‘A Classic Example Of Big Government Democratic Overreach’

A $350 Billion Slush Fund For Big-Spending State And Local Governments With No Strings Attached …

“California, Texas and New York would receive 29% of the $350 billion in direct aid that President Joe Biden has proposed for states and cities in his COVID-19 relief bill, according to a USA TODAY analysis of the projected allocations. Biden’s legislation, which carries a $1.9 trillion overall price tag, was passed by the Senate Saturday after clearing the House previously by a mostly party-line 219-212 vote. The House will again vote on the Senate’s amended version of the bill before it can head to Biden’s desk. The package includes $350 billion in aid designed to replenish tax revenue collections that decreased during the pandemic …” (“How Much Money Will Your State Get If Biden’s COVID-19 Relief Bill Passes?,” USA Today, 3/04/2021)

• “The federal CARES Act, passed last March under President Donald Trump, provided $150 billion through the Coronavirus Relief Fund across all states, tribal governments, territories and the 38 cities with more than 500,000 people. Funds were limited to expenses ‘directly related’ to COVID-19, not replacing lost revenue like Biden’s bill would do.” (“How Much Money Will Your State Get If Biden’s COVID-19 Relief Bill Passes?,” USA Today, 3/04/2021)

• “Three out of every five dollars (60.4%) of the direct aid in Biden’s bill would go to states that Biden won in the November election, according to a USA TODAY analysis. An analysis from Reuters found the same states received about 56% of relief dollars in last year’s CARES Act.” (“How Much Money Will Your State Get If Biden’s COVID-19 Relief Bill Passes?,” USA Today, 3/04/2021)

In Particular, The Slush Funds Will Wipe Out New York State’s Deficit, Nearly Erase The City Of San Francisco’s Deficit, And Bail Out New York City Taxi Drivers

“The $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package passed by the US Senate wipes out New York State’s projected budget deficit — possibly negating the need for hefty tax hikes or spending cuts, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s office said Monday. ‘Ok. Thanks to @SenSchumer NYS budget deficit for this year is…..Zero, nada, niete, zilch (NY terms),’ Schumer spokesman Angelo Roefaro tweeted…. Roefaro continued, ’How NY decides its budgetary policy is a matter for the state legislature and the administration. Our job was to deliver resources to help NY confront and overcome Covid and it’s impacts, including the fiscal impact. And we did that fully and completely.’” (“Schumer Spokesman: Federal Pandemic Relief Eliminates NYS Deficit,” New York Post, 3/08/2021)

“The federal stimulus package likely to be signed by President Biden this week will erase the majority of San Francisco’s projected $650 million budget deficit over the next two years, saving City Hall from having to make painful service cuts and layoffs — for now…. If passed, the stimulus package will inject about $600 million into San Francisco’s coffers over the next two years, [City Controller Ben] Rosenfield said.” (“S.F’s Budget Will Be Saved From Painful Cuts Thanks To Federal Stimulus. What About In The Next One?,” San Francisco Chronicle, 3/09/2021)

“On Tuesday, for the first time, [New York City] announced a concrete plan to aid the [taxi] drivers, who have been battered even more by the pandemic. Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a plan to spend $65 million of the money that the city expects to receive from the federal stimulus package to help restructure the loans that drivers obtained to buy medallions, the city permits that let them own their own cabs.… [I]f successful, the program could eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars owed by drivers …” (“New York to Spend $65 Million to Rescue Cab Drivers. Is It Enough?,” The New York Times, 3/09/2021)

Even Washington, DC, Gets A Bailout, More Than 14 States Receive

According to USA Today, the District of Columbia would get $2.275 billion in federal aid, which is more than 14 states will get, among them West Virginia, New Hampshire, Maine, Alaska, and Delaware. (“How Much Money Will Your State Get If Biden’s COVID-19 Relief Bill Passes?,” USA Today, 3/04/2021)

And Tribal Governments Get More Money Than Every State And Territory Except Three

According to USA Today, tribal governments would get $20 billion in federal aid, which is more than every state and territory, save for California, Texas, and New York. (“How Much Money Will Your State Get If Biden’s COVID-19 Relief Bill Passes?,” USA Today, 3/04/2021)

REMINDER: Democrats’ Bailout For Big-Spending State Governments Is Out Of All Proportion To Estimated Revenue Shortfalls

“But at least one important slice of the package ... goes beyond a rescue and is almost certain to further stimulate an economy that is already beginning to rapidly recover. That’s because those proposed cash transfers [to state and local governments] are more than six times greater than the approximately $31 billion of expected tax revenue that disappeared in the current fiscal year, according to pre-pandemic and more recent forecasts compiled by Bloomberg. In other words, that money could make up for that loss and be plowed back into states’ economies, such as their own version of relief checks, infrastructure projects and more, depending on the federal guidelines around the aid.” (“Biden’s State Rescue Dwarfs Tax Hit, Turning It Into Stimulus,” Bloomberg, 3/03/2021)

‘For Many [States] The Worst Didn’t Come’ And ‘Tax Collections Turned Back Up Again, All In The Span Of A Few Months’

“Democrats have argued … that states face dire fiscal consequences without aid, and included $350 billion in relief for state and local governments in President Biden’s $1.9 trillion federal stimulus bill, which narrowly passed the House this past weekend…. As it turns out, new data shows that a year after the pandemic wrought economic devastation around the country, forcing states to revise their revenue forecasts and prepare for the worst, for many the worst didn’t come…. By some measures, the states ended up collecting nearly as much revenue in 2020 as they did in 2019. A J.P. Morgan survey called 2020 ‘virtually flat’ with 2019, based on the 47 states that report their tax revenues every month … A researcher at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank, found that total state revenues from April through December were down just 1.8 percent from the same period in 2019. Moody’s Analytics used a different method and found that 31 states now had enough cash to fully absorb the economic stress of the pandemic recession on their own.” (“Virus Did Not Bring Financial Rout That Many States Feared,” The New York Times, 3/01/2021)

• “Most state tax collections plunged last spring when shutdown orders started and millions were thrown out of work as businesses closed. That prompted many states to issue doomsday forecasts, lay off workers and turn to Washington for billions of dollars in aid to replace revenue they were expecting to lose. Many feared a replay of the Great Recession … But this time, after falling 4 percent over all, [Brookings Institution economist Louise] Sheiner said, tax collections turned back up again, all in the span of a few months.” (“Virus Did Not Bring Financial Rout That Many States Feared,” The New York Times, 3/01/2021)

… Except For One, Which Prohibits States From Returning Money To Taxpayers Via Tax Cuts

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD: “Democrats in Congress aren’t satisfied with spending $1.9 trillion to help blue states and union friends. They’ve also launched a sneak attack against conservative states. Read their legislation’s lips: No new state tax cuts. That’s the news from a provision added last week by Senate Democrats that limits how states and localities can use their $360 billion windfall. States can use the loot to provide government services, cover revenue losses during the pandemic and “respond to the public health emergency” or “its negative economic impacts, including assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits, or aid to impacted industries such as tourism, travel, and hospitality.” (Editorial, “Democrats to States: No New Tax Cuts,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/09/2021)

• “But here’s the political gut punch. The bill explicitly bars states from cutting taxes. States ‘shall not use the funds,’ the bill says, ‘to either directly or indirectly [our emphasis] offset a reduction in the net tax revenue’ that results ‘from a change in law, regulation, or administrative interpretation during the covered period that reduces any tax (by providing for a reduction in a rate, a rebate, a deduction, a credit, or otherwise) or delays the imposition of any tax or tax increase.’ … The language is so expansive that states could be limited from making any changes to their tax codes that reduce revenue even if they don’t use federal funds as direct offsets. Much will depend on how Ms. Yellen defines “indirectly.” States that don’t comply with her interpretation will have to repay federal funds.” (Editorial, “Democrats to States: No New Tax Cuts,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/09/2021)

• “Democrats in Washington are trying to dictate to governors and state legislatures that they can’t change their tax laws if they accept their share of the $1.9 trillion. The sweeping prohibition would last through 2024, and the bill grants Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen authority to write regulations ‘as may be necessary or appropriate to carry’ it out.” (Editorial, “Democrats to States: No New Tax Cuts,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/09/2021)

‘A $60 Billion Surprise In The COVID Relief Bill: Tax Hikes,’ ‘Democrats Are Getting An Early Start On Their Tax-Increase Agenda’

“Democrats are getting an early start on their tax-increase agenda. They’ve tucked a trio of little-noticed tax hikes on the wealthy and big corporations into their coronavirus relief package that together are worth $60 billion. One takes away deductions for publicly traded companies that pay top employees more than $1 million. Another provision cracks down on how multinational corporations do their taxes. A third targets how owners of unincorporated businesses account for their losses.” (“A $60 Billion Surprise In The Covid Relief Bill: Tax Hikes,” Politico, 3/10/2021)

• “Many Senate Democrats were concerned that millions of unemployed people would be surprised to learn this tax season that they have to pay taxes on their jobless benefits. They pushed through an amendment to the coronavirus plan exempting the first $10,200 in assistance. To offset its cost, Democrats turned to a rule Republicans created as part of their 2017 tax cuts. It limits to $500,000 the amount of losses certain people who own unincorporated ‘pass-through’ businesses can use to offset other income and thereby reduce their tax bills. That issue became a lightning rod last year when lawmakers temporarily suspended that limit as part of a previous stimulus package. At the time, lawmakers were trying to get money into the hands of businesses owners in order to prevent layoffs by making it easier for them to qualify for tax refunds, and the $500,000 limit would have impeded that. Many progressives criticized the move …” (“A $60 Billion Surprise In The Covid Relief Bill: Tax Hikes,” Politico, 3/10/2021)

The ‘Biggest Change To Obamacare Since 2010’: ‘Supersized Subsidies’ And More Costly Bait For Medicaid Expansions

“The $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill under consideration by the House after passage by the Senate would increase subsidies to people who buy Affordable Care Act health plans, marking the biggest changes to the health law since its passage in 2010. The subsidy changes would be temporary and expire after two years... The package also includes funding aimed at enticing states that didn’t expand their Medicaid programs earlier to do so now, and subsidies to cover the cost of health insurance for people who lose their jobs. … The legislation would eliminate an income cap that limits who is eligible for ACA tax credits to reduce monthly insurance premiums. It would also limit the amount households pay to only 8.5% of their income on healthcare, and it would boost subsidies to lower-income consumers.” (“Covid-19 Stimulus Bill Contains Biggest Change to Obamacare Since 2010,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/09/2021)

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD: “Enormous sums go to expanding favorite Democratic programs. The package adds $35 billion to pump up subsidies to defray ObamaCare premiums. The bill eliminates the existing income cap (400% of the poverty level) on who qualifies for subsidies, and lowers the maximum amount participants are expected to contribute to about 8.5% of their income, down from 10%. The bill also spends $15 billion to provide a temporary five percentage-point increase in the federal Medicaid match to states that expand eligibility to lower-income adults. This is bait for the dozen or so states that have resisted ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion, which enrolls working age, childless adults above the poverty line. The political goal overall is to chip away at private coverage on the way to Medicare for All.” (Editorial, “The Non-Covid Spending Blowout,” The Wall Street Journal, 2/21/2021)

• “Provisions of the $1.9 trillion bill moving through the House make Affordable Care Act subsidies more generous and available even to the affluent. Buying an ObamaCare policy makes sense if a subsidy shields you from fearsome premiums and out-of-pocket costs; more than 85% of enrollees receive such a subsidy. But those who earn too much to qualify for government subsidies have been fleeing the exchanges. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said last fall that unsubsidized enrollment dropped 45% between 2016 and 2019…. Instead of making the underlying product better or less expensive, Democrats now want to pass more of the cost onto taxpayers. More low-income buyers would pay little to nothing for insurance. Democrats would also remove the income cap for receiving subsidies, which is 400% of the poverty line, and reduce a person’s maximum contribution to 8.5% of income from 10%. The ObamaCare ‘subsidy cliff’ is poor policy that punishes Americans for working and earning more, but now government will spend scarce resources on those who don’t need help…. The supersized subsidies would cost $34 billion over two years but that is merely the beginning…. The more generous subsidies will be captured by insurers, who will continue to raise premiums, and the specter of high costs will push lawmakers to intervene again. Rinse, repeat. Smaller businesses may move their workers onto the exchanges instead of offering their own insurance.” (Editorial, “Supersizing ObamaCare Subsidies,” The Wall Street Journal, 2/24/2021)

• “The House bill also offers a temporary five-percentage-point increase in federal funding to states that decide to expand Medicaid to childless, prime-age adults above the poverty line. This has nothing to do with Covid relief. Texas, Florida and 10 other states declined to expand Medicaid as part of the Affordable Care Act, and that decision looks smart in retrospect. States have spent more money on more enrollees, without improving emergency room visit rates or other health outcomes, while burning a hole in state budgets.” (Editorial, “Supersizing ObamaCare Subsidies,” The Wall Street Journal, 2/24/2021)

An $86 Billion ‘Taxpayer Bailout’ For Failing Union Pension Plans ‘That Has Nothing To Do With The Pandemic’

“Tucked inside the $1.9 trillion stimulus bill that cleared the Senate on Saturday is an $86 billion aid package that has nothing to do with the pandemic. Rather, the $86 billion is a taxpayer bailout for about 185 union pension plans...” (“Rescue Package Includes $86 Billion Bailout for Failing Pensions,” The New York Times, 03/07/2021)

• “Both the House and Senate stimulus measures would give the weakest plans enough money to pay hundreds of thousands of retirees — a number that will grow in the future — their full pensions for the next 30 years. The provision does not require the plans to pay back the bailout, freeze accruals or to end the practices that led to their current distress, which means their troubles could recur. Nor does it explain what will happen when the taxpayer money runs out 30 years from now.” (“Rescue Package Includes $86 Billion Bailout for Failing Pensions,” The New York Times, 03/07/2021)

• “Using taxpayer dollars to bail out pension plans is almost unheard-of. Previous proposals to rescue the dying multiemployer plans called for the Treasury to make them 30-year loans, not send them no-strings-attached cash. Other efforts have called for the plans to cut some people’s benefits to conserve their dwindling money — such as widow’s pensions, early retirement subsidies and pensions promised by companies that subsequently left their pools. … [T]he bill would not change the funds’ investment strategies, which are widely seen as a cause of their trouble. … In hopes of making up for the low contributions, the plans often invest unduly aggressively for their workers’ advancing age. … The new legislation does nothing to change that dynamic.” (“Rescue Package Includes $86 Billion Bailout for Failing Pensions,” The New York Times, 03/07/2021)

MAYA MacGUINEAS, President of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget: “Perhaps most concerning, the House Ways & Means Committee appears to have made space for the pension bailout … These multiemployer pensions have been on shaky ground for some time and ought to be dealt with transparently, where lawmakers can appropriately finance and reform these plans. The financial status of these funds shouldn’t be addressed in a piece of crisis legislation, and certainly not at the cost of benefits for unemployed workers. Frankly, no member of Congress should be willing to defend this.” (“COVID Relief Bill Losing Focus as Details Emerge, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 2/17/2021)

Preparatory Measures For A Student Loan Bailout ‘Through Executive Action, As Congressional Democrats Have Pressed’ For

“A new provision in the Senate Covid-relief bill would remove a key hurdle for the Biden administration to forgive a chunk of Americans’ student debt. The provision, added by Senate Democrats this week, would remove any tax consequences for households whose student debt is forgiven through 2025, saving them thousands of dollars. Federal law typically treats any forgiven debt as taxable income. The provision would make it easier for President Biden to forgive student debt through executive action, as congressional Democrats have pressed him to do.” (“Senate Bill Would Clear Hurdle for Student Loan Forgiveness,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/05/2021)

• THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD: “You almost have to admire how Democrats have used the pandemic and budget reconciliation to realize their progressive ambitions. Consider a provision that Senate Democrats snuck into the $1.9 trillion spending bill teeing up as much as $1.6 trillion in student-loan forgiveness…. President Biden last year promised to cancel $10,000 per borrower. Senate Democrats are urging him to forgive $50,000 apiece, and some progressives want to cancel all $1.6 trillion in outstanding federal student debt. The President doesn’t have the legal authority to do so on his own and, even if he did, millions of borrowers would be stuck with enormous tax bills that in many cases would exceed their annual loan payments…. The goal of the current Senate Democratic gambit is to remove the immediate legal and practical obstacles to blanket loan forgiveness by President Biden. Discharging debt without legislation would in the short term hurt borrowers stuck with large tax bills. This concrete injury might provide the legal standing for borrowers to challenge Mr. Biden’s forgiveness as an illegal use of executive power. But if Congress waives taxes on discharged student debt, no borrower can claim a concrete injury…. Tax-free debt forgiveness for grad students, while those who didn’t attend college or worked to pay off their loans get stuck with the taxpayer bill. Democrats finally discover a tax cut for the affluent that they like.” (Editorial, “Tax Forgiveness for Student Loan Forgiveness,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/08/2021)

‘A Policy Revolution’ To Undermine Welfare Reform As We Know It: ‘A Children’s Version Of Social Security’

“Obscured by other parts of President Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus package, which won Senate approval on Saturday, the child benefit has the makings of a policy revolution. Though framed in technocratic terms as an expansion of an existing tax credit, it is essentially a guaranteed income for families with children, akin to children’s allowances that are common in other rich countries.” (“In the Stimulus Bill, a Policy Revolution in Aid for Children,” The New York Times, 3/07/2021)

• “‘The moment has found us,’ said Representative Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat who has proposed a child allowance in 10 consecutive Congresses and describes it as a children’s version of Social Security. ‘The crystallization of the child tax credit and what it can do to lift children and families out of poverty is extraordinary. We’ve been talking about this for years.’” (“In the Stimulus Bill, a Policy Revolution in Aid for Children,” The New York Times, 3/07/2021)

• “[S]upporters have spent decades developing the case for a children’s income guarantee…. Mr. Biden’s embrace of the subsidies is a leftward shift for a Democratic Party that made deep cuts in cash aid in the 1990s under the theme of ‘ending welfare.’ As a senator, Mr. Biden supported the 1996 welfare restrictions, and as recently as August his campaign was noncommittal about the child benefit.” (“In the Stimulus Bill, a Policy Revolution in Aid for Children,” The New York Times, 3/07/2021)

“The $1.9 trillion Covid stimulus that the House is expected to pass Wednesday includes roughly $100 billion in aid to families with dependent children. If that phrase rings a bell, it’s because ‘Aid to Families with Dependent Children’ was the name of the New Deal-era welfare program eliminated by President Bill Clinton’s 1996 welfare reform bill. Back then, Democrats worried (with some reason) that AFDC enabled, for some families, long-term dependency on welfare. To limit time spent collecting welfare and to move low-income mothers off the dole, Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. Now, a quarter-century later, in the midst of a Covid recession, the Democrats are reviving no-strings financial assistance to families with children.” (“Congress Ends Welfare Reform as We Know It,” Politico Magazine, 3/10/2021)

• “In one sense, this marks the end of a long arc of ‘new Democratic’ politics spearheaded by Clinton, the president who signed into law both welfare reform and the original, more restrained and respectably bourgeois, version of the child tax credit. In 1992, Clinton got himself elected president in part by pledging he’d ‘end welfare as we know it.’ Government aid, Clinton said, should reward work, not idleness. In 1996, Clinton got himself reelected in part by signing into law the welfare-reform bill, which put strict time limits on cash aid and moved welfare mothers into work. Clinton also expanded the earned income tax credit, an income assistance program available only to low-income people who worked.” (“Congress Ends Welfare Reform as We Know It,” Politico Magazine, 3/10/2021)

Payments To Minority Farmers Some Have Deemed ‘Reparations’

“A little-known element of President Biden’s massive stimulus relief package would pay billions of dollars to disadvantaged farmers — benefiting Black farmers in a way that some experts say no legislation has since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Of the $10.4 billion in the American Rescue Plan that will support agriculture, approximately half would go to disadvantaged farmers, according to estimates from the Farm Bureau, an industry organization. About a quarter of disadvantaged farmers are Black. The money would provide debt relief as well as grants, training, education and other forms of assistance aimed at acquiring land.” (“Relief Bill Is Most Significant Legislation For Black Farmers Since Civil Rights Act, Experts Say,” The Washington Post, 3/08/2021)

• “[Tracy Lloyd McCurty, executive director of the Black Belt Justice Center] and others have used the word ‘reparations,’ a term for financial restitution to the descendants of enslaved people, when speaking of these efforts to erase Black farmers’ debt and provide access to land. Democrats have increasingly called in recent years for payments or other compensation to African Americans for the long-term effects of slavery and segregation.” (“Relief Bill Is Most Significant Legislation For Black Farmers Since Civil Rights Act, Experts Say,” The Washington Post, 3/08/2021)

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “The American Rescue Plan provides more than $10 billion to support our nation’s agriculture and sets aside roughly half of it, half of it, to disadvantaged communities, particularly black farmers, for debt relief, education, training, and land acquisition. Although it’s only a small fraction of the overall bill, experts have called the American Rescue Plan, quote, ‘the most significant legislation for black farmers since the Civil Rights Act.’ … The hangover from the horrible treatment that rural African American farmers have gotten since the days of slavery can in part, in decent part, be undone by this legislation.” (Sen. Schumer, Floor Remarks, 3/10/2021)

HOUSE MAJORITY WHIP JIM CLYBURN (D-SC): “I would say simply this. This bill was put together in order to rescue a lot of lives and livelihoods. In this bill, around $5 billion for black farmers. Black farmers, we know, have suffered significantly over the last several years. Before I came to Congress, almost 30 years ago, I ran the South Carolina commission for Farm Workers. And I can tell you, I know what was happening to black farmers that were discriminated against. And they have never been made whole. And they have had their problems exacerbated by COVID-19. So just because it didn’t start with COVID doesn’t mean that it was not affected by COVID-19.” (MSNBC, 3/09/2021)

Democrats Delight In Their Massive Spending Spree As ‘The Most Progressive Piece Of Legislation In History’ And ‘An Ideological Revolution’

“At first, Democrats described their $1.9 trillion stimulus as a response to a once-in-a-century economic and health emergency. But then the language began to shift to something much different: an anti-poverty measure with few precedents in US history…. Other Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), described the legislation as potentially more consequential even than the Affordable Care Act … The Democrats’ comments seemed to confirm -- even endorse -- GOP complaints that the sprawling bill does more to address long-held liberal priorities than attack the twin COVID economic and health care crises, which by some measures are already waning.” (“Democrats’ Messaging Shifts As They Pass Biden Relief Bill: From Economic Crisis Rescue To Poverty Relief,” The Washington Post, 3/10/2021)

• “Democrats could not contain their jubilation over the legislation … Multiple provisions represented pent-up demand from Democrats who control both chambers of Congress and the White House for the first time since the start of the Obama administration …” (“Democrats’ Messaging Shifts As They Pass Biden Relief Bill: From Economic Crisis Rescue To Poverty Relief,” The Washington Post, 3/10/2021)

• ABC NEWS’ JONATHAN KARL: “[F]irst consider the $1.9 trillion bill. This is the most aggressive, most well-funded anti-poverty program that we have seen in more than a generation …” (ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” 3/07/2021)

WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF RON KLAIN: “[W]e are hopefully just weeks away from final passage of the most progressive domestic legislation in a generation.” (MSNBC, 2/24/2021)

WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JEN PSAKI: “I will note that the plan that the Senate passed this weekend puts us one huge step closer to passing one of the most consequential and most progressive pieces of legislation in American history. … Well, first I would say: Senator Manchin and Senator Sanders and a range of Democrats in between just voted to support a $1.9 trillion package that is the most progressive piece of legislation in history.” (White House Press Briefing, 3/08/2021)

• PSAKI: “We’re about to pass a historic, the most progressive bill in American history. It’s passing today.” (White House Press Briefing, 3/10/2021)

HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): “This is a momentous day in the history of our country because we have passed historic, consequential, and transformative legislation. … I think I can safely say and I’ve said this to my colleagues in the House on the Democratic side, this is the most consequential legislation that many of us will ever be a party to.” (Speaker Pelosi, Press Conference, 3/10/2021)

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “This is one of the most consequential pieces of legislation we have passed in decades.” (Sen. Schumer, Press Conference, 3/10/2021)

• “Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday the $1.9 trillion economic relief legislation headed for President Joe Biden’s desk will be a ‘turning point’ that transforms U.S. politics by restoring the country’s faith in government.” (NBC News, 3/10/2021)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT): “The American Rescue Plan is the most significant piece of legislation to benefit working people in the modern history of this country.” (Sen. Sanders, @BernieSanders, Twitter, 03/06/2021)

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): “An ideological revolution on behalf of justice.” (“Democrats’ Messaging Shifts As They Pass Biden Relief Bill: From Economic Crisis Rescue To Poverty Relief,” The Washington Post, 03/10/2021)

EZRA KLEIN, Far-Left New York Times Columnist: “I’m open to counterexamples, but this still looks like the most ambitious and progressive economic package Congress has passed in my lifetime. It will do more to cut poverty, and push full employment, than anything else I’ve covered.” (Ezra Klein, @ezraklein, Twitter, 03/05/2021)

FLASHBACK: Democrats Have Repeatedly Announced Their Eagerness To Use The Pandemic To ‘Fundamentally Transform The Country’ And ‘Restructure Things To Fit Our Vision’

JOE BIDEN: “It’s like the New Deal, think of every great - every great change that’s taken place that’s come out of a crisis - that’s come out of a crisis…. And I think we have an opportunity now to significantly change the mindset of the American people, things they weren’t ready to do, you know, even two, three years ago.” (CNN Coronavirus Town Hall, 4/16/2020)

• BIDEN: “And I truly think that if we do this right, we have an incredible opportunity to not just dig out of this crisis, but to fundamentally transform the country.” (LULAC Virtual Town Hall, 5/04/2020)

HOUSE MAJORITY WHIP JIM CLYBURN (D-SC): “This is a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.” (“House Democrats Eyeing Much Broader Phase 3 Stimulus,” The Hill, 3/19/2020)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “We need big, bold action…. We need Franklin Rooseveltian-type action and we hope to take that in the House and Senate in a very big and bold way.” (“Schumer, Pelosi Set To Unveil ‘Rooseveltian’ Relief Package,” The Hill, 5/07/2020)

• SCHUMER: “A picture of Franklin Roosevelt was hovering over all of us and we’re very much aware of that. It was alluded to a whole bunch of times.” (The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein, @JStein_WaPo, Twitter, 2/03/2021)

HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): “I see everything as an opportunity. The bigger the challenge, the bigger the opportunity.” (MSNBC’s “All In with Chris Hayes,” 5/11/2020)

• SPEAKER PELOSI: “It’s a wonderful opportunity because I think our country is united in wanting to, not only address the immediate needs of the emergency and the mitigation for the assault on our lives and livelihoods, but also how we recover in a very positive way.” (“Democrats Eye Major Infrastructure Component In Next Coronavirus Package,” The Hill, 3/3/2020)

REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA), House Progressive Caucus Co-Chair: “So I think it depends on how you use the word leverage. For me, the leverage is that there is enormous suffering, and if we do not respond with the boldness and the scale that this crisis demands, then that suffering will continue. I think it’s important for us to not allow ourselves to be pulled into a place where we don’t define the agenda …” (“An Unusually Honest Conversation About Wielding Political Power, With Rep. Pramila Jayapal,” Vox, 5/06/2020)

WAY BACK: RAHM EMANUEL, Former Obama White House Chief of Staff: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” (Remarks to Wall Street Journal CEO Council, 2008)