Dems present a 'fake' infrastructure bill: Banks
Republican Reps. Andy Biggs, Jim Banks and Steve Scalise provide their perspectives on the infrastructure bill on 'The Ingraham Angle.'
This is a rush transcript of "Ingraham Angle" on November 5, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: I'm Raymond Arroyo in for Laura Ingraham on a big news night. This is the INGRAHAM ANGLE.
News breaking on Capitol Hill. Remember, when the Democrats ridiculed the Trump administration for not being able to navigate the congressional process. At least, he was new to politics.
Well, tonight, after hours of trying to corral the votes in her caucus, the best House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her team could come up with was a negotiation between moderates and progressives in her party, which is tenuous at best at this hour.
Here's the state of play. Representatives Josh Gottheimer and Pramila Jayapal, who are neither the president or the speaker last time we checked, are in talks right now, to strike a deal that would see the infrastructure bill voted on tonight. In exchange, progressives voting for the infrastructure bill, moderates have reportedly agreed to support the progressive Build Back Better bill. A separate bill, once the CBO has scored it.
Now. What could the Congressional Budget Office find? Well, as the Wharton School and independent analysts have pointed out, the Build Back Better bill's real cost to you, the taxpayer, is in the ballpark of $4 trillion. Likewise, University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan was actually read through the bill line-by-line estimated it will destroy 7 million jobs.
So where do we stand tonight? For more than 14 hours after this entire debate started, Fox's chief congressional correspondent Chad Pergram joins us live from Capitol Hill with details. Chad, what's the latest? What's happening on the floor?
CHAD PERGRAM, FNC CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, good evening, Raymond. Just as you came to me here, I'm looking at Diana DeGette, who is a Democratic Congresswoman from Colorado. She is presiding over the House of Representatives and they are starting the vote on the infrastructure bill.
Remember, the plan initially today was the House was going to come in early, they were going to vote on infrastructure. They were also going to vote on the social spending plan. And then things went awry. They didn't have the votes on the social spending plan. The reason is, as you say, moderate Democrats, they were pushing for this plan to get a actual score, a price tag, as it's called here on Capitol Hill from the Congressional Budget Office.
Now, you don't get that in one day. They just finalized this bill about 24 hours ago. And so it takes about a week or two to get the final score. Now, the update since I just came, this just explains how fluid this is the House of Representatives has just gone into recess subject to the call of the chair.
There is kind of a saying up here on Capitol Hill that when you see the blue screen go up in lieu of the House floor, sometimes they call that the blue screen of death. Sometimes that's a bad sign. Now, we don't think that's the case right here. But you usually go out recess subject to the call of the chair, if you don't think you have the vote. So maybe -- and this has even changed since I came on the air here, they might, might not have all of the votes nailed down here. But this is the plan.
Once they met, the Progressive Caucus met, President Biden called in to the Progressive Caucus. They said we're going to go ahead and forge ahead with this plan. We're not going to vote on the social spending plan. Now, the moderates held out. They are saying, Look, we're not going to provide our votes until we get an actual score that price tag from the Congressional Budget Office. But what we will do is allow a vote on the infrastructure bill.
And keep in mind, that the progressives have always said, we need those two bills to ride together. It was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who basically tore that agreement apart, saying that what we're going to do is we're going to vote on the infrastructure bill, and that's what we're thinking is going to happen here imminently. But even since I said -- since I came on the air here, it appears there is yet another delay. Surprise, surprise.
ARROYO: Yes. Chad, I know the progressives wanted this voted on together, the infrastructure bill and the Build Back Better bill because they wanted to compel the moderates to join them for this big spending palooza as part of that Build Back Better bill, which, now estimates say could be as high as $4 billion -- trillion with a T.
Here's my question. Nancy Pelosi and members of her caucus were to fly to Scotland tonight. That trip is obviously delayed. Joe Biden was supposed to go to Delaware. He's still in the White House making phone calls. What does this tell you about the Democrats' ability to govern, to move legislation at this moment in the wake of the elections we saw this week?
PERGRAM: Well, it's pretty clear that this has been a disarray of a process, Mark Pocan, who is a Democratic Congressman from Wisconsin probably put it best. He says, today has been a cluster blank and that's not the term that he used. He said that just a few minutes ago. But it appears that they're going to try to forge ahead. This is where everybody said, we thought that the plan was one thing this morning. How many different plans have we heard the past couple of days about what they're going to do?
Remember, the House was going to vote on this at the end of September, when the President came to the Capitol. That didn't happen. We thought it was going to come at the end of last week before the President went to Rome and Scotland, that didn't happen. And here we are on Friday night. I should check you on one point. However, you're right. The speaker is going to go to Scotland to the climate conference that continues in Glasgow there. But she was not going to leave until Monday. And that's why -- where a lot of people thought that this was going to be wrapped up over the weekend.
The House of Representatives is already scheduled to be out next week. And the hope, at least from the Democratic perspective was that the House gets this done. Tonight, the Senate takes time to prepare the bills so they can do it the week of the 15th.
But as Steny Hoyer the majority leader says, maybe they both start on this the week of the 15th trying to get this wrapped up by Thanksgiving. Because you know what happens in early December. They have to fund the government and wrestle with the debt ceiling. So they have to clear the decks of these two big bills sometime in the next two to three weeks.
ARROYO: Yes. The clock is ticking. They only have a few weeks here and with Thanksgiving crashing in, it's going to be very tight schedule. Chad, before I let you go, there was a story today that Nancy Pelosi was on the floor. And she was handed a list of, presumably members who would not vote for these actions. The bills that we're about to see in moments, the infrastructure bill and the rule for the Build Back Better bill.
There was some panic on the floor. What came out of that? Did you hear anything? Any reaction to that moment?
PERGRAM: Well, the one thing I know is that usually Nancy Pelosi is not handed a list as to where the votes are, or aren't. Nancy Pelosi, whether you like her or not, always knows where the votes are. She knows who's going to vote yes, who's going to vote no. And that's why they have not called this vote. That's maybe even why we're having this momentary delay here.
Nancy Pelosi has always said, she will not put a bill on the floor to lose. If it's on the floor, you can bet your bottom dollar that they're probably going to pass it. And so, when she thought that we can move the infrastructure bill, again, you can lose a few Republicans there, get some air cover -- few Democrats there get some air cover from some Republicans.
Remember, there's a coalition of about nine to 15 Republicans who will probably vote yes on this bill. So you can lose some on your side. As we always say on Capitol Hill, it's about three things. The math, the math, the math. And whether you like Nancy Pelosi or not, she is very good at counting the votes.
ARROYO: Chad, we will leave it there. Thank you for watching all of this. We'll check in with you. And as we reported moments ago, if you're just joining us, the House is in recess before this very dramatic vote that we've been waiting for since 8 A.M. when they call this house into session. It has still yet to take place, but is expected imminently on the infrastructure plan as well as the rule for the Build Back Better, the centerpiece of Joe Biden's agenda.
Joining me now, Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs. Congressman, thank you for being with us. Pelosi has been promising to bring these bills up for weeks. Last week, she couldn't get it passed. What does it tell you about her leadership? And about the President's powers of persuasion here?
REP. ANDY BIGGS (R-AZ): Well, what it tells me is that they have tried to bite off more than they can chew. So you've got -- I'm not sure how strong Nancy Pelosi is anymore, because she do have the Progressives Caucus that's pulling the strings, she also have the counterbalance of the moderate folks. And she's not used to having such a strong progressive caucus kick back as hard as they've done over the last several months. And they've done it -- a pretty good job.
And she's wrestling with this thing, and she may yet get it. But going into recess again is not -- not what I think most of us anticipated. It indicates that the --
ARROYO: What are you hearing? What are you hearing? You think she's lost the vote, or the vote is wobbly here? She only has three votes in despair. I mean -- and she's, I guess, trying to get Republicans to sign on to this infrastructure bill.
BIGGS: Yes, she is. But she's going to need to get about 10 or 15 Republicans to sign on. I don't know that she can get all 10 of those. But it looks a little shaky at right now. Because they have to get the wording just right, because it looks like there's a lack of trust between the moderates and progressives. And so, if you don't have trust, it's hard to get an agreement put together.
ARROYO: Well, and after those results last week, particularly in -- with some of these Congress people in tight races coming up in 2022, it's no wonder they're a little gun shy here.
Remember, Nancy Pelosi led everybody over the cliff. In the Obamacare days, I was there on the Hill that day, I remember distinctly in 2009. But I want to show you, this was Nancy Pelosi from earlier today. And she was talking about the whip count Representative Clyburn is the house whip, but she has her own tricks up her sleeve. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Mr. Clyburn has the official whip count. I have the speaker's secret whip count. I don't tell anything that people tell me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you worry that it starts to look like the Democrats can't get out of their own way.
PELOSI: No, welcome to my world. This is the Democratic Party. It had been here a long time, as have all three of us. The -- in those days, all of this would be done. But not on 24/7 platforms, where there are opinions going out, characterizations going out before anybody even knew what was going on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: Congressman, back in 2009, House members were genuinely afeared of Nancy Pelosi, and what she could do with them, with congressional assignments, on committees, money from the various congressional funds for races. I spoke to one Democratic Congressman who shall remain nameless earlier this afternoon. And that individual told me, they're worried about whether she's able to hold this caucus together. She seems as unsteady as Joe Biden. What are you seeing? What are you hearing?
BIGGS: I think that's true. I saw her work in the floor today, and yesterday, and the day before, and she had a list and she was going from place to place and she'd get people around. She get a whole team of people around. I don't know, I've never seen a caucus like the Progressive Caucus, or even the moderates be able to push back at her like these groups have been able to do.
And it does say, that maybe her grasp on the caucus is a little weaker than it has been. And so the real question is, are they going to be able to get their joint statement together? Will they trust each other? And will they ever get to the bottom of their build a bigger bankruptcy bill that they're trying to put together?
ARROYO: Congressman Biggs, we'll ask you to hold with us for just a moment here. Well, I saw momentarily images, I thought they were coming out of recess. They apparently are not. And as you said, that's not always a good sign. It sometimes means they've lost the votes, or don't have them right now. So you just hang out in recess until you can break some kneecaps and get people back into the stable.
I want to play something for you right now from Joe Biden. After the elections of this past week, one would imagine that he would throw the brakes on. And say, why don't we reconfigure this? We'll do a moderate scaled back package, so it looks like we're being responsive to the people and not overshooting the goal here. I'll play this for you now. You have no control on. Oh, you don't have it yet?
OK. We'll get back to it. But it is an amazing moment here that we're seeing, Congressman. When you're talking about $66 billion for freight and passenger rail, 110 billion for bridges and tunnels traditional infrastructure. This really isn't an infrastructure bill, is it, when you break it down? How much of this actually goes to infrastructure?
BIGGS: The biggest estimate I've ever heard is -- is that half of it. So maybe $500 billion goes to infrastructure. But when you start pairing that down and taking a look at it, it's probably nowhere near that. It's probably closer to $110 to $125 billion. The rest of it is going to go to everything from electric vehicles, Green New Deal projects, and a lot of it's not even funded.
So when they tell you that that you're not going to have to pay for it, it's all going to be funded. That's with offsets. That's inaccurate. It's a -- quite frankly, it's a bald-faced lie. So what you end up with is, is a lot of spending for a lot of things that don't have anything to do with what most Americans think of as roads, highways, seaports, airports. None of that.
ARROYO: Congressman Biggs, I'm going to ask you to stay with us. There's some breaking news on the floor. I want to go to Chad Pergram, who's standing by on Capitol Hill.
Chad, what's the latest? It looks like they were coming back in and then we went back into recess.
PERGRAM: That's right. It was kind of bizarre, because we thought they were going to start the vote on the infrastructure bill, right as you and I came on the air at the top of the hour here and they went into that brief recess. They came back just for a few minutes while you were talking to Andy Biggs. Not even for a few minutes, a few seconds, and then went back out.
Now, that usually is an indication that you don't have the votes. It also means that you are crossing all the Ts you are dotting all the Is. You are measuring once -- you know, your -- or twice, and cutting ones -- making sure that you have all the votes.
I talked earlier this afternoon, this evening with Jared Huffman, Democratic Congressman from California. He is a member of the Progressive Caucus. And he said today, this is what he described it as, as whiplash. He said, we didn't expect a curveball in our own House, meaning in the Democratic House, meaning among the Democratic caucus. He says, we, meaning progressives, have stretched and stretched and stretched. We have an elasticity problem. And he says that, this represents the problems of a threadbare majority. They only have three votes to spare. And you have these moderates, who are steered in their position. You have these progressives, who are steered in their position. And Nancy Pelosi is not going to call that vote in less they have the votes.
There is another phenomenon that is going on here tonight on Capitol Hill. It is Friday night. They have been here since 8 o'clock in the morning. They set not one, but two records today for the longest roll call votes in congressional history. One was more than seven hours. The old record was two hours and 55 minutes, said in November of 2003. It has been a strenuous, long day here on Capitol Hill.
There is a phenomenon in Congress known as the Stockholm Syndrome. You -- I've seen the Republicans do this. I've seen the Democrats do this. You keep people here. You keep them here over a weekend, right before a recess.
ARROYO: You hold them hostage and weaken their resistance.
PERGRAM: That's right. And after a period of time, they start to come around to the viewpoints of their (ph) captors. And so, at some point people cry uncle, and they're willing to vote. That could happen yet tonight.
ARROYO: Yes. No, we've seen that close to holidays, Christmas and New Year's, where they use the leverage of the holidays and getting home in the airlines against members. That's clearly what we're seeing here. It's a very bad sign, though, Chad.
And very briefly, I've seconds. It's a bad sign of the leadership strengths of Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden at this moment.
PERGRAM: Well, Nancy Pelosi, if she puts the bill on the floor, you don't get style points. You either pass or fail. If they pass that bill, they probably pass it by one or two votes.
ARROYO: Chad, I thank you for the insight. We'll check in with you. Still ahead, the latest updates on tonight's vote. Plus, Laura will be back. 13,000 scientists and physicians have signed a new declaration opposing these COVID mandates. We'll have that straight ahead. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Today, Pfizer claimed it has a new experimental pill that would reduce COVID hospitalization and death rates by nearly 90 percent. Now, even if we assume that is true, would it even matter?
Now, if history is our guide, we already know what the reaction would be from Fauci and friends. They'll just continue to push divisive and immoral vaccine mandates. But a brave group of independent-minded physicians and scientists are standing up to the COVID mob. Tomorrow, they're going to gather in Ocala, Florida, to affirm their support for a declaration opposing COVID-19 mandates that has been signed now by nearly 13,000 experts standing against all that.
Now, joining me now are two of the most prominent doctors who've signed that declaration. Dr. Harvey Risch, epidemiologist at the Yale School of Medicine; and Dr. Robert Malone, immunologist and architect of the mRNA vaccines. Also with us is Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Stanford School of Medicine professor.
Now, Dr. Malone, tell us very clearly and succinctly, why you signed this declaration and why was it an important moment for you to declare now?
ROBERT MALONE, IMMUNOLOGIST: Physicians are being hunted by a press and by the medical boards in an attempt to shut down their right to practice medicine as they see fit in working with their patients. This has got to stop.
INGRAHAM: Now, you're the -- one of the architects of the mRNA vaccine. Without you, who knows what -- where we would have ended up on this technology, this new experimental drug. So the government says, we just want to save lives. This is all about saving lives. Dr. Malone.
MALONE: If that's the case, then they would have done the risk-benefit analysis stratified by age back when I had conversations with Nancy Pelosi's office about this. They -- the words are not consistent with the actions. We can use the words like lying or dissembling or misrepresentation, but their actions speak volumes.
INGRAHAM: Well, that begs the question of what their motivation really is. And Dr. Fauci was on cable news earlier this week, taking this all a step further and pushing vaccines for five to 11-year olds. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NIAID: It's important for the children. We have 28 million children from five to 11 years old, who will benefit personally from a health standpoint. The safety profile is really quite good. Our FDA, particularly, when it comes to children are very, very scrupulous in figuring out whether or not we have a benefit risk ratio that's favorable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Dr. Risch, he's contradicting what Dr. Malone just said about the benefit risk analysis. So where's Fauci getting this wrong?
HARVEY RISCH, PROFESSOR, YALE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH: He is believing the CDC -- what the CDC says. The CDC is in total denial over the amount of adverse events that have occurred from these vaccines. They played it down, they used the VAERS, which under reports, they -- we have an inkling of this, because when Pfizer presented to the FDA about the five to 11s data from their randomized trial, there was a slide that showed the Optim database information on myocarditis, which was four times what the VAERS showed.
And the study on athletes also showed that asymptomatic myocarditis is four times the number of actually diagnosed myocarditis. So we're talking about 16-fold larger numbers of myocarditis in young people. And this is just totally being repressed or distorted by the CDC and the FDA.
INGRAHAM: Now, Dr. Bhattacharya, I want to play a really emotional moment from a Texas father on this issue of vaccine side effects.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm the father of a six-year-old son. I'm a single parent. I have raised my boy since he was a baby. He meant the world to me. They need to quit pushing this on our children. I lost mine, I need to protect yours. And then they say, it's worth the risk. It wasn't worth the risk.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Obviously, very difficult to listen to. He lost a son after his son received the vaccine. And why are stories like these not really being told?
JAY BHATTACHARYA, PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE, STANFORD: I think, the fact is, the children -- the risk the children face from COVID is so small, that almost any risk from the vaccine itself might cut against recommending the vaccine. I think it should be something that's left up to parents and the pediatricians that they have. Like, you might have a child with special needs that have some additional risk from COVID. It's really a risk benefit that's best done at the individual level.
Not telling people -- telling people that the vaccine is entirely safe is actually really harmful to public health. It's not entirely safe. I mean, I think it's largely safe, but it's not entirely safe. And you have stories like this, which just pull at your heartstrings. No medicine is perfectly safe.
You have to tell people honestly what the risks are, and then let them make choices. These mandates are absolutely insane. They're destroying the trust in public health. And we'll get many more stories like this. I'm worried that other vaccines that are actually useful and important for children, people will stop trusting.
INGRAHAM: That's a terrifying prospect. But I think that's really well said. I'm afraid of that as well. And, Dr. Malone, there was an exchange on Capitol Hill this week between the CDC Director Walensky and Senator Richard Burr, which I think is quite illuminating about what this administration, what the CDC itself thinks about natural immunity. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RICHARD BURR (R-NC): What does the science say about the durability of natural immunity? And when can we expect answers on its benefit?
ROCHELLE WALENSKY, CDC DIRECTOR: CDC continues to recommend that people who have been previously infected get their COVID-19 vaccine. The data on the infection induced immunity, some of what you quoted are murkier. They rely on retrospective studies, observational studies. Our guidance continues to recommend that children who have been previously infected actually get vaccine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Dr. Malone, your response to her.
MALONE: So the CDC study that was half baked, which recently came out in an attempt to address this, is the only one out of over 100 that I'm aware of, that indicates that natural immunity is not better than vaccination. In fact, the vaccination on top of previous infection and natural immunity actually confers higher risk to patients than vaccination in the naive individual.
I myself, am an example of that. After two jabs of Moderna and I had had COVID in February of 2020. I developed hypertension with systolic up to 230, restless leg syndrome, narcolepsy, et cetera. These are known risks. And regarding Dr. Fauci's comment, there's no other word for it. That duplicitous is the nicest thing, I can say.
INGRAHAM: Doctors, thank you very much. And the American Duchess turned lobbyist is (inaudible). Oh, yes, she's challenging religion now. Who is that? Friday Follies gets into it all with Raymond Arroyo in moments.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
INGRAHAM: It's Friday, and that means it's time for Friday Follies. And for that we turn to author of "The Spider Who Save Christmas," FOX News contributor Raymond Arroyo. All right, Raymond, there was a Microsoft streaming event this week that had a very curious start.
RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, they practically apologized even for the land they were standing on, Laura.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We want to acknowledge that the land where the Microsoft campus is situated was traditionally occupied by the Sammamish, the Duwamish, the Snoqualmie, the Suquamish --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm Natali (ph) Godella (ph). I'm a Caucasian woman with long blonde hair and I go by she/her.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm Nick (ph) Philingham (ph). I'm a Caucasian man with glasses and a beard. I go by he/him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: Laura, this was such an education for me. I think I will begin every folly segment with I'm Raymond, I am a Hispanic-Italian man with dark hair and a blue suit who goes by sire and my liege. And I'm standing on swampland once owned by alligators and nutria.
INGRAHAM: Raymond, actually, when you sent this to me, or Tommy sent it, I don't know who sent it to whom, I thought, OK, this is funny. When did "Saturday Night Live" do this? I actually thought "Saturday Night Live" had gotten to be funny, that they were actually funny. I thought, wow, this is great. Who is this actress? Then I saw it was the real thing. I was like the whole thing is "The Onion."
ARROYO: But when you are this self-aware and apologizing for the place you're standing, just stay home and let the people who own the place originally broadcast. You'll be happier that way.
INGRAHAM: Just give it back to all the people who -- then where do these Snoqualmie go? Is there another age that they can then return the land to? At some point you run out of generations, I believe.
ARROYO: Right. And then there were some people, Laura, who say one thing and do another entirely. The Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, your favorite, has long disparaged the royals while claiming the title, and she uses it this way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MEGHAN MARKLE, DUCHESS OF SUSSEX: The causes that have been very important to me I can focus even more energy on, because very early out of the gate I think we realized once we have access or a voice that people are willing to listen to, with that comes a lot of responsibility.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: No one realized that she was talking about members of Congress. It turns out Meghan is now a lobbyist, Laura. She's been coordinating with Senator Kirsten Gillibrand to lobby senators, particularly Joe Manchin this week, about paid family leave. There are reports that she called senators on their private lines, opening with, "This is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex." How do you trash the royals, then use their title to lobby? This shouldn't be allowed. This is outrageous really.
INGRAHAM: Is she in need of paid family leave in Montecito? In Montecito?
ARROYO: With a team of nannies and cooks. She and her husband took off 20 weeks for parental leave when they had each of their children, 20 weeks. What government could afford this, Laura?
INGRAHAM: First of all, I am the Duchess of Sussex, why do we care what you think about anything? Sorry, but that is not relevant. I'm an American citizen and this is my view. But what can we expect?
ARROYO: Laura, I hope you get an invite to the dinner. Gillibrand is hosting a dinner for congressional ladies with Meghan Markle in the coming weeks in D.C. So let me know, give us a report.
There is a new British show that I wish we could adapt slightly and maybe bring to FOX. It's called "Love Trap." It's a dating show, and this is what happens when contestants are eliminated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: David, who do you think is a love trap?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sharee (ph).
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
ARROYO: Now, if I were to adapt this, Laura, I'd call our show political trap and dump rejected politicians or political wannabes through a trap door. I can see it now. Look out below.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Learning as much as I can so that I can maximize the opportunity we have here to really make an impact.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
ARROYO: Laura, this is a hit waiting to happen. Can you imagine election night, the cathartic power of this no matter your party. Just drop them through the floor.
INGRAHAM: So for next year, given where that defund the police initiative went in her district of Minneapolis, we can push that button and have Ilhan Omar go down the trap. I will personally push that button. That would be great.
ARROYO: We'll send the set builders right out there to Minneapolis.
INGRAHAM: Raymond, there seems to be a reckoning of sorts under way among the Democrats following this week's elections. Here is your pal, Carville.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES CARVILLE: It's stupid wokeness. This defund the police lunacy, this take Abraham Lincoln's name off of schools. People see that. And it's just really has a suppressive effect across the country on Democrats. Some of these people need to go to a woke detox center or something.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
ARROYO: Laura, James has been saying this for months, and most in his party have really tuned him out, but he's right. And there is something deeper going on here. This week the Archbishop of Los Angeles, Jose Gomez, he's also head of the U.S. Bishops Conference, he said that the new social justice movements like BLM are rivals to Christianity. He says their salvation is found in constant struggle. It's rooted in Marxism and profoundly atheistic. So beyond the political, this is really a spiritual conflict. And as Pope Benedict said, when we forget God we no longer see the image of God in our neighbor, and that's what's happening. That's what's happening in our society, and it's what's destroying our politics.
INGRAHAM: Old Carville I saw had an LSU sweatshirt on there, Raymond. I have my Alabama button on, so we are playing this weekend, LSU versus Alabama. So we'll if James Carville comes to that game there, Raymond.
ARROYO: I think the tigers are going to have a rough time. They're going to have a rough time, them tigers.
(LAUGHTER)
ARROYO: Don't tell him.
INGRAHAM: When he stands up for Robert E. Lee, when he stands up for Robert E. Lee, then I will be really impressed. All right, Raymond, I appreciate it. Great to see you, as always.
ARROYO: Have a good game.
INGRAHAM: Six weeks ago THE INGRAHAM ANGLE brought you an investigation about dozens of vets being left to die outside a V.A. hospital, one of California's most liberal but exclusive enclaves. Ahead, we have an important update.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ARROYO: I'm Raymond Arroyo. This is a FOX News alert. We are monitoring the action on Capitol Hill. A big vote anticipated in just moments on the Biden infrastructure package, as well as the rule for that Build Back Better plan, the epicenter of the Biden agenda. For more on what's happening on Capitol Hill, we go to Chad Pergram, our chief congressional correspondent. Chad, what is the latest? I know there's a lot is happening behind the scenes.
CHAD PERGRAM, FOX NEWS CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good evening. In just about three or four minutes here, 10:51 eastern time, the House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has indicated that the House will come back into session, and they will begin by voting on the infrastructure bill.
This is the bipartisan package that the Senate approved in early August. The House thought they were going to vote in late September, maybe late October when President Biden came to Capitol Hill. They never did because you have liberal Democrats saying, wait a minute, we need these two bills to ride together, meaning the social spending bill and the infrastructure bill. And many of those liberal members said they would withhold their votes on the infrastructure bill unless they got an agreement and everything was worked out on the social spending plan. That is not all put to bed yet.
But here is what has happened in just the past 35 minutes or so. You have the liberal Democrats and the moderate Democrats have come to a truce. And I'm just going to read you what has come out here. You have this group of five or six moderate Democrats, and they say that they will vote for the social spending bill in its current form when it comes to the House floor no later than the week of November 15th. Keep in mind that these moderates, they wanted a vote, and this is the agreement they had with the Speaker, to vote on the infrastructure bill by September 27th. So here they are saying, OK, we are willing to vote on this bill tonight, but we have to get to the other bill by the 15th of November.
By the same token, you then have the liberal Democrats, they've put out a statement here, this is Pramila Jayapal, who is the chair of the Progressive Caucus, Democrat from Washington state, and she says that she will agree to have her members vote on the infrastructure bill tonight. Again, the House and Senate will line up and that bill can go to President Biden for his signature, and then agree to vote on the rule, this is what sets the framework for the House at some point sometime in the future, maybe in about two or three weeks here, to consider the social spending plan.
So you have to have the votes to get this to pass in the House of Representatives. Democrats have a margin of three votes. And if you don't have those two wings of the Democratic Party aligning, the moderates and the liberals, you can't pass the bill.
To be fair House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does have a bit of a cushion. That cushion comes from, ironically, Republicans, because this is a bipartisan plan on infrastructure. And depending on who you talk to you we think that there is a range of anywhere from nine to 15 Republicans who will vote yes on this piece of legislation.
So the plan, to reiterate, probably in the next couple minutes here, the House will come into session. They will vote on infrastructure, and then sometime later this month they will consider the social spending plan which is going to change in the United States Senate. Whatever the House passes cannot move through the Senate. Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia doesn't like the family leave provisions in there, doesn't like some of the tax provisions. Other senators may try to add infrastructure -- excuse me, immigration proposals. And then whatever the Senate passes, they have to bounce it back, and the House is probably going to have to eat whatever the Senate puts in that bill.
ARROYO: Chad, I thank you for that. We'll check in with you for the latest as this evening continues. Thank you for your insight as always.
Back with me now is Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs, and joining us, Indiana Congressman Jim Banks, Republican Study Committee Chair, and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise. Thank you all for staying with us.
Now, you heard Chad there a moment ago. The Democrats are trying to portray this infrastructure bill as a bipartisan bill. You will remember, and many of you were a bit concerned about this. I know Laura was very upset at Senator Cassidy and Collins and Grassley, at 19 in all Republican senators who supported this bill because of some of the provisions. Congressman Banks, I will start with you. Is this a bipartisan, clean infrastructure bill?
REP. JIM BANKS, (R-IN), REPUBLICAN STUDY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Remember, this is a fake infrastructure bill. It's more green new deal than it is infrastructure. So I can't think of a Republican district in America where Republican congressmen can go home and explain to his constituents, his or her constituents, how in the world they voted for a fake infrastructure bill that is more to do with the green new deal than it is infrastructure.
So I don't know how that works. It wouldn't work where I come from, and I can't think of a Republican district where that would work, either. But the fact of the matter is this is a dangerous bill. We don't know yet what is going to happen. If they do somehow pass this bill, it's a bad bill that will do harm to America.
ARROYO: Congressman Biggs, there are some provisions, and I've reported on bits of this bill even here in New Orleans. There is $1 billion set aside for what they call community reunification. And what that means just in the context of here in New Orleans, there is a stretch of the interstate that Democrats claim divide African American communities from the French Quarter. Well, when you talk to the people in those communities, they left that overpass. But this bill would provide for the demolition of major highways that have been there in some cases for 30 and 40 years. Your take on whether this is a smart expenditure in addition to the tracking of mileage, which they will tax. That seems to be the backdrop of this bill, what it would facilitate.
REP. ANDY BIGGS, (R-AZ): A couple quick points. When they start talking about highways and freeways and roads being racist and dividing communities, that's absurd. Local communities can adjudicate that better than the federal government, number one. Number two, as Jim said, no Republican should be voting for this, that's for sure. And then the third thing is, this bill is part and parcel to the other bill, this massive spending bill, which will give federal government more surveillance opportunities and more control over local folks. No Republican should be voting for this, Raymond.
ARROYO: We are now watching the House of Representatives coming back in session for, look, this is a major test for the Biden administration, the centerpiece of his agenda, the Build Back Better plan, the rule for that is going to pass tonight, or be brought up to a vote. And they are also going to consider first this infrastructure package. We will bring you the latest as it happens. I will update you on anything that occurs from the floor. There is the motion to concur to the Senate amendment. This is voting on the infrastructure bill.
Steve Scalise, I want to go to you. When we are talking about infrastructure and bipartisanship, how bipartisan is this? Nancy Pelosi, we are told, is relying on members of your caucus to support this bill. How many will she get, or has she gotten?
REP. STEVE SCALISE, (R-LA) HOUSE MINORITY WHIP: Raymond, we dramatically reduced that number. I whipped against the entire package because they brought infrastructure and tied it together with this massive, over $4 trillion tax and spend bill, and so it is one big package, and we actively acted against it, dramatically reduced the number. And that is why they've been dragging this out for weeks because they haven't had the votes.
And then you're seen -- there are no moderates, by the way. They are socialists and liberals, and they finally worked some kind a deal together, but they are still not going to have enough votes to pass the tax increase bill.
And so if you look at what is going on right now, first of all, there was a report by Penn Wharton school of business that came out today that exposes the fallacy that President Biden keep saying this isn't going to cost anything. It says, number one, it's not going to cost $1.5 trillion. It is going to cost over $4 trillion. There's amnesty for millions of people, 87,000 more IRS agents to go snoop on your bank accounts. There's a natural gas tax that everybody is going to pay.
So it blows away his myth promise that if you make less than $400,000 you won't pay a dime in new taxes. You're going to be paying a lot more in energy costs. And by the way, people are already playing too much in inflation, which is the message they sent in Virginia. Clearly, President Biden and Speaker Pelosi are just ignoring that message that people sent in a lot of states, not just Virginia, on Tuesday night.
ARROYO: Congressman Banks, very quickly, before we run out of time here, there are some who are saying this entire so-called bipartisan infrastructure bill was a bit of a pig in a poke. It was a way to force moderates, or blackmail them into voting for this bonanza of spending. It is green new deal spending, new taxes, 900 percent increase in OSHA fines. It is a spend-o-rama. The price tag could be as high as $4 trillion at this point. Was that wise for Republican senators to sign on to this infrastructure package?
BANKS: We are going to look back and we're going to blame them. We're going to blame the Republicans who went along with it in the beginning, that opened the door for this process to play out the way that it does tonight. To your point, the Democrats used one to get the other if they succeed.
But that has yet to be determined. We are going to find out tonight. This is deja vu, it seems like every week, that the Democrats say they have a deal and then it falls apart at the last minute. So I'm still hopeful that we'll get to the floor here in moments from now and find out that they are not able to get this done.
ARROYO: Congressman Scalise, we heard only moments ago Chad Pergram told us there's a deal that has been struck, the moderates have agreed to vote on the big spending, the Build Back Better plan by the 15th of November. Do you think that will hold? Presumably that's after the Congressional Budget Office turns in their findings and make sure the numbers square. Now, by these moderates saying they'll vote for it, does that mean they will support it?
SCALISE: Raymond, this is where people all across the country need to get engaged, because that means for the next two weeks your members of Congress are going to be home all of next week. And if you are in a district represented by a Democrat, pick up the phone, because Nancy Pelosi needs almost every single one of their votes for this massive, multi-trillion dollar bill to pass. Engage with your member of Congress and let them know how devastating it will be to your family. It's going to raise taxes on low-income families with the natural gas tax. The IRS, 87,000 new IRS agents are not going to be just going after millionaires and billionaires. They're going after you, seniors. They're going after the bank account of seniors on fixed income.
Pick up the phone, call your member of Congress, and urge them to vote no. There's two weeks left to make that happen. We can still kill this bill. Save America, kill the bill.
ARROYO: Congressman, Biggs, I want to play you something. This is Nancy Pelosi, this is what she claimed earlier about these bills. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NANCY PELOSI, (D-CA) HOUSE SPEAKER: We have a significant contribution to workforce development. If we're going to build back better, even in the BIF bill, the bipartisan infrastructure framework, it's important to have people be trained for the jobs, and not only in construction but in-home health care and in other ways.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: Congressman Biggs, there are estimates I've read that this could kill millions of jobs, just the infrastructure bill, forget the Build Back Better bill. Your thoughts, what are you hearing, what do you know?
BIGGS: What I'm hearing is from economists that they're telling me that these will kill about 7 million to 10 million jobs between these two bills. And so when she is saying it is going to reinvigorate the economy and we need to train people, we are going to have to train people that lose their jobs because of this. And they want to get these green new deal core and all of those things, that is really where they are going, to green new deal jobs are going to basically cripple our economy with the mandates and regulations that they're going to give them. So more jobs will be lost overall. It's a net loss for our economy. And the regulations, mandates will continue long after the spending big goes away. That's for sure, Raymond. It's a disaster, multigenerational disaster, quite frankly, for the American people.
ARROYO: I've got about a minute here. Steve Scalise, I just want to ask you before we run out of time. Given the elections this week, the clear message from the American people, why do you think the Democrats and the Biden administration have decided to just press forward with this spend-o- rama, universal pre-k, the whole nine yards. It even restricts money from religious organizations and schools. They can't use the money, but secular groups can. This seems vastly unfair. Steve, very quickly.
SCALISE: You saw Nancy Pelosi blow through the results of 2009 when Virginia flipped Republican right before the wave in 2010. She will let her members walk the plank because they want to push a socialist agenda. People need to engage. We could still defeat this bill. We've got a week-and-a- half at least before it comes to the floor. Trillions and trillions of dollars of inflation-busting spending and new taxes that will kill American jobs and ship jobs to China. Let's keep focusing on trying to defeat this bill. Engage your member of Congress.
ARROYO: Congressmen, I thank you all for being here. I'm out of time. It's been great being with you. We'll continue to monitor the news.
I'm Raymond Arroyo sitting in for Laura Ingraham. Stay with FOX News for live coverage at midnight. Gutfeld is next. Have a great weekend.
Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox