hold a lot of water.

"And for folks saying, OK, you know, we -- where are you going to get these 50 votes, I think we really need to start asking some of these Democratic senators [cnsnews.com] where they plan on getting 60 votes. These 10 Republican senators -- that there's the theory that we're going to get support for that out there -- I think is a claim that doesn't really hold water, particularly when we can't even get 10 senators to support a January 6 commission."

Ocasio-Cortez said the question is:

Do we settle for much less and an infrastructure package that has been largely designed by Republicans in order to get 60 votes, or can we really transform this country, create millions of union jobs, revamp our power grid, get people's, you know, bridges fixed and schools rebuilt with 51 or 50 Democratic votes?

And I think the argument that we need to make here is, it's worth going it alone [i.e., scrapping the filibuster] if we can do more for working people in this country.

You know, with 50 votes, we have the potential to lower the age of Medicare eligibility, so that more people can be covered and guaranteed to their right to health care, as opposed to 60 votes, where we do very, very little, and the scope of that is defined by a Republican minority that has not been elected to lead.

Also See:
AOC: Joe Manchin Influenced by 'Romanticism of Bipartisanship,' 'Old Way of Politics' [cnsnews.com]

Nothing is expensive if you don't have to pay for it.

Original Submission