http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/12/21/the_trump_stimulus_will_be_differentThe Trump Stimulus Will Be Different
December 21, 2016
Listen to it Button
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: You know, my instincts oftentimes, my friends, are infallible. Yesterday, talking about the Trump stimulus plan I told a caller, "It's not gonna be like you're used to... It's gonna be a mixture of federal, state, local and private money." "Private money? What do you mean, private money?" "Trump's gonna get investors." Well, lo and behold, the Washington Post has a quasi-story on this, once again documenting that I, El Rushbo, am highly tuned.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: We had a couple calls yesterday, the day before, and I've alluded to it myself without the calls that Trump's big, big, big deal is the stimulus. And it is. This infrastructure bill is something he's really serious about, folks. Listen to him, he brings it up every rally that he's had. He's embarrassed of our airports.
If you drive around New York, I swear, you know, you come in to New York, you land at Newark, say, or Teterboro and you cross the George Washington Bridge and you end up on the FDR, you're going through Harlem by Yankee Stadium, you look at all those roads and bridges and you wonder if it's gonna collapse when you drive over it.
I mean, it's rusted out, looks like it's in really, really bad shape. And there's all kinds of examples of this all over the country. Trump wants it fixed. He's talking about a trillion-dollar stimulus bill, and that immediately generates red flags because the last time we heard a stimulus bill talked about and passed it was Obama's. It was touted as $787 billion but by the time it was all finished it was near a trillion dollars.
And of course no bridges were rebuilt, and no roads were repaired, other than those that were already in the in the pipeline to be, and there certainly wasn't any additional modernization of airports. In other words, nothing that wasn't already in the pipeline from previous budgets for upgrade or repair was added to it.
Obama's stimulus was pure political. It went to donors, who then formed companies like Solyndra. Obama paid back donors with his stimulus. He funded industries that he wanted to advance at the expense of fossil fuels and he made sure that union workers, as many as possible, did not lose their jobs. If you look at the allocation of Obama's stimulus, you'll find a shocking percentage of it went to union employees, including teachers.
But it didn't rebuild any roads, not any new roads, new bridges, or airports. Trump was serious about actually doing it, but a trillion dollars we don't have. We do not have a trillion dollars. We didn't have Obama's $787 billion, and believe me, the people that elected Trump and the people that were four square behind Trump know full well we don't have the money. And they believe Trump when he has said we don't have the money.
We're $20 trillion in debt, 19, $20 trillion in debt. We don't have any money. And the people that voted for Trump believe that the days of mass addition to the national debt are over. That's one of the attractive aspects of Trump. Okay, so here's Trump now talking about a trillion-dollar stimulus. And immediately there's all kinds of people getting really worried about this, because this is right out of the Democrat Party playbook.
Government spending, federal spending on projects paying back donors, funding the unions, all of the, you know, political expenditures, busting the deficit, busting the national debt and nothing getting done. That's the track record. And in fact here's another reason why people are scared. Grab audio sound bite number four. This is Chuck-U Schumer yesterday on Powerhouse Politics, ABC News. It's a podcast, Jonathan Karl talking to him about the infrastructure bill. He asks Schumer, "Do you think you'll be working with Trump on this?"
SCHUMER: We think it should be large. He's mentioned a trillion dollars. I told him that sounded good to me. But I told him that, you know, you couldn't do the kind of infrastructure building we need in America with just tax breaks. I said to do this in the way that at least we wanted to do it, he'd need to alienate a good number of his right-wing Republicans, and he said he realized that. We're not gonna oppose something simply 'cause it has the name "Trump" on it, but we will certainly not sacrifice our principles just to get something done.
RUSH: All right. So you add Trump stimulus, trillion dollars, rebuild roads, bridges, whatever, then you add to it Chuck Schumer saying he's on board, "Oh, man, we can't wait, trillion dollars, sounds good to me." Conservatives are shaking, they're quivering, they're frightened, "Oh, my God, oh, my God, this is exactly what we were afraid of." And then Schumer puts the cherry on top by saying that he told Trump the only way to do this is by alienating a good number of right-wing Republicans, and Trump said he realized this.
So now you have some Never Trumpers, you have some conservatives who are on the on the verge -- they're probably writing the pieces right now, the See, I Told You So pieces. They can't wait to go on Fox News and say, "I told you it was too good to be true. Trump's just a New York City liberal. Here he is in bed with Schumer, and a trillion dollars sounds good to him, and Trump admits he's gonna alienate right wingers."
Trump's not said that. Schumer is saying it. So what kind of stimulus is Trump thinking about? Well, we turn to the Washington Post, and it actually is pretty close to some things I've already heard. The Trump stimulus -- and I'm gonna go out on a limb here, 'cause I really think Trump has different ideas of doing things like this. I think Trump tells the truth when he talks about our political leaders being stupid and doing things in dumb, stupid ways.
I think the people he's chosen for his cabinet are expressly, purposely for projects like this, people who know where to find money, investment money, federal money, state money, where to find it and put it to use to actually improve things, build things, construct things.
I don't think this is going to be your average, ordinary, run-of-the-mill political legislation with a giant authorization bill that is filled with new spending and tax breaks and incentives, the same way it's always been done that nobody wants any more of, and it never results in actual progress. It never results in whatever the objective is actually happening.
Remember, part of Obama's stimulus was, who was it, John Deere was all of a sudden saved not having to lay people off, or was it Caterpillar? It was Caterpillar, never gonna have to lay anybody off, and Caterpillar kept laying people off even after Obama's stimulus. The Trump stimulus, he has assured everybody is gonna be revenue neutral. But when people hear that they smirk, too. Well, that's what everybody says, revenue neutral, but it's never. Obama told us that Obamacare was gonna revenue neutral, and nothing's ever revenue neutral.
So built-in opposition to that claim. Trump's stimulus is not in one year. He doesn't want a trillion dollars next year. He wants it over ten years. So it's $100 billion a year, and he does want to fund quietly of with tax incentives, the kind of which we don't know yet. He also wants the states where these projects are to throw in some money, and he wants private money. And everybody's saying, "Private money? How in the hell do you do that? (stammering) Why -- why -- why would anybody in the private sector throw money after a federal government project?"
"Well, be it would be an investment."
"Well, how? What -- what -- what kind of investment? How would they make any money on it?"
"Well, have to wait and see."
But the Washington Post has a little bit more detail on how this is all gonna happen, and apparently... Well, they say that the administration, Trump administration is going to have a task force, rather than existing bureaucracy. And this task force might even bypass the cabinet departments that would normally be used on a project like this.
The Washington Post says, "The task force head [to manage his stimulus] is 'not Cabinet level,' this individual said, but would play a critical role in coordinating among federal, state and local officials as well as private investors as the new administration prepares to inject hundreds of billions of dollars into projects across the country.
"Trump has pledged to mobilize anywhere from half a trillion to a trillion dollars into upgrading the nation's aging roads, bridges and transportation hubs," i.e. airports and train stations. Airports the biggie. "But that plan might not rely on direct federal spending." Hello! That's exactly what I've been saying for past few days! It will not rely on direct federal spending.
"Venture capitalist Wilbur Ross," who was in Trump's cabinet, a rich guy, which is all anybody knows about him, "Trump’s nominee to run the Commerce Department, and University of California at Irvine business professor Peter Navarro have proposed an investment tax credit that they say would cost $137 billion and stimulate about $1 trillion of private investment. Ross and Navarro say the plan would be revenue-neutral..."
And of course, the rest of the Post story is, this is not possible. How in the world can you come up and turn $137 billion, no matter how you get it, into one trillion? That kind of return, that just doesn't happen. And that's the exact kind of thinking that has put us into the circumstances we're in where nothing new ever gets done, takes years to get started. There hasn't been any innovative thinking whatsoever.
We have the traditional ways to find the money in the budget: Create new money, print new money, whatever. Take it from here; take it from there. Nothing ever gets done. This is a revolutionary new way of thinking about it. Everybody's pooh-poohing, like they pooh-poohed every aspect of Trump's campaign because it was outside the box. It was outside the establishment. It didn't make sense. No way it could work, just like, "No way Trump can win."
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Look, folks, I think banks are gonna have a lot more to do with whatever Trump's doing here than the federal Treasury. I think that's where this is all headed. But that's... I'm getting way ahead of the game. Let me share something with you. CNN, an hour ago: "Trump transportation secretary Elaine Chao..." That's the wife, by the way, of Mitch McConnell. "Trump Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao Hedges on Massive New Infrastructure Injection."
Elaine Chao's already answering the questionnaire in preparation for her confirmation hearings, and she's making it clear she's not big on this kind of stimulus spending and she prepared to say that. And you say, "Well, my God! Why would Trump appoint her if she's out there saying that she doesn't necessarily agree and like the way Trump's gonna do it?" Well, back to this task force that I mentioned to you. One of the possible wrinkles in the entire Trump plan is that this task force -- which I told you is not cabinet level -- would assume part of the role traditionally played by the transportation secretary, especially when it comes to roads and bridges.
Trump's nominated Elaine Chao. It sounds to me like what Trump is doing, he's got all these cabinet people. He's nominated them and so forth. But when he's really gonna go get something done, he's gonna have a task force outside of the normal cabinet channels. Which wouldn't he when his cabinet secretaries, appointees, are already saying they don't like the way he's going about this. They're not personalizing it. I just... I still don't think people grasp the newness here.
END TRANSCRIPT
