Congress is primed to pass another huge spending bill. This time it’s $280 billion for semiconductors. With inflation over 9%, we can’t afford this.
Where is the money to pay for this coming from? The Wall Street Journal reports– “The legislation isn’t paid for with a tax increase or other revenue. Lawmakers have said this is a matter of national security, which justifies the additional deficit spending.”
No, thanks. Calling it “national security” because China is beating us in semiconductors is not enough to justify printing money we don’t have.
The Senate passed it by a vote of 64 to 33. WSJ– “Opponents of the bill pushed to attach more strings to the funding and questioned the wisdom of a large subsidy to a profitable industry.” The opponents got it right; we don’t need to give Silicon Valley a handout.
The woke clause of the bill, described by WSJ; “would create a Senate-confirmed diversity officer for the National Science Foundation.” We doubt that’s needed.
This bill has been in the works for three years, so it began when our economy was in much better shape. A lot has happened in the last three years. We’ve endured a large government-imposed economic shutdown, a sharp rise in prices across the board, and record high inflation. Today’s economy is far from the economy of three years ago, but this bill does not reflect those changes.
The bill does reflect the changing political landscape in that $20 million in it goes to protecting Supreme Court Justices from violence from the radical left. That may be needed, but that should stand alone, not be included as a rider to gain support for spending hundreds of billions. Using Supreme Court protection money as leverage is despicable and clearly an example of what is wrong with how legislation is crafted on Capitol Hill.
The House has a chance to fix this legislation by adding in how the government will pay for it. But don’t count on that. Rep. Nancy Pelosi will likely give her Silicon Valley friends a huge handout. An abundant and profitable industry doesn’t need this kind of government investment.
