Manchin in the middle
Regarding “Opinion: Joe Manchin has shown America how politics is supposed to work,” (Dec. 24): Sen. Joe Manchin’s recent pronouncement on Fox News that he will not support President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better bill provided an ideal opportunity for Glenn Lowenstein to promote his “No Labels” group. Although the group’s purpose in reducing partisanship is admirable, Lowenstein’s essay entirely fails to acknowledge that compromise is not always possible. A key provision of Build Back Better is the extension of the expanded Child Tax Credit. Biden’s American Rescue Plan increased the tax credit for 90 percent of U.S. children — more than 65 million — and provided monthly payments to their families. Although the payments are modest, they have enabled parents to pay for food, shelter, clothing and much more, lowering childhood poverty in our country by more than 40 percent. Every Republican House member and senator opposed the American Rescue Plan. Some issues cannot and should not be compromised.
Rand Nolen, Houston
Sen. Joe Manchin in no way represents the “will of the American people,” as Glenn Lowenstein would have us believe. He represents himself and other wealthy businessmen who do not want to pay the costs to society their businesses cause.
The “American people” have indicated their support for virtually everything in the Build Back Better bill in polling that shows even Republicans like most of the provisions. Investments don’t cause inflation; they pay for themselves in the long run, as Manchin, an investor himself, knows.
The Democrats trying to pass legislation that helps the American people over Republican intransigence is not shoving legislation down a divided nation’s throat. Republicans are shoving minority rule down the majority’s throat.
Bruce Ellis, Houston
Regarding “Opinion: Of course Joe Manchin opposes Biden’s Build Back Better bill,” (Dec. 23): I can’t speak to Sen. Joe Manchin’s interests in coal. However, I do understand the good senator’s other problems with the bill as written. The main concern, as I understand it, is the overall cost. As presented, several items of entitlement in a large part of the bill would expire after the first year. Anyone who has been around for a while knows that entitlements don’t expire once started. Without these provisions the bill is projected to double in cost from $2 trillion to somewhere north of $4 trillion. His other concern is who is to pay. Biden says that the ultrarich and corporations will pay and it will cost us nothing. Really? As to the ultrarich, it would take the entire wealth of 2,000 billionaires to cover this massive spending. That can’t happen so the bulk of the expense would be left to corporations. Corporations can’t eat this extra expense either — and hope to remain in business. The answer to that is a raise in prices of everything that they make or furnish. And corporations make or furnish everything that we use, buy, ride in, eat, burn as fuel or watch and listen to as entertainment. So we end up footing the bill.
Kent Marshall, Sugar Land