Private Equity's Favorite Democrat w/ David Dayen | MR Live

A housing bill, a collaboration between Elizabeth Warren and Tim Scott, passed the Senate with 89 votes and White House support. It aims to promote manufactured housing, increase affordable housing funding via Community Development Block Grants, and incentivize states to improve land use and zoning. While considered the most significant housing boost in decades, its impact is modest. The inclusion of a provision restricting private equity's role in the single-family home market was a direct demand from Donald Trump, who used his executive order as leverage for his signature.

The bill passed with 89 votes in the Senate and White House support. It addresses manufactured housing, funding opportunities, and zoning. Trump insisted on the private equity provision for his support. (34:52, 36:07, 40:27)

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI), positioned as the heir apparent to Chuck Schumer's Senate leadership, publicly opposed the housing bill's private equity provision, calling it 'positively Soviet.' Dayen notes that Schatz delivered a five-minute floor speech but did not file an amendment to change the bill, nor did he sway any votes. This action is interpreted as a deliberate signal to the private equity industry, demonstrating his alignment with their interests rather than a genuine attempt to alter legislation. This behavior is described as 'shhatting' a bill—undermining corporate power regulations under a progressive guise.

Schatz voted against the bill, citing the 'build-to-rent' provision as 'positively Soviet.' He made a floor speech but did not file an amendment. His actions did not change votes; in fact, one senator flipped to 'yes.' (46:05, 47:40, 48:50, 51:40)

Some prominent Democrats, including Senators Booker and Van Hollen, are proposing significant increases to the standard deduction, framed as middle-class tax cuts. Critics argue these proposals risk diverting crucial funds needed to reverse cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, and ACA subsidies, and could benefit high-income earners due to a lack of income caps (especially Booker's plan). This strategy is seen as an attempt to 'out-Republican' Republicans on tax cuts, potentially eroding the party's ideological distinction and its commitment to broad-based taxes for quality public services.

Booker and Van Hollen propose raising the standard deduction significantly. Booker's plan benefits people from the 40th to 90th percentile and high-income earners. Van Hollen caps benefits for high earners. This approach is contrasted with the need to reverse trillions in cuts to social programs. (01:03:08, 01:04:01, 01:05:12, 01:06:19)

The host critiques the US government's handling of the Iran war, highlighting a severe oil shock and a perceived lack of planning. He points out the FCC's threats over war coverage and the media's built-in bias, particularly CNN's 'hedging' due to potential new Zionist owners. The host also criticizes the administration for not deploying the US Navy to protect shipping in the Strait of Hormuz while simultaneously pressuring NATO allies to put their troops in harm's way. The discussion contrasts Republican rhetoric on US military casualties, where deaths in offensive actions are deemed 'worthy sacrifices' versus those during withdrawals, which are seen as 'in vain.'

Oil prices over $100 a barrel, FCC threatening broadcast licenses over war coverage, CNN's 'hedging' due to potential Ellison takeover. Trump seeking help from other countries for Strait of Hormuz while US isn't deploying its own navy. Nancy Mace's comments on 'ultimate sacrifice' for current war deaths versus the 'in vain' deaths during Afghanistan withdrawal. (05:04, 13:00, 21:31, 23:45, 26:01)