The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Bipartisan deal back on track

Biden walks back his insistence on linkage to larger spending bill.

- By Zeke Miller

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan deal to invest nearly $1 trillion in the nation’s infrastruc­ture appeared to be back on track Sunday after a stark walk-back by President Joe Biden from his earlier insistence that the bill be coupled with an even larger Democrat-backed measure in order to earn his signature.

Republican senators who brokered the agreement with the White House and Democrats to fund investment­s in roads, bridges, water and broadband internet indicated they were satisfied with Biden’s comments that he was dropping the bothor-nothing approach.

In a statement issued Saturday after 48 hours of behindthe-scenes maneuverin­g by the White House to salvage the deal, Biden said it was not his “intent” to suggest he was issuing a veto threat on the bill.

That proved to be enough for some wavering Republican­s, who have privately and not-so-privately registered their displeasur­e at the linkage.

“Over the weeks and weeks in negotiatio­ns with Democrats and with the White House on an infrastruc­ture bill, the president’s other agenda was never linked to the infrastruc­ture effort,” Utah Republican Sen. Mitt Romney said Sunday on CNN’S “State of the Union.” He said that if Biden had not put out the statement, “I think it would have been very, very hard for Republican­s to say, yes, we support this.”

“We’re not going to sign up for a multitrill­ion-dollar spending spree,” he added.

Romney said he believed there was now sufficient GOP support in the Senate to reach the 60-vote threshold to overcome a potential filibuster and pass the bipartisan package.

The bipartisan accord has been a key priority for Biden as he tries to deliver on a campaign promise to restore bipartisan cooperatio­n to Washington and to show centrist Democrats and others that the White House was working with Republican­s before Biden tries to push the broader package through Congress.

The two measures were always expected to move together through Congress: the bipartisan plan and a second bill that would advance under special rules allowing for passage solely with majority Democrats’ votes and is now swelling to as much as $6 trillion. Biden reiterated that was his plan on Saturday but said he was not conditioni­ng one on the other.

“So to be clear,” his statement said, “our bipartisan agreement does not preclude Republican­s from attempting to defeat my Families Plan.”

Still, it remained to be seen what impact Biden’s comments would have on progressiv­e lawmakers in the House and Senate, who have pushed Biden not to moderate his agenda in pursuit of bipartisan­ship. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-calif., has said her chamber would not take up the bipartisan proposal until the Senate first acted on the larger Democrat-backed bill.

“I think it’s very important for the president to know that House progressiv­es, and I believe, you know, the Democratic Caucus, is here to ensure that he doesn’t fail,” New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-cortez said on “Meet the Press.” “And we’re here to make sure that he is successful in making sure that we do have a larger infrastruc­ture plan.”

Biden is to travel to Wisconsin on Tuesday to start a nationwide tour to promote the infrastruc­ture package, the White House said.

 ?? JACQUELYN MARTIN/ASSOCIATED PRESS ?? President Joe Biden speaks with Sen. Rob Portman, R-ohio, amid a bipartisan group of senators last week. Biden said it was not his “intent” to suggest he was issuing a veto threat on the infrastruc­ture bill, and that proved to be enough for some wavering Republican­s who had registered their displeasur­e at any linkage to wider legislatio­n.
JACQUELYN MARTIN/ASSOCIATED PRESS President Joe Biden speaks with Sen. Rob Portman, R-ohio, amid a bipartisan group of senators last week. Biden said it was not his “intent” to suggest he was issuing a veto threat on the infrastruc­ture bill, and that proved to be enough for some wavering Republican­s who had registered their displeasur­e at any linkage to wider legislatio­n.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States