The Biden administration has outlined the “American Jobs Plan,” a $2 trillion spending plan. While the proposal is purportedly for infrastructure, much of the plan is a liberal wishlist of policies that have little, or nothing to do with roads and bridges.

As noted by Republicans on the House Budget Committee, less than 13 percent of this spending plan is spent on repairing or creating roads, bridges, waterways, locks, dams, ports, airports, and broadband.  

Some of the non-infrastructure provisions in Biden’s plan includes: 

• 20 percent of the entire cost of the bill is for an expansion of Medicaid—approximately $400 billion.
• $213 billion for housing and to increase federal control of local housing markets
• $100 billion of additional funding for schools without requiring them to reopen
• $50 billion for a new office at the U.S. Department of Commerce
• $35 billion for climate science, innovation, and R&D 

This plan would spend $10 billion in taxpayer dollars on a uniformed “Civilian Climate Corps” tasked with the vague mission of “advancing environmental justice.” This funding would be enough to hire 200,000 professional, progressive environmental activists. These Green New Deal hall monitors would be entitled to taxpayer-funded housing, clothing, feeding, allowance, and medical expenses. 

Biden also wants to include the PRO Act in his “infrastructure” proposal. This would ban right-to-work laws, which 27 states have in place, allowing employers to force their employees to join a union as a condition of employment. The PRO Act would also force a mass reclassification of independent contractors, threatening the livelihoods of millions of contractors across the nation. When California implemented AB5, which established the same independent contractor reclassification as the PRO Act, countless people lost their jobs, had to flee the state, or saw a significant decline in income. 

ATR has compiled 655 personal testimonials from independent contractors who detail the ways that AB5 has hurt them, which you can view here.  

As it stands, the United States is on track to spend $5.8 trillion in 2021. Now, Biden wants to spend trillions of dollars more, including the second part of his infrastructure plan which is likely to cost an addition $2 trillion. With both parts of this spending package combined at about $4 trillion, this plan would be, in dollars, the largest spending increase in U.S. history.  

The so-called “American Jobs Plan” seems eerily similar to the “American Rescue Plan,” which used coronavirus pandemic relief as a Trojan horse for leftist policy goals like a $350 billion state bailout, burdensome tax paperwork mandates, a state tax cut ban, and more.  

Now, Joe Biden is attempting to implement a liberal wishlist under the guise of infrastructure, a historically popular government initiative.  

Americans for Tax Reform joined a group of free-market groups and signed a coalition letter encouraging Congress to oppose interest rate caps on consumer borrowing. By restricting interest rates on financial products, Congress will limit consumer choices among affordable lending services.

Installing a cap on interest rates will price consumers out of the market, particularly many of the unbanked and underbanked who need access to affordable financial products the most. An interest rate cap on lending products will not reduce borrower demand and instead will force lenders to increase borrower eligibility requirements. Increased eligibility requirements could adversely discriminate against borrowers who lack even a basic credit score.

Many low-income borrowers who may not have access to traditional banking services and or credit history will not get quick credit from any legal lender. This has been demonstrated by economists at the Mercatus Center that shows government interest rate caps exclude borrowers from obtaining affordable lending products and does little to diminish the customers need for these products. Those borrowers will continue to seek credit through alternative forms of credit, which could come from illegal lenders known as "loan sharks.” Loan sharks operate outside regulatory supervision and have been known to use tactics like blackmail, coercion, and violence when borrowers fail to meet their aggressive repayment plans.

Legislation at the federal and state level should be conscious of whose lead they are following. Many of these proposals may resemble the legislation put forth by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.) in 2019.

Several states have tried an interest rate cap in the past with low-income households suffering the most. Arkansas, a state with a constitutionally mandated interest rate cap, has extremely low loan volume. Many of its residents drive out of state to acquire installment loans that offer increased lending options with interest rates appropriately tailored to service those borrowers. After Georgia and North Carolina implemented caps on interest rates, insufficient funds notifications and bounced check fees surged, harming lower-income consumers who may find it more challenging to afford these fees.

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D-IL) signed an interest rate cap into law last month even after lender organizations, including the Illinois Small Loan Association, warned that the interest rate ceiling effectively ends the short-term loan industry. Neighboring Indiana and Wisconsin have no interest rate cap and can expect to see an influx of new borrowers crossing state lines for loans as did the states like Oklahoma, Missouri, and Tennessee surrounding Arkansas.

Consumers are best able to make appropriate financial choices that meet their needs when they have more choices in credit markets. Americans for Tax Reform and the undersigned organizations strongly urge Congress to oppose regulation limiting credit markets and installing a ceiling on interest rates.

Click here to review the letter.

Americans for Tax Reform today praised the Montana Senate for passing SB 398, a common sense, good governance reform that will save not only livelihoods – but also lives. SB 398 ensures appropriate transparency and accountability over decisions impacting public health while also safeguarding Montana’s state revenue base. 

In response to the bill’s passage, Tim Andrews, Americans for Tax Reform’s Director of Consumer Issues, congratulated Montana legislators on this achievement and noted that: “It is the fundamental responsibility of state governments to protect their citizens. At times, these threats can come from local governments that act without any accountability or scrutiny and impose punitive taxes on the most vulnerable in their communities. SB 398 will put a stop to this.” 

Montana state health officials testified during a hearing on SB 398 that, should the bill not be passed, laws will be enacted in twenty-six Montana localities that would outlaw stores selling e-cigarettes and vapor products. This would force the closure of over twenty establishments and cost more than one hundred jobs in the state. These local laws would also leave countless smokers looking to quit the deadly habit of cigarette use without access to scientifically proven reduced harm alternatives. 

Andrews made sure to note the incredible public health benefits of SB 398, stating that “Not only will this bill stop businesses being closed by ill-informed, unaccountable bureaucrats, it will also save lives. According to the world’s leading cancer academics, E-cigarettes could save over 27,000 lives in Montana if a majority of the state’s cigarette smokers made the switch to vaping. SB 398 will preserve the ability of Montana residents to access these lifesaving products and will have a significant impact on decreasing socioeconomic disparities that exist in health.” 

Andrews also recognized the leadership of Representative Ron Marshall noting that: "Rep. Marshall's tireless advocacy on behalf of consumers, taxpayers, and small businesses has been nothing short of remarkable and this achievement would not have been possible without his passion and dedication. Businesses across the state, as well as smokers desperately trying to quit their deadly habit, owe him and his team a great debt of thanks."

SB 398 will now be transmitted to the House, where Representatives will consider the bill in committee before it can be voted on by the full House. Americans for Tax Reform will continue our advocacy in support of SB 398 and encourages all Montana taxpayers, legislators, and consumers to voice their support for this legislation as well. 

Americans for Tax Reform submitted written testimony today for a hearing on Missouri’s House Bill 517 in the House Committee on Downsizing State Government.  

HB 517 is a pro-taxpayer reform that will protect Missouri’s businesses and consumers from damaging regulations imposed by local governments on reduced harm tobacco alternatives. ATR urged lawmakers to support the legislation in the interests of safeguarding Missouri’s public health and state economy. 

Tim Andrews, ATR’s Director of Consumer Issues, wrote “It is simply good governance that matters of this magnitude be decided at the state level, due to both the level of increased scrutiny, transparency and accountability it provides, but also the direct impact it has on state tax revenue should a product be banned.” 

Andrews also urged legislators to consider the impact that HB 517 would have on state revenues, noting “State budgets would also be negatively affected through the forgoing of tax revenue from state income taxes caused by a burgeoning black market, caused by the smuggling of illicit products between different jurisdictions and sold without appropriate state taxes being paid.  As such, protecting citizens from these policies is not only the moral thing to do, but also in the direct interest of lawmakers in Jefferson City.” 

Andrews noted the importance of protecting the freedom of Missourians, writing “It is important to note that, contrary to some arguments made by opponents of this bill, “local control” at its core is about safeguarding individual liberties and restricting the growth of government; it is not a free pass for cities to do whatever they want. Localities are just as capable of being conduits for heavy-handed laws that will harm citizens. When that is at stake, state action is not only appropriate to safeguard individual freedoms – it is essential.” 

Andrews concluded by stressing the benefits that HB 517 will have on public heath, stating that “Vapor products would save nearly 125,000 lives if a majority of Missouri smokers made the switch to vaping, extrapolating from a large-scale analysis performed by leading cancer researchers and coordinated by Georgetown University Medical Centre. HB 517 will have a tremendous impact on public health and would decrease socioeconomic disparities significantly as it will prevent localities from prohibiting life-saving treatment.” 

The full testimony can be read here.