Obama had the right idea when he was packaging money to spend. He would invite the banks in for a conference and then write the Democratic Congress and ask for a "Infrastructure Bank." I know Goldman signed on for it. In other words PRIVATIZE the desired amounts of money needed to bring improvements to the Middle Class and lots of people will come rushing to the Dems side and the Republicans will lose support for their opposition.
There are more and more private social agencies that oversee spending and oversee Foster Care. The Child Tax Credit is a direct threat to the Foster Care agencies because impoverishment is a big issue for taking children away from their parents. Substance abuse is as well, but, Foster Care somewhat thrives on taking the children from the poor and placing them with Upper Middle Class and Middle Class parentless children, perferably Chrisitans.
So, rather than doing a $3.5 trillion soical and environment package, look to see what can be privatized and assign enough of the monies to draw those folks away from the Republicans and into the Democratic camp.
BUILD IT AND THEY WILL COME.
So, raising children out of poverty is a good thing, but, what is going to happen to the privatized Foster Care agencies? There has to be either a role for them that is different and perhaps limiting and/or they have to be assigned unemployment EXCEPT to create a different need for their services other than riping kids out of the arms of their parents.
There is a Yin and Yang to everything. The Dems have to find a way to strike a balance with their traditional priorities.\
Repubicans like Public-Private cooporations. They thrive on it. They like throwing money at private concerns. I think that can always have oversight as another public agency to be sure the monies are being used as they were designed. That was Obama's goal with the infrastructure bank. The public monies for infrastructure would be met equally with private funds to be paid with GUARANTEED payment. Right? The government fills in for lending that goes sour. But, when dealing with cities and states, there isn't really that much risk.
Washington - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (click here) could have been speaking for the majority of Democrats in Washington when she said on Tuesday that she was “very disappointed” that President Biden’s domestic agenda will have to be pared down because of opposition from Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
“If there are fewer dollars to spend, there are choices to be made,” Pelosi said during her weekly press conference at the U.S. Capitol. She promised that the final package would be “transformative” all the same, whatever that package ultimately looks like. The two Senate centrists have said that the president’s proposal to spend $3.5 trillion over 10 years on expanding childcare, health coverage and environmental protections is much too expensive to win their necessary support....
