Republican lawmakers are unified in their opposition to President Joe Biden’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure proposal, rejecting both its massive size and expansive scope. But they’re reportedly having a hard time crafting a counteroffer that would satisfy members of their own party, an early indicator of just how difficult it will be to reach a bipartisan agreement on an infrastructure bill in the coming months.
Earlier this week, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) floated the prospect of a slimmed-down infrastructure plan that could win bipartisan backing, with a cost somewhere between $600 billion and $800 billion. But some Republicans expressed concerns about that level of spending, and by Thursday afternoon, Capito was backing away from her proposal.
“It's too early to say right now,” Capito told reporters. “We don't have a detailed figure attached to that, and it probably won't be, I wouldn't think, an amount certain. More of a range of where we think we could fall and begin to negotiate.”
Capito, the ranking member on the Environment and Public Works Committee, said that her task now is to create a “conceptual Republican bill” focused on the meat-and-potato infrastructure issues, such as road construction and bridge repair, that Republicans say they could support. But there is no consensus yet among Republicans on what exactly that bill would do, how big it might be or how it would be funded.
Biden eager to negotiate: The White House wants to get started with negotiations, but the lack of a counteroffer from Republicans means that substantial discussions can’t begin yet.
“What we're waiting for is a counterproposal from Republicans in Congress,” Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Friday. “And they've indicated that they're working through that, so we look forward to seriously considering any proposal that — any good-faith engagement, I should say, that comes our way. But we're waiting.”
Psaki added that Biden has made clear that he believes corporations should pay for the cost of an infrastructure bill. “Some in Congress think that it should be paid for by putting the burden on the backs of Americans,” she said. “We're happy to have that debate. But that's the fundamental disagreement. Those are the two major options.”
Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD) expressed optimism that Republicans and Democrats could reach an agreement on a smaller infrastructure package, though he noted that not all Republicans were going to climb aboard. “If Democrats want to negotiate in good faith on a truly infrastructure package, I don't know if it would get Senator McConnell's vote, but I think there are a number of Republican votes in support of a package to include the highway bill, water, sewer, broadband, things like that," Thune said. “Much smaller than what the Democrats have proposed, but more focused.”
Smaller may be a problem, though. Pivotal centrist Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said Thursday that he doesn’t support the kind of reduced package Republicans say they could back. “We're going to do whatever it takes. If it takes $4 trillion, I'd do $4 trillion, but we have to pay for it," Manchin told reporters.
Mulling their strategy: As we told you yesterday, Democrats are mulling a strategy in which they work with Republicans on a smaller bill in the name of bipartisanship while keeping the option of passing a second, larger bill with a much wider scope via reconciliation. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) spoke in favor of that approach this week. “The wise thing to do is to work in two lanes. One is the reconciliation lane, which I don’t think would be wise to forgo, and the second is the bipartisan lane,” he told Politico.
But Whitehouse also warned that the strategy could backfire by giving Republicans a way to interfere with Democratic efforts. “If [Republicans] know that we’ve committed to the bipartisan lane, there’s a very strong incentive for them to make that a fake and to use it simply to slow down,” Whitehouse said
What’s next: Biden is set to have additional meetings next week on the infrastructure plan.