Politics

(WASHINGTON) — A popular plan to let the government directly negotiate lower prescription drug prices with pharmaceutical companies — extracting significant savings for taxpayers and patients — will likely not be part of the Democrats’ sweeping social spending package, the White House said Thursday.

The development dashed hopes for what many consumer advocates had considered the best chance in decades for immediate relief to families burdened by soaring costs of medication. It also marks a major victory for drug makers who have spent millions of dollars lobbying against direct government intervention in pricing.

“Unless the government steps in and fights the fight for us, we have to fight it. And we don’t have a choice,” said Laura Marston, 39, of Washington, D.C., who needs daily doses of insulin to survive. The drug’s list price has risen 1000% over the last 25 years.

“Every day I feel like I live in a country that prides itself on freedom, but I don’t get to be free because at 14 I was diagnosed as a type 1 diabetic,” she said.

Americans pay more for prescription drugs than citizens of any other country in the world, on average $1,200 per person, per year, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

While individual American insurance companies negotiate discounts with drug makers, federal law prohibits the government from doing the same thing.

Most Democrats and patient groups have pushed for changes to the law that would allow the government to negotiate prices through Medicare under a cap pegged to what other wealthy nations pay. Former President Donald Trump also campaigned on the idea in 2016.

“The idea is not just to have Medicare negotiate prices for its own program but to extend those negotiated prices to private insurance plans as well,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. “This would put drugs on equal footing with other types of health care. Medicare negotiates or sets the price for hospital care, for doctor visits.”

The federal government could save $450 billion over 10 years, according to one Congressional Budget Office analysis — savings that could help offset the costs of other initiatives or reduce the deficit. Consumers would also reap savings at the pharmacy counter.

“Everyone would feel it through a couple of different channels. In some cases, it would mean less out of pocket at the pharmacy, and in some other cases it would mean less that we pay for prescription drug coverage,” said Andrew Mulcahy, a health policy researcher at RAND Corporation, who has studied the issue.

Drug companies have warned that the trade-offs from lost revenue would be significant, upending a key part of the U.S. economy, leading to job losses and less money for research and development of new drugs.

“Of course we make profit, but it’s not like we keep it, right? We return it to shareholders who give us money to take huge risk on R&D,” said Lilly CEO Dave Ricks, whom public filings show received a $23 million compensation package last year.

Ricks estimates that despite earning billions in profits, the company would have to cut experimental drug projects in half if the government capped prices — curbing the kind of innovation seen from manufacturers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Five of the six medicines approved globally to treat COVID are from American companies — two from mine, and three of vaccines that are used globally are from American companies,” Ricks said.

An independent government analysis forecasts there would be two fewer new drugs brought to market over the next 10 years, with 23 fewer over the decade after that.

Sue Millikan of Ohio, a retiree and grandmother covered by Medicare, says high prices concern her but so does the prospect of missing out on medical breakthroughs.

“We are able to do things here in this country because of our freedoms and invent things and produce things, and I don’t want to see restrictions to that,” Millikan said. “I can see where it’s happening in other countries where it limits how many drugs they get, when they get them, how fast you can get stuff, and I don’t want to see that happen here.”

While many Americans share those concerns, polls show that large majorities of Americans — Democrats, Republicans and Independents — have consistently supported government negotiation of drug prices.

“It’s really speculative to try to figure out what might happen, you know, 10, 20, 30 years from now,” said Levitt. “We don’t even know what scientific breakthroughs there will be, let alone what drugs might or might not come to market.”

“The United States is alone among developed countries in not having a role for the government in negotiating or setting the price of drugs, and that’s why we pay much higher prices than the rest of the world,” he said.

For diabetics like Marston, government negotiation of drug prices could mean between $28 and $176 less for a monthly supply of insulin, according to an analysis by the Center for American Progress.

“It would be a great first step to demonstrate that and I think more people across both parties would benefit from that and appreciate that,” she said.

But the White House on Thursday said the idea doesn’t have enough votes in Congress.

“At the end of the day, there are not yet enough votes to get something across the line,” a senior Biden administration official, who asked not to be identified, told reporters.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oreg., who chairs the Senate Finance Committee and is a leading advocate for Medicare drug negotiations, says he is still fighting for a slimmed-down version of the plan.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is also adamant that the proposal be restored before a final vote on the social spending plan.

“The American people are very, very clear that they are sick and tired of paying the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs,” he said. “It is really outrageous that year after year, members of Congress talk about the high cost of prescription drugs and yet, year after year, we are not able to do anything about it.”

For now, the drug companies appear to be winning the debate. The industry is pushing alternatives for relief, like caps on out-of-pocket expenses for critical medicines and expansion of Medicare coverage of some drugs.

“Our understanding is this is a framework. We continue to stand ready to work with policymakers this year to enact meaningful reforms that will lower out-of-pocket drug costs for patients,” said Brian Newell, spokesman for PhRMA, the drug industry trade group.

In the meantime, millions of Americans hope Congress won’t squander this moment, and years of debate over drug prices will finally lead to some action.

“I don’t think anybody’s happy with how drug prices have gone up,” Millikan said.

ABC News’ Sarah Kolinovsky and Allison Pecorin contributed reporting.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Democratic leaders are pulling the plug on infrastructure this week.

The plan to vote on the $1 trillion infrastructure bill Thursday is now officially canceled, according to sources familiar with the situation.

That means President Joe Biden will not get a vote on the bill Thursday night as he lands in Rome.

Sources confirm that the House will instead vote on a short-term bill to extend surface transportation authorization Thursday, as it’s due to expire Sunday.

In a last-minute push before heading overseas, and after months of torturous negotiations, Biden on Thursday announced a “framework” of his economic plan in an effort to get all Democrats behind his social spending and climate policy agenda.

“No one got everything they wanted, including me, but that’s what compromise is. That’s consensus. And that’s what I ran on,” Biden said in remarks from the White House East Room.

Before taking the world stage, Biden put public pressure on members of his own party, especially House progressives, to come together to support what he pitched as a “fundamental game-changer,” laying out the details of the $1.75 trillion package he presented to House Democrats earlier Thursday morning.

“I ran for president saying it was time to reduce the burden on the middle class to rebuild the backbone of this nation working people in the middle class. It couldn’t have been any clearer — the very moment I announced my candidacy. That’s why I wrote these bills in the first place and took them to the people,” Biden said, using the presidential bully pulpit.

“I campaigned on that and the American people spoke. This agenda that’s in these bills is what 81 million Americans voted for. More people voted than any time in American history,” Biden said. “Their voices deserve to be heard. Not denied, or worse, ignored.”

But as the day went on it still wasn’t clear all Democrats, especially progressives, were on board, even at the risk of a major embarrassment for Biden.

In an afternoon news conference, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared upbeat when announcing the roughly 2,500-page social spending proposal was headed for markup, but did not commit to a vote on the bipartisan package on Thursday. She dodged when asked by ABC News Congressional Correspondent whether she trusts Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who have been holdouts on provisions most Democrats support.

“I trust the president of the United States,” she said. “And again, the text is out there if they have some — anybody, any senator, any House member — have some suggestions about where their comfort level is or their dismay might be — then we welcome that, but I trust the president of the United States.”

Four weeks of federally paid family leave is out — a major blow to progressives — but done to cut the framework’s price tag in hopes that holdouts Manchin and Sinema would pledge their support for the social spending framework. House progressives were insisting on that before a House vote on the already Senate-passed bipartisan infrastructure bill.

Sinema signaled her support for the framework in a statement hailing “significant progress” — but it didn’t mention the word “deal.”

Late in the day Thursday, Manchin said, “We negotiated a good number.”

But Sen. Bernie Sanders, who wields large influence with the House progressive caucus, actively encouraged progressive colleagues in the House to hold out and oppose a vote now on the bipartisan infrastructure package until they see the legislative text of the larger social spending package and get assurances from all 50 senators that they support it.

“I want to see it improved,” Sanders told reporters. He noted the significance of the proposal but said “it has some major gaps in it.”

The progressive caucus later voted internally to endorse Biden’s framework but to hold the line until the social spending bill is ready for a vote.

That all but guaranteed the bipartisan bill would not pass Thursday, even if a vote was held.

A senior Capitol Hill official confirmed that Pelosi had told House Democrats to not “embarrass” Biden by voting down the infrastructure bill Thursday as he headed overseas.

The remarks were made behind closed doors at the Democratic caucus meeting Thursday morning and were first reported by CNN.

In his speech, Biden promoted the framework’s provisions on climate policy, another progressive priority, ahead of the COP26 UN global climate summit, saying even his scaled-back plan will “grow the domestic industries, create good-paying union jobs” and address “long-standing environmental injustices.”

“We’ll build up our resilience for the next storm, drought, wildfires and hurricanes that indicate a blinking code red for America and the world,” he said, noting natural disasters have cost $99 billion in damage to the U.S. in the last several years. Setting up a question to those who argue his plan costs too much, “We’re not spending any money to deal with this?”

He said his plan would not raise taxes on the middle class but “would continue cutting taxes for the middle class,” and instead raise them on the nation’s wealthiest Americans and corporations, whom Democrats argue haven’t been paying their fair share.

Biden can’t afford to lose a single vote in the Senate and only three votes in the House. He delayed his foreign trip to head to the Hill and lobby members of his own party to back the legislation he campaigned on.

Earlier, he pulled up to the Capitol shortly after 9 a.m., and then flanked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, responded only with “It’s a good day” to a reporter asking what his message is to House progressives who don’t trust Manchin and Sinema — holdouts throughout the extended and often chaotic bargaining.

When reporters shouted, “Do you think you have enough of a framework to get progressives to support the infrastructure bill?” Biden responded “Yes.”

About an hour later, as he emerged, Biden told reporters, “I think we’re going to be in good shape,” but declined to answer more questions as he left the Capitol.

Biden was met inside the meeting with multiple standing ovations, sources told to ABC News, with some members standing up and shouting, “Vote, vote, vote!”

Democratic leaders were eager to put the infrastructure bill on the floor as soon as Thursday, but Pelosi — who doesn’t call for votes unless she knows has the support for passage — hadn’t officially called for one.

House Progressives emerged from a closed-door meeting and commended Biden for framework, but they still insisted they will vote no on the infrastructure bill if it hit the floor until a firm deal is made on the larger spending package.

“There are too many no votes for the BIF to pass today,” said Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.

“He did not ask for a vote on the bill today,” she said earlier in the day, referring to the Senate-passed bipartisan infrastructure bill. “The speaker did. He did not. He said he wants votes on both bills and said what we do on these two bills is going to be determinative for how the world sees us.”

Before his speech, the White House teased Biden’s remarks on his domestic agenda ahead his international trip, saying he is “delivering” on his promises to rebuild the middle class.

“After hearing input from all sides and negotiating in good faith with Senators Manchin and Sinema, Congressional Leadership, and a broad swath of Members of Congress, President Biden is announcing a framework for the Build Back Better Act,” said a White House statement that notably did not say he had an agreement.

“President Biden is confident this is a framework that can pass both houses of Congress, and he looks forward to signing it into law. He calls on Congress to take up this historic bill – in addition to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act – as quickly as possible,” the statement said.

The White House said “the framework will save most American families more than half of their spending on child care, deliver two years of free preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old in America, give more than 35 million families a major tax cut by extending the expanded Child Tax Credit, and expand access to high-quality home care for older Americans and people with disabilities.”

The Child Tax Credit expansion, which Biden proposed extending until 2025, would now be only until the end of 2022. Paid family and medical leave, which Biden had originally proposed to be 12 weeks and then scaled back to four weeks, appeared to have been dropped altogether after Manchin objected, despite progressives fighting back. Two free years of community college that Biden had promised is not included.

It also claimed it represents “the largest effort to combat climate change in American history” and “the biggest expansion of affordable health care coverage in a decade,” saying it would “reduce premiums for more than 9 million Americans by extending the expanded Premium Tax Credit, deliver health care coverage to up to 4 million uninsured people in states that have locked them out of Medicaid, and help older Americans access affordable hearing care by expanding Medicare.”

An expansion of Medicare to cover dental and vision, a top priority of Sen. Bernie Sanders, is not in the framework.

And, the White House said, “it is fully paid for … by making sure that large, profitable corporations can’t zero out their tax bills, no longer rewarding corporations that shift jobs and profits overseas, asking more from millionaires and billionaires, and stopping rich Americans from cheating on their tax bills.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has been charged with a misdemeanor sex crime in Albany City Court, according to a spokesman for the New York State Court System.

The complaint, filed by an Albany County Sheriff’s Department investigator, accused Cuomo of forcible touching.

The alleged crime took place at the governor’s mansion on December 7, 2020 when Cuomo “intentionally and for no legitimate purpose” forcibly placed his hand under the blouse of an unnamed victim and onto an intimate body part.

“Specifically, the victims left breast for the purposes of degrading and gratifying his sexual desires, all contrary to the provisions of the statute in such case made and provided,” the complaint said.

Cuomo resigned in August following a monthslong investigation by State Attorney General Letitia James that found he sexually harassed 11 women, including current and former state employees.

“Specifically, we find that the Governor sexually harassed a number of current and former New York State employees by, among other things, engaging in unwelcome and nonconsensual touching, as well as making numerous offensive comments of a suggestive and sexual nature that created a hostile work environment for women,” the report said.

Following his resignation, Cuomo said the report was politicized and that there was a rush to judgment.

“Let me say now that when government politicizes allegations and the headlines condemn without facts, you undermine the justice system and that doesn’t serve women and it doesn’t serve men or society,” Cuomo said during his farewell address. “I understand that there are moments of intense political pressure and media frenzy that cause a rush to judgment, but that is not right. It’s not fair or sustainable. Facts still matter.”

Cuomo was replaced by then Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In a last-minute push before heading overseas, President Joe Biden headed to Capitol Hill Thursday morning to try to get all Democrats behind his social spending and climate policy agenda.

On a call with reporters, senior administration officials laid out the framework of a $1.75 trillion social spending package President Biden will present to House Democrats, including skeptical progressives.

“The president believes this framework will earn the support of all 50 Democratic senators, and pass the House,” an administration official said.

Biden pulled up to the Capitol shortly after 9 a.m., flanked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, responding only with “It’s a good day” to a reporter asking what his message is to House progressives who don’t trust Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema who have been holdouts throughout the extended and often chaotic bargaining.

As he headed to the closed-door meeting, ABC News Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott asked, “Mister President, do you have a deal?” but Biden merely waved and said “How are you? Good to see you all.”

When reporters started shouting, “Do you think you have enough of a framework to get progressives to support the infrastructure bill?” Biden responded “Yes.”

The White House said he would give the nation an update on his domestic agenda before his international trip in a speech from the White House East Room at 11:30 a.m., saying he is “delivering” on his promises to rebuild the middle class.

“After hearing input from all sides and negotiating in good faith with Senators Manchin and Sinema, Congressional Leadership, and a broad swath of Members of Congress, President Biden is announcing a framework for the Build Back Better Act,” said a White House statement that notably did not say he had an agreement.

“President Biden is confident this is a framework that can pass both houses of Congress, and he looks forward to signing it into law. He calls on Congress to take up this historic bill – in addition to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act – as quickly as possible,” the statement said.

The White House said, “the framework will save most American families more than half of their spending on child care, deliver two years of free preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old in America, give more than 35 million families a major tax cut by extending the expanded Child Tax Credit, and expand access to high-quality home care for older Americans and people with disabilities.”

The Child Tax Credit expansion, which Biden has proposed extending until 2025, would now be only until the end of 2022. Paid family and medical leave, which Biden had originally proposed be 12 weeks and then scaled back to four weeks, appeared to have been dropped altogether after Manchin objected, despite progressives fighting back. Two free years of community college that Biden had promised is not included.

It also claimed it represents “the largest effort to combat climate change in American history” and “the biggest expansion of affordable health care coverage in a decade,” saying it would “reduce premiums for more than 9 million Americans by extending the expanded Premium Tax Credit, deliver health care coverage to up to 4 million uninsured people in states that have locked them out of Medicaid, and help older Americans access affordable hearing care by expanding Medicare.”

An expansion of Medicare to cover dental and vision, a top priority of Sen. Bernie Sanders, is not in the framework.

And, the White House said, “it is fully paid for … by making sure that large, profitable corporations can’t zero out their tax bills, no longer rewarding corporations that shift jobs and profits overseas, asking more from millionaires and billionaires, and stopping rich Americans from cheating on their tax bills.”

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A Senate hearing grew heated on Wednesday as Republicans repeatedly demanded Attorney General Merrick Garland retract and apologize for a memo he issued earlier this month aimed at addressing a rise in threats against school board officials around the country.

In an oversight hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Garland defended the intent of the memo that had called for the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Offices around the country to convene meetings with local officials to discuss strategies aimed at addressing the increase in threats.

“All it asks is for federal law enforcement to consult with, meet with local law enforcement to assess the circumstances, strategize about what may or may not be necessary, provide federal assistance if it is necessary,” Garland said.

Republicans, though, sought to characterize Garland’s directive as an order for FBI agents to investigate and pursue parents voicing concerns at school board meetings — which in recent months have been venues of intense debate over issues like policies to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and the teaching of race issues in American history.

Garland’s initial memo followed a letter sent by the National School Board Association to the White House that had requested federal assistance in addressing threats they argued should, in some cases, be classified as acts of “domestic terrorism.”

Following widespread backlash from Republicans and several state attorneys general, the NSBA issued an apology Monday for some of the language it included in the letter.

Asked over and over by Republicans whether he regretted issuing the memo following the NSBA’s apology, Garland said he did not.

“I have the letter from NSBA that you’re referring to and it apologizes for language in the letter, but it continues its concern about the safety of school officials and school staff,” Garland said in an exchange with Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. “The language in the letter that they disavow is language that was never included in my memo and never would have been. I did not adopt every concern that they had in their letter. I adopted only the concern about violence and threats of violence and that hasn’t changed.”

But the explanation did not stop Republicans in the more than 4-hour hearing from falsely accusing Garland of “siccing” the FBI and DOJ’s national security division on parents, as Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., accused Garland of doing in one exchange.

“This is shameful, this here, this testimony, your directive, your performance is shameful,” Cotton said. “Thank God you’re not on the Supreme Court. You should resign in disgrace, judge.”

“I wish if senators were concerned about this that they would quote my words,” Garland responded. “This memorandum is not about parents being able to object in their school boards. They are protected by the First Amendment as long as there are no threats of violence, they are completely protected.”

Garland also denied suggestions from lawmakers like Republican Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., that the White House effectively used him for political purposes by transmitting the NSBA’s letter to the Justice Department in order to have him take action to try and “intimidate parents.”

“Either you were just a vessel of political comms staffers at the White House or you yourself are in favor of politicizing the DOJ,” Sasse said.

“The purpose of this memorandum is to get our law enforcement to assess the extent of the problem and if there is no problem — if states and local law enforcement are capable of handling the problem, then there is no need for our involvement in it,” Garland said in response. “This memo does not say to begin prosecuting anybody. It says to make assessments. That’s what we do in the Justice Department, it has nothing to do with politics.”

Democrats in the hearing in several instances jumped to Garland’s defense, with Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., using time near the hearing’s close to read off a list of incidents in recent months involving harassment or threats against school board officials.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Illi., also admonished the GOP members of the committee for their characterization of the memo.

“I wish my colleagues would reflect for a single moment as to why that memo is important not just for school board members, but to send a message across America that there’s a line we’re going to draw when it comes to political expression,” Durbin said. “When you say words, when you wave your arms, that’s all protected. When you threaten someone with violence or engage in acts of violence that is never going to be protected and shouldn’t be.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Democrats on Wednesday scrambled to close the deal on President Joe Biden’s landmark social spending legislation, focusing on new ways to pay for the package, including a billionaires’ tax the White House said the president supports.

At the same time, they were hoping to make enough progress that House progressives would agree to vote for a separate Senate-passed bipartisan infrastructure bill before Biden heads overseas Thursday.

Just hours after Senate Democrats on Wednesday morning unveiled the “billionaires tax” — to tax the wealth of a few hundred of the wealthiest of Americans — the gambit came into question when Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin, a decisive vote on the bigger social spending bill, raised concerns.

“I’m supporting, basically, that everyone should pay their fair share,” Manchin told reporters on Capitol Hill. “I don’t like the connotation that we’re targeting different people.”

When asked about the plan, proposed by Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., which would help pay the $1.5 -2 trillion cost for sweeping new programs including child care, child tax credits, family leave and environmental initiatives, Manchin hesitated, saying while he thought they would “absolutely” get to a deal “the Senate will take time.”

“There’s a lot going on with that and it’s very convoluted. I believe there’s going to be everyone’s going to pay. I believe that we will end up where everyone must participate,” he said.

Wyden’s plan would apply to people with at least $1 billion in assets or $100 million in income for three consecutive years, applies to increased value on assets — so-called “unrealized gains” not now subject to tax — and would impact roughly 700 taxpayers, according to experts. White House press secretary Jen Psaki announced at Wednesday’s briefing that the plan has Biden’s support.

But the option raises some constitutional concerns and could depend ultimately on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of a wealth tax as a direct tax on property, which is unconstitutional, or whether it’s another form of income tax, which is constitutional. Legal challenges also risk undermining the president’s promise that his plans would be completely paid for.

“We’re not going to support anything we don’t think it’s legal,” Psaki said. “But I will tell you, the president supports the billionaire tax. He looks forward to working with Congress and chairman Wyden to make sure the highest-income Americans pay their fair share,” he said.

White House press sec. Jen Psaki says Pres. Biden “remains open” to going to Capitol Hill amid agenda negotiations.

“We’re making decisions hour by hour on what would be most constructive to move things forward.” https://t.co/MdiYqOuOjj pic.twitter.com/lD0GBR9tnB

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) October 27, 2021

Aside from the billionaires’ tax plan, Manchin said he and his fellow Democrats are on board with another proposal to help pay for the sweeping programs: a 15% minimum tax on the country’s wealthiest companies.

“We’ve all agreed on a 15% corporate tax,” he said.”There’s a patriotic duty that you should be paying something to this great country to give you the protection and the support and the opportunities. That’s called a patriotic tax. It will be nothing that should be scorned about.”

Wyden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, introduced the plan to establish a 15% minimum corporate minimum tax rate that’s aimed at companies making more than $1 billion in profits annually. They estimate the plan would apply to 200 companies generating “hundreds of billions in revenue over ten years,” according to a statement form the senators.

Warren pointed to Arizona Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema in promoting the plan as negotiation continued on Capitol Hill, telling reporters they scrapped the idea of raising individual tax rates on the rich because, she said, those people do avoid taxes anyway.

“They have now opened that hole to the point that billionaires drive semis through it loaded with money,” Warren said of the current tax system.

The corporate tax proposal, and the separate tax on billionaires, are aimed at that tax avoidance — what lawmakers said was the concern of Sinema, who with Manchin, has been a Democratic holdout.

“The idea here is to say, ‘Enough, enough. If you’re a corporation that makes more than $100 billion dollars in profits — not revenues, not assets — but profits, then you’re going to pay a minimum 15% tax,” Warren told reporters.

“It’s not a new tax idea. The taxes are actually already there,” she added. “We’re now saying,”We want you to — you’ve got to — make this on an annual basis instead of putting it off for 30 or 40 years.”

As the clock also ticks on Biden’s overseas trip and White House senior staff do last-minute lobbying to lawmakers, Psaki said Wednesday the president also “remains open to going to the Hill.”

But she also signaled that if there isn’t a vote this week, the White House wouldn’t accept it as a loss.

“We’re on the verge of getting to a deal,” she said of negotiations. “They don’t look at it through the prism of whether there is a vote in one [sic] legislative body before he gets on an airplane,” She said.

Biden summoned Manchin and Sinema to the White House Tuesday night, but Democrats appear still at odds over key issues on expansion Medicare, Medicaid and family leave.

Despite some progressives’ objections, an optimistic-sounding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled the House could act on the “BIF” — the bipartisan infrastructure framework bill — sooner rather than later, with the thinking the chamber can and should vote on BIF with a framework in hand.

“In order for the BIF to pass, we need to have the trust, the confidence and the reality of the Build Back Better bill,” Pelosi told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting, a source familiar told ABC News.

Notably, Pelosi has said she doesn’t bring bills to the floor for a vote if she knows they are going to lose.

“In the next couple of hours, I will be communicating with you on our path from here to there … depending on what happens at the White House,” she said. “That will determine our timetable, our course of action, but we are in pretty good shape.”

Coming out of a meeting later, Pelosi told reporters that Democrats are in “pretty good shape” on the social spending bill.

“We have to just make decisions about one thing or another,” Pelosi said, heaping praise on Biden for leading the charge. “I feel pretty good about it.”

Pelosi notified members in a new dear colleague letter this afternoon that the House Rules Committee will hold a hearing on Thursday on the Build Back Better Act.

The hearing does not mean the bill is ready to hit the floor, as negotiations continue, but it will offer committee leaders a chance to speak to members about the bill. She wrote that progress had been made on a few sticking points, including closing the Medicaid coverage gap, but they’re still working to close a deal on paid family and medical leave.

Meanwhile, a disgruntled Sen. Bernie Sanders told reporters that he doesn’t see a deal by the end of the day.

“I don’t know, but I don’t think so. I’m not quite clear in terms of the revenue package. Every sensible revenue option seems to be destroyed,” Sanders said.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus said Thursday at a press conference they are also ready to vote “soon” on the legislation that chair Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, said members have not been on the sidelines for when it comes to negotiations.

“I don’t think we’re in a position to keep kicking the can down the road,” Beatty said. “You know, infrastructure is very important, and we need to make sure that we meet the deadline that is imminent.”

The White House is hoping Biden will be able to tout the sweeping infrastructure package at the COP26 summit and G-20 summit this weekend.

According to an analysis by the pro-wealth-tax Americans for Tax Fairness and the Institute for Policy Studies Program on Inequality, billionaires in the U.S. have seen their collected wealth surge 70% since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic to more than $5 trillion — a gain equal in size to Biden’s spending plans over 10 years, The Associated Press reported.

The president did not campaign on a wealth tax but vowed no one earning less than $400,000 would pay more in taxes in his administration.

ABC News’ Sarah Donaldson contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ARLINGTON, Va.) — Headlining a rally Tuesday evening, President Joe Biden was the latest national Democrat to campaign in Virginia for gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe, joining a long list of prominent figures in the party who’ve descended on the commonwealth to mobilize voters against Republican nominee Glenn Youngkin.

“You all know the stakes,” Biden told a crowd of supporters at the Virginia Highlands Park in Arlington, just outside the nation’s capital. “You don’t have to wonder what kind of governor Terry will be because you know what a great governor he was. It wasn’t just because of what he promised, it’s what he delivered.”

This marked the president’s second time stumping for McAuliffe; he first campaigned with him in late July.

Always falling the year after a presidential election, Virginia’s off-year elections, in particular the gubernatorial race, are considered a bellwether for politics heading into the midterm elections. Virginia trended increasingly blue over the four years of Donald Trump’s presidency, but this election will be the first measure of how lasting that rebuke of the GOP is in what used to be a presidential battleground. A loss for McAuliffe, or even a narrow win, will also serve as a warning shot for Democrats in Washington that an unpopular president and stalled agenda defined by intraparty differences could cost them their slim majorities in Congress next year.

Biden’s approval is not only underwater nationally, but also in Virginia, where a Monmouth poll out last week showed more than half of voters disapprove of the job he is doing as president.

Trump endorsed Youngkin after he secured the Republican nomination in May, but he has not done any events with the candidate. He called into a rally in support of the statewide GOP ticket where attendees pledged allegiance to a flag said to be carried at the rally preceding the Jan. 6 insurrection, but Youngkin was not there and denounced the pledge as “weird and wrong.” The Republican has had to toe the thin line between being too pro- or anti-Trump so as not to alienate voters on either end of the political spectrum, and he’s fired back at McAuliffe’s Trump attacks by reminding his opponent that Trump is not on the ballot, trying to keep the focus on Virginia-specific issues.

The state rejected the former president twice (and by a 10-point margin in 2020), Democrats flipped the state legislature in 2019 and Republicans haven’t won statewide office in over a decade — all indications Trump is politically toxic in Virginia. McAuliffe and other Democrats have tried to use Trump’s toxicity to drag down Youngkin, tying him to the former president at every opportunity.

But during Tuesday night’s rally, Biden borrowed McAuliffe’s playbook, closely tying Youngkin to the former president.

“How well do you know Terry’s opponent? Well, just remember this, I ran against Donald Trump. Terry is running against an acolyte of Donald Trump,” Biden said, claiming Youngkin has embraced Trump’s “bad ideas and bad record.”

The president also comment on how Youngkin hasn’t done any campaign events with Trump, claiming the GOP nominee “won’t allow Donald Trump to campaign for him in this state.”

“What’s he trying to hide? Is there a problem with Trump being here? Is he embarrassed?” Biden rhetorically asked the crowd.

Despite the race tightening over the last few weeks, McAuliffe is confident he’ll once again break the so-called “Virginia curse” of candidates losing Virginia’s off-year gubernatorial race if they have the same party affiliation as the current occupant of the White House. He broke it in 2013 when Barack Obama was president.

Barred by Virginia law from seeking a consecutive term, McAuliffe is vying for a comeback eight years after first winning the governor’s mansion, and despite Democrats’ recent gains, he’s locked in a tight race with Youngkin, a former private equity executive running his first campaign for political office. According to FiveThirtyEight’s polling average, the McAuliffe’s lead is under two points one week out from Election Day — down from a nearly eight-point peak over Youngkin he had in early August.

Biden touted McAuliffe first term in office, even saying he’s “taking a page” from the Democrat’s book by including an expansion of pre-K in his Build Back Better bill that Congress and the White House are still negotiating. Biden also plugged McAuliffe’s record on the economy and creating new jobs, saying, “If you’re looking for someone who’s going to keep your economy going and growing, the man behind me’s the guy to get it done.”

Calling in help from national politicians is in line with how McAuliffe and other Democrats have nationalized the stakes of this race.

“This election is about the next chapter of Virginia — and our country,” McAuliffe said at a rally in Richmond with Obama Saturday.

“What happens here, I promise you is about people in these state and the people of our country,” Vice President Kamala Harris said at a rally in Prince William County Thursday.

In addition to Obama and Harris, who will be back in the state Friday for a concert rally in Norfolk with Virginia Beach native Pharrell Williams, McAuliffe has had first lady Jill Biden, second gentleman Doug Emhoff, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Stacey Abrams and Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms campaign for him. Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Alex Padilla, D-Calif., are campaigning for him in Northern Virginia Wednesday night.

Youngkin has taken a different approach as the campaign ends, touting his 10-day, 50-stop “Win with Glenn” bus tour around the commonwealth and mocking his opponent for relying “on big name surrogates to draw paltry, apathetic crowds.”

“Nobody’s coming to campaign with me,” Youngkin told CBS last week. “I mean, this is a race about Virginians and about the Virginia challenges.”

Polls show Republicans are more enthusiastic about participating in this election than Democrats. How heavily Washington’s woes weigh on McAuliffe, and whether enough Virginia voters buy the Democrats’ attempts to paint Youngkin and Trump as one in the same, and in turn, vote against him in this race, won’t be known until the votes are counted.

Mark Rozell, dean of George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, told ABC News Tuesday that the number of national surrogates stumping for McAuliffe is indicative of Democrats’ concerns.

“I think a lot of that has to do with the McAuliffe campaign being worried that the Democratic base is asleep right now, that the Democratic brand right now is suffering because of the declining popularity of the president, what happened in Afghanistan, the perception that the party just can’t get it together in Washington to get things done,” said Rozell, who’s covered this race in the Washington Post’s opinion section.

McAuliffe himself has acknowledged the president’s falling support in Virginia.

“We got to get Democrats out to vote. We are facing a lot of headwinds from Washington, as you know. The president is unpopular today, unfortunately, here in Virginia, so we have got to plow through,” he said during a virtual rally on Oct. 5 that was clipped by the Republican National Committee and posted on social media.

In a statement ahead of Biden’s quick trip across the river, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said McAuliffe knows the president “is failing Virginians.”

“With an unprecedented amount of Republican enthusiasm, Virginians are ready to reject Terry McAuliffe and Joe Biden this November and turn out for Glenn Youngkin and Republicans up and down the ballot,” she said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — “I don’t know where in the hell I belong,” Sen. Joe Manchin, the West Virginia Democrat, said Tuesday when when asked about possibly switching parties amid his stubborn bargaining with frustrated fellow Democrats and President Joe Biden.

Manchin said people approach him “every day” about doing so, and that it would be an easy decision. But he insisted he won’t, speaking out in a revealing interview with Economic Club for Growth Chairman David Rubenstein.

“Is that the purpose of being involved in public service? Because it’s easy?” Manchin asked. “Do you think by having a “D” or an “R” or an “I” is going to change who I am?” he said, adding he didn’t believe Republicans would be any more pleased with him than Democrats are right now.

He called being the only statewide Democratic public official in his home state “very lonely,” but said he understands why his constituents mostly vote for Republicans.

“My little state has never complained. We’ve done all the heavy lifting — we’ve done the mining, we’ve made the steel, we’ve done everything it took for this country to be a the superpower of the world,” Manchin said. “And all of a sudden they took a breath and looked back and we’re not good enough, we’re not clean enough, we’re not green enough, we’re not smart enough, so to hell with you. So, they said, ‘Well, to hell with you, too.'”

With Democrats holding onto a razor-thin margin in the Senate, Manchin has emerged as a pivotal player in Democratic efforts to pass the president’s agenda.

He said he doesn’t think there is anything “fun” about being the decisive vote in the Senate — but it’s led to breakfast meetings at Biden’s Delaware home and given him the upper hand in driving the direction of the massive social spending package, including what amounts to a veto power over provisions he doesn’t like.

That includes sticking to a much lower $1.5 top-line price tag for the social spending package he set at the start — something Democrats and Biden are still negotiating with him about this week, months later.

He commented on Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s decision in June to use the fast-track budget process known as reconciliation to bypass Republican blocking efforts.

“I don’t think we should be running the government through reconciliation, because it’s not lasting,” Manchin said he told Schumer.

He also reaffirmed Tuesday that he’s opposed to changing the Senate’s filibuster rule — just days after Biden himself suggested he could support exceptions for fundamental Democratic priorities such as voting rights and election reform — and maybe more.

While that would give Democrats breathing room to pass key agenda items, without Republicans keeping the measures from even getting a vote, Manchin said it’s important that the minority party retains some political power and that all sides pursue bipartisanship.

And he offered some behind-the-scenes color about how he’s been bargaining with Biden, who’s eager to secured his support.

“The president and I had this conversation, I said, ‘Mister President, I don’t know who put this out, but that’s screwed up,'” Manchin said, speaking about a proposal to help pay for his spending plan by having the IRS track annual transactions of $600 or more from individual bank accounts. After GOP backlash, the administration last week backed off the idea to catch tax evaders, raising the triggering amount to more than $10,000.

Manchin wasn’t happy.

“Do you understand how messed up that is?” he said he told the president. “This cannot happen. It’s screwed up.”

“He says, ‘I think Joe’s right on that,’ Manchin told Rubenstein. “So, I think that one’s going to be gone.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Three of President Joe Biden’s major nominees were confirmed to ambassadorships by the Senate on Tuesday.

Former Sen. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican who left office in 2019, was confirmed as ambassador to Turkey, while former Democratic Sen. Tom Udall of New Mexico was confirmed to be ambassador to New Zealand.

Cindy McCain, the wife of late GOP Sen. John McCain, was confirmed to the rank of ambassador during her tenure of service as U.S. Representative to the United Nations Agencies for Food and Agriculture.

All three nominees were confirmed unanimously.

Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, a Democrat, asked for unanimous consent to confirm Cindy McCain. Kelly was mentored by John McCain prior to his death in 2018 and won his Senate seat last year. Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, also of Arizona, was presiding over the Senate when the nomination was confirmed and was visibly excited.

Flake and McCain were some of Biden’s most ardent Republican supporters during the 2020 presidential election. They were censured by the Arizona Republican Party in January for their staunch criticism of former President Donald Trump.

“When I began in the Republican Party officially, the Republican party was the party of inclusion. It was the party of generosity. It was the party of ‘country first,'” Cindy McCain said of the censure. “We have lost our way and it’s time that we get back on track.”

“I truly hope that as things progress on, and we get further away from this mess that occurred, that we can do just that,” she added. “We can get back on track and remind everyone that we are here for the country and not our party.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Border Patrol agents at the center of a controversy stemming from their use of horses to block Haitian migrants from entering the U.S. have not yet been questioned more than a month after the incident took place, according to a law enforcement official.

Images of mounted patrol agents using their horses to push back migrants, mostly Haitian, stirred national controversy as an unprecedented number attempted to cross the Rio Grande into the small border town of Del Rio, Texas, in September. The Department of Homeland Security launched an internal investigation into the matter shortly after the images came out.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas promised a swift investigation into the horse patrol over a month ago, assuring lawmakers it would yield findings days later. As of publication, and despite multiple requests for comment from ABC News, the administration has not publicly announced any findings.

Preliminary findings from Customs and Border Protection’s Office of Professional Responsibility have been handed over to the Justice Department to determine if criminal charges are warranted, according to two officials who were not authorized to speak publicly.

One law enforcement official said the internal investigation could not proceed, and the agents directly involved could not be interviewed, until the U.S. attorney makes a determination.

Referrals to U.S. attorneys are common in federal law enforcement personnel matters and do not necessarily indicate that criminal charges are being considered. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas, which includes Del Rio, declined to comment.

“The investigation is ongoing,” a DHS spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News. “The Department is committed to a thorough, independent, and objective process. We are also committed to transparency and will release the results of the investigation once it is complete.”

Advocates for both migrants and the agents have been frustrated with the pace of the investigation so far.

Karen Tumlin, founder of the Justice Action Center, said a central concern is that the government has deported potential witnesses to federal police brutality in the time it has taken to conduct the investigation.

“[The delay] creates an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ issue,” Tumlin said. “That was their intention.”

Over the two-week period that migrants surged into Del Rio, border officials stopped about 29,000 of them, according to the Department of Homeland Security. More than 15,000 either returned to Mexico on their own or were sent to Haiti on rapid expulsion flights. About 1,800 were placed in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention and some 13,000 were released on conditions to report back to authorities.

Jon Anfinsen, a Border Patrol agent and union leader, confirmed the mounted patrol agents remain on administrative duties, which he said has impacted the unit’s ability to perform their normal patrol work.

The horse patrol appears to be back up and running in Del Rio, Texas, despite silence from the Biden administration on the results of the internal probe. Use of the horse patrol was stopped at the Del Rio International Bridge in the days following the confrontations.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki was unequivocal in announcing the end to the use of Border Patrol horses in Del Rio last month, calling it a “policy change.” DHS officials clarified at the time that it was only a temporary suspension.

“The secretary also conveyed to civil rights leaders earlier this morning that we would no longer be using horses in Del Rio,” Psaki said at a Sept. 23 White House press briefing. “So that is something — a policy change that has been made in response.”

A CBP official who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly disputed Psaki’s characterization.

“They pulled all horse patrol agents for maybe a day or so to process,” the official said referring to the administrative duties agents are required to perform when migrants flood the area. “Then it was right back to normal sector-wide, with the exception of a couple more agents under scrutiny.”

A photo posted to the USBP Del Rio Sector’s Facebook page on Oct. 7 shows Border Patrol agents on horseback detaining a group of men huddled on the ground.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.