National

Axios Sneak Peek

Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers has found a new target for his war on inflation: President Biden's "hipster" antitrust policies.  

Why it matters: National gas prices reached another record high Monday and inflation hit 8.3% last month. Top administration officials are super-sensitive to criticism from Summers, a former Harvard president who served in senior economic roles in the last two Democratic administrations.

Driving the news: “Policies that attack bigness can easily be inflationary if they prevent the exploitation of economies of scale or limit superstar firms,” he tweeted late Sunday night. 

That Twitter thread, which followed a blistering Bloomberg TV interview Friday, ricocheted around Democratic economic circles, daring officials to reconsider their positions.

Summers told Axios in an interview on Monday that “while the primary responsibility with inflation rests with the Fed, there are micro-policies that also matter," referring to regulatory decisions that can affect prices. 

His "hipster" critique was in response to a Wednesday speech by Jonathan Kanter, head of the Justice Department's antitrust division, who said “corporate power has grown to levels that leave our fellow citizens concerned and confused." Summers expressed concern that such judgments could lead to a dangerous populism.

Behind the scenes: Summers remains in touch with senior Biden aides, who quietly solicit his views — and his pronouncements carry weight across the party, even as Republicans have seized upon them to score political points. 

By attacking Biden's antitrust agenda, and singling out the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice's antitrust division, Summers is opening up an entirely new front on inflation.

The big picture: Biden has made antitrust rhetoric a mainstay of his approach to addressing inflation, but officials acknowledge that they have limited tools to immediately bring down prices.

In Japan on Monday, Biden told reporters he’s also considering lifting some of Trump’s China tariffs and that he'll discuss the matter with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. 

In private administration debates, economists at Treasury, including Yellen, are arguing to lift them, Axios reported in April. 

Flashback: Summer’s February 2021 Washington Post warning on inflation, exploded in Democratic economic circles, a lonely note of caution about $1.9 trillion in COVID relief spending Biden was proposing for the economy. 

Since then Summers has not been shy about repeating his warnings and criticizing both the White House and the Fed for being too slow to act.

But he was always clear that Biden's signature domestic agenda, Build Back Better would help reduce costs. And he recently came to Biden's defense in his spat with over corporate taxes with Jeff Bezos, calling the Amazon founder "mostly wrong."

Go deeper: Last summer, President Biden decided to become the trustbuster-in-chief, signing an executive order that promised to promote competitiveness and subject corporate merger to the highest scrutiny.

"Forty years ago, we chose the wrong path,” Biden said, criticizing the antitrust policies of the past two Democratic presidents, including the one where he was vice president. 

Critics including the conservative legal scholar Robert Bork, were quick to claim that Biden’s “neo-Brandeisian” view of antitrust was out of vogue for a reason. 

But Biden's antitrust enforcers, including FTC chair Lina Kahn, a prominent Amazon critic, now has a Democratic majority on the commission to pursue her progressive agenda on Big Tech. 

The DOJ's Kanter took aim at private equity last week, telling the Financial Times that they do deals “designed to hollow out or roll up an industry and essentially cash out.” 

The other side: The administration insists that suing to block some deals, as with Lockheed Martin's proposed acquisition of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc., will save taxpayer's money by limiting sole-source contracts. 

"The President has for years held the view that we need much stronger antitrust scrutiny than in the past few decades, where lax oversight has led to significant consolidation in many sectors of the economy, and higher prices for American consumers," a White House official told Axios.

"That is why he directed and signed an historic Competition EO (executive order) which, far from a narrow-minded “big is bad” approach, lays out a comprehensive, government-wide effort to increase competition in ways that improve consumer welfare and economic competitiveness," the official said.

Larry Summers' new inflation target

Larry Summers is criticizing BIden's antitrust police on inflation, including the FTC and DoJ.

Image of Larry Summers with wrinkled brow at a microphone

Photo: Andreas Solaro /AFP via Getty Images

Inflation

Policymaking

Joe Biden

President Biden has made the COVID-19 crisis and a post-Trump return to national unity and traditional democratic ideals his top priorities. From vaccinations to stimulus to schools, Biden is seeking bipartisan compromise while showing a willingness to use executive authority and bare Democratic majorities in the U.S. House and Senate to implement his policies. Republican leaders are navigating deep party divisions over if and how to move beyond former President Trump.

Politics & Policy

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Sunday rejected criticism from some Republicans about sending billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine, telling reporters that supporting Ukraine is a critical U.S. interest and "not some handout."

Why it matters: The Senate is set to pass a $40 billion humanitarian and military aid package for Ukraine as soon as Wednesday. Fifty-seven House Republicans voted against the bill last week, highlighting growing opposition within the GOP also shared by pro-Trump candidates running for Congress.

What they're saying: "This is not some handout. This is to prevent this ruthless thug from beginning a march through Europe. The first place to do that is in Ukraine, and that's what we're determined to do," McConnell told reporters from Stockholm, a day after meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv.

"Look, there have always been isolation voices in the Republican Party, like prior to World War II. That's perfectly all right. This is a debate worth having, it's an important subject," he continued.

"I think one of the lessons we learned during World War II is not standing up to aggression early is a huge misjudgment."

Driving the news: McConnell will travel to Helsinki on Monday with Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), John Cornyn (R-Texas) and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) to meet with Finland's President Sauli Niinistö, who officially confirmed Sunday that his country will apply for NATO membership.

McConnell said the U.S. should be "first in line" to ratify Finland and its neighbor Sweden's expected applications to NATO, calling the historic bids "one of the good things that's come out of this invasion." 

McConnell also urged President Biden to designate Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, which Ukrainian officials have called for in response to the atrocities committed by Russian forces.

McConnell defends Ukraine aid: "This is not some handout"

"This is to prevent this ruthless thug from beginning a march through Europe."

Mitch McConnell

Russia

China is becoming the most formidable rival America has faced, and the risk of confrontation with Russia, North Korea or Iran still looms. Authoritarians are rising, the chaotic Afghanistan exit revealed the limits of U.S. power, and the pandemic, climate change and other critical challenges continue to pose grave threats.

World

Lawmakers could consider a slate of antitrust legislation in Congress ahead of the 2022 midterms. But conversations with Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) at an Axios event Thursday signaled disagreement even among Democrats on the impact of those bills. 

State of play: Lawmakers are working against the clock on bipartisan efforts to broadly reshape the Big Tech landscape. Insiders told Axios the outlook is bleak for the proposals if they're not put for votes ahead of Congress's August recess.

What he's saying: Swalwell told Axios' Margaret Talev Thursday he's concerned the reforms "would throw the baby out with the bathwater" and put U.S. national security at risk for the sake of reining in Big Tech. 

The legislation could embolden the Chinese government's efforts at currency manipulation, intellectual property theft and espionage, Swalwell said.

Swalwell said he's concerned the reforms would allow "sideloading" — letting users download apps from unofficial platforms or the open internet. 

"You would allow the Chinese to flood these stores with almost no regulation, with apps that could pipe U.S. consumer information — potentially national security information — back to China," Swalwell said. 

The bottom line: "That is primarily my concern — to not give China a backdoor to U.S. persons' data without any protection," he said.

Swalwell said he'd welcome addressing his concerns through an amendment to one of the bills. He said hearings at Congress's judiciary or intelligence panels with the FBI, NSA and CIA "about what risks there are with this legislation" would also assuage his concerns. 

Members of the New Democratic Coalition led by Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) have also expressed concerns about the antitrust bills.

The other side: Concerns that the tech legislation will hurt national security are "a red herring," Jayapal told Axios' Ashley Gold during a conversation that followed Swalwell's.

Jayapal said national security experts have told her the bigger risk is "for us to not have the competition that pushes the right kinds of innovation forward."

"Our national security is really affected when consumers have no choices, when small businesses can't thrive," Jayapal added.

Tech antitrust bills' big foe: the calendar

Democrats split on Big Tech measures in Congress

There's disagreement even among Democrats on the impact of legislation moving through Congress.

Illustration of the Capitol dome with police tape in front featuring binary code

Big Tech regulation

Big Tech

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

Technology

Axios Events

The head of the U.S. intelligence community warned Tuesday there's no "viable" prospect for peace negotiations in Ukraine in the near term, predicting a protracted "war of attrition" that's likely to become "more unpredictable and escalatory."

Why it matters: The U.S. is doubling down on helping Ukraine defeat Russia on the battlefield but with little clarity about how the war ends. That means the mammoth $40 billion package of additional security and financial assistance set to pass the House on Tuesday night is unlikely to be the last.

The big picture: Out of nearly a dozen Republican and Democratic senators Axios spoke to Tuesday, not one said they believe the U.S. is in a "proxy war" with Russia.

But growing U.S. involvement in the war — through billions of dollars in weapons and intelligence-sharing — could foster a greater risk of a humiliated and desperate Vladimir Putin lashing out.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines testified Tuesday the Russian president would likely only use nuclear weapons "if he perceived an existential threat to the Russian state or regime."

"We're supporting Ukraine, but we also don't want to ultimately end up in World War III, and we don't want to have a situation in which actors are using nuclear weapons," Haines told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Between the lines: "One of the difficulties of this situation is that the better the Ukrainians do, the more dangerous Putin is," Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), a member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, told Axios.

The maximalist demands Putin set at the beginning of the war are making it difficult for him to find a way to back down.

King believes it's up to the Ukrainians — not the U.S. — to determine the end game.

"They believe they can win. And so I think it would be difficult for President [Volodymyr] Zelensky to make significant concessions to Putin because of the mood in Ukraine," King said.

Behind the scenes: Ukraine's ambassador to the U.S., Oksana Markarova, addressed both the Senate Democratic and Republican lunches on Tuesday, a day after a deal was reached on the new aid package.

She told senators Ukraine needs enough firepower to regain its sovereignty, Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told Axios. In other words, push Russian forces out every inch of Ukrainian territory — including Crimea and areas of the Donbas region that have been occupied since 2014.

"It seemed to me that she's very optimistic about that if they get what they need in this next package," Cramer said. "Clearly, their goal is to win and to get all of their land territory back."

Asked if that was a realistic scenario, Cramer replied: "Listen, I didn't think it was realistic that they'd be where they are, so we've been underestimating them and overestimating Russia since the beginning of this."

"I think people are learning their lesson."

What to watch: Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told Axios he's pushing to add a resolution to the Ukraine package urging the Biden administration to designate Russia a "state sponsor of terrorism."

If the resolution is ultimately brought to the Senate floor alone, both Blumenthal and his co-sponsor, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C), predicted it would receive over 90 votes.

Ukraine’s success ramps up Putin threat

The U.S. is doubling down on helping Ukraine beat Russia on the battlefield but with little clarity on how the war ends.

DNI Director Avril Haines is seen speaking with Congress on Tuesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines testifies Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

Russian invasion of Ukraine

Axios AM

Republicans are deeply split on their abortion strategy, with top officials pushing restraint, even silence, while activist GOP candidates demand an all-out campaign for a national ban and harsher penalties. 

Why it matters: Republicans' confidence in landslide victories this fall was shaken by the leaked abortion ruling — in part because they know the topic invigorates their base, while rattling many swing voters. 

A top adviser to House Republican leaders tells Axios their polling shows that in races that matter, voters aren't "hip to this kind of seismic change." 

The adviser said lawmakers are asking for guidance on how to talk about issues like abortion in cases of rape or incest — knowing a hardline view is wildly unpopular. 

The GOP establishment's initial marching orders, in an NRSC memo leaked to Axios' Alayna Treene, counseled caution and even silence. 

But activist candidates and voters couldn't care less what the establishment wants — and see this as the moment to fulfill their lifelong dream of strict abortion bans, with few exceptions, and penalties for those carrying out abortions. 

What we're hearing: Tony Perkins — president of the Family Research Council, who's been fighting on the issue for 30 years — told me in a phone interview that there's "some caution about overreach" among GOP leaders.

But they're privately promising to help push America to be a "predominantly pro-life nation," Perkins said. 

What to watch: Cook Political Report's Dave Wasserman points to swing state Nevada, which has toss-up Senate and governor's races. The GOP needs suburban voters in the Silver State — but the party's base is pushing hard for more abortion restrictions.

The takeaway ... One thing is certain about modern politics: Rarely does moderation or restraint prevail — especially on cultural, religious or identity issues. In fact, one truism of modern conservatism is: The more the establishment pushes something, the more the base recoils. 

The great GOP divide on abortion

Republicans know the topic invigorates their base, while rattling many swing voters.

Abortion

A federal appeals court reinstated on Friday provisions of Florida's GOP-led voting law, overruling a lower court that said the provisions aimed to suppress Black voters, the Miami Herald reports.

Why it matters: The law included restrictions on vote-by-mail ballots and drop boxes, which civil rights advocates have said makes voting more difficult for Black people. It's one of dozens of voting restrictions brought by Republicans in state legislatures following the 2020 election.

What they're saying: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, a three-judge panel, said there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove the law was intended to discriminate.

The judges noted in their opinion that the Supreme Court instructs courts to presume the "good faith of the state legislature" when examining possible discriminatory intent in a statute, per the Herald. 

"[I]n its 288-page opinion, the district court never once mentioned the presumption," they wrote. "And while we do not require courts to incant magic words, it does not appear to us that the district court here meaningfully accounted for the presumption at all."

The lower court ruling is temporarily blocked as an appeal continues.

What to watch: The decision means the law's provisions will likely be in effect come November, the Herald notes.

Federal appeals court reinstates portions of Florida's restrictive voting law

A lower court had ruled that the provisions were aimed at suppressing Black voters.

Photo of Ron DeSantis speaking from a podium on a stage

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis delivers remarks at the 2022 CPAC conference at the Rosen Shingle Creek in Orlando on Feb. 24, 2022. Photo: Joe Burbank/Orlando Sentinel/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

Florida

Where access to abortion pills prescribed via telemedicine is banned

Data: Guttmacher and Axios research; Map: Jacque Schrag/Axios

As the Supreme Court considers potentially overturning Roe v. Wade, abortion rights activists are heralding abortion pills as a potential option in places where clinics may have to close — but several red states are already cracking down on the pills.

The big picture: Almost half of U.S. states have banned or tightly restricted abortion pills — two medicines named mifepristone and misoprostol — and more could soon follow suit. 

Prior to the pandemic, the FDA said patients seeking abortion pills had to get the drug from hospitals or medical facilities in person. 

The FDA in December changed its guidance on abortion pills, permanently allowing people to access the medication through telemedicine and receive the pills by mail, where permitted by state law.

The latest: The governor of Tennessee signed a law in May making it a felony to mail abortion pills, punishable by 20-year imprisonment and a $50,000 fine. The law also adds further restrictions to medication abortion.

Texas and Indiana are the only two states that ban the use of abortion pills at seven weeks and 10 weeks, respectively. So do South Dakota, Oklahoma and Montana, though courts have blocked those laws.

Republican lawmakers in several states have moved to introduce legislation aimed at making abortion pills illegal. 

There's a bill moving through the Alabama legislature that would make it a crime to "manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, sell, or transfer" abortion pills in the state.

The Wyoming state Senate passed a bill in March aimed at completely outlawing abortion pills. 

In Iowa and Ohio, laws require a physician to be present when a patient takes the medication. However, federal judges blocked those laws , saying the requirement places an "undue burden" on women. 

Of note: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) attempted to prohibit the mailing of abortion pills via executive order instead of a legislation. However, a federal court temporarily blocked it. 

People in the state are still required to see a health provider when looking to access the pill, which is given in a two-dose regimen. They are allowed to take the second dose at home.

In March, Noem signed into law a bill to add more restrictions to medication abortion access. It is set to take effect if the state can convince the court to overturn its block on the governor's order.

What they're saying: "I think pretty much any state that is on the conservative side might expect to see similar legislation in 2022," Elizabeth Nash, state policy expert at the Guttmacher Institute, told Axios.

What's next: Some activists have been pointing to newer options that skirt certain telemedicine restrictions and operate in a legal gray area, including one online medication abortion provider, Aid Access, founded by a Dutch physician in 2018, which will mail abortion pills internationally.

Abortion rights advocates say people who want to end a pregnancy will use abortion pills no matter what the policy landscape is.

"It is going to be in their hands in the U.S., it's inevitable," said Elisa Wells, co-founder of Plan C, which provides information on how to access abortion pills online. "This is modern medical technology everybody should have access to. Whether people can use it under the radar without being criminalized is the question."

The other side: "Pro-life groups are encouraging states to take action to install safeguards for women that will ensure they are aware of the risks when undergoing a chemical abortion," said Prudence Robinson, a communications associate at Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion advocacy group. 

"And the states are facing this threat head on. In this year alone, nearly 10 states enacted state-level restrictions on this dangerous method of abortion."

By the numbers: Medication abortion accounted for 54% of all U.S. abortions in 2020, an increase from 39% in 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Go deeper: Pills are the next big abortion battleground

Red states crack down on abortion pills

Several states have moved to restrict access to the pills and more could follow suit.

Axios Explains: Abortion

The U.S. faces a range of health care flashpoints — unaffordable drugs, opioids, vaping — as we debate whether to adopt universal care. For now, the Affordable Care Act is the law of the land, but Republicans want to issue it a final death blow.

Health

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday that the Senate will vote next week to codify abortion rights into federal law even though Democrats lack the votes to ensure the bill's passage.

Why it matters: Abortion advocates and Democratic candidates have doubled down on calls for Congress to pass legislation protecting abortion rights since a  leaked draft of a Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was published. 

The measure lacks even 50 votes, far short of the 60 votes it would need, as all Republicans are likely to vote against it and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) voted against similar legislation earlier this year.

What he's saying: "Republicans will have two choices: They can own the destruction of women’s rights, or they can reverse course and work to prevent the damage," Schumer said.

Yes, but: "The move is little more than an effort to send a political message ahead of midterm elections and a seismic ruling that could have major legal, cultural and electoral consequences that also carries deep significance for voters across the political spectrum," the New York Times notes.

The big picture: Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) said Tuesday they plan to uphold the filibuster, leaving Democrats with few legislative options to try to stop the Supreme Court from issuing a decision that would end the nationwide right to an abortion.

The leak has set up battleground states for a midterm brawl.

Go deeper: What abortion access would look like if Roe v. Wade is overturned

Editor's note: This story has been updated to note that Sen. Joe Manchin voted against similar legislation earlier this year. 

Schumer: Senate to vote on abortion rights next week despite lacking votes

The measure is all but doomed with Republicans likely to block it.

Photo of Chuck Schumer speaking from a podium with his left hand raised in a fist

Chuck Schumer speaks during a press conference to discuss the vote to codify Roe v. Wade on May 5 in Washington, D.C. Photo: Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images

A leaked draft Supreme Court opinion showing the justices are poised to overturn Roe v. Wade has injected new urgency into midterm races across the country. 

Why it matters: Removing federal protection for abortion rights is likely to jumpstart voters of both parties, and bring heightened scrutiny to some previously sleepy races.

State of play: Purple states, especially those currently with divided control between their governor's mansion and legislature, now have added attention on their statewide races.

Pennsylvania's governor's race — which had taken a backseat to the battle for its Senate seat — could now decide the fate of abortion rights in the state. Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, long antagonized by a Republican legislature, is term-limited, and his replacement will decide what's next.

In North Carolina, Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's term isn't up until 2024, but he's now trying to avoid a GOP supermajority in the state legislature that could veto his attempts to preserve abortion rights.

"That's where the battles will move to — the state capitals — and where these fundamental freedoms will be won and lost. And it will matter who [the] governors are," Cooper told Axios.

Zoom in: The stakes also got higher for Democrats to try to flip their own gubernatorial races, especially in Georgia, where the party managed to lock down two Senate seats in the 2020 cycle.

The state saw an emotional, polarized battle over a six-week abortion ban in 2019, which has been frozen in federal court pending the Supreme Court decision.

Incumbent Gov. Brian Kemp, the leading Republican candidate, championed Georgia's 2019 anti-abortion law.

On Tuesday, he vowed to continue defending the "strongest pro-life law in the country," but did not go as far as his primary opponent David Perdue, who said he would call a special legislative session to "ban abortion," if elected. 

Presumptive Democratic nominee Stacey Abrams said she is "enraged" and "appalled" by the implications of the leaked decision.

Even in states where big races aren't expected to flip, like Florida's gubernatorial contest, the news energized Democrats in the race — especially coupled with the state's new 15-week abortion ban taking effect July 1.

"This is just Step 1 of this radical-right agenda across our country," Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried said at a well-attended, impromptu rally in Miami. "And if you're not angry today, what are you waiting for?"

"I just wish this weren't happening to America. It's heartbreaking," former governor and U.S. Rep. Charlie Crist told reporters.

Of note: Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis has been silent on Twitter since the leaked ruling was published Monday night. 

The bottom line: Even if Roe is indeed ultimately overturned by the Supreme Court, the true effects of that decision won't be known in some key states until after the midterms.

Axios' Taylor Allen, Emma Hurt, Ben Montgomery, Selene San Felice and Lucille Sherman contributed to this report.

Sign up for Axios Local, now publishing daily newsletters in 16 cities across the U.S., with nine more coming later this year.

Abortion battleground states brace for midterm brawl

"That's where the battles will move to — the state capitals — and where these fundamental freedoms will be won and lost."

Illustrations of ballots in an hour glass, with a small amount of red ones in the bottom and many more blue ones above

Republican members of the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday sent a letter to the Justice Department requesting an investigation into the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: The request comes as Republicans are making the leak and its impact on judicial norms the focus of their response, in contrast with Democrats who have largely seized on the contents of the ruling.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said during a news conference Tuesday afternoon that the leak, not the opinion, is "the story for today."

What they're saying: The members, in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland obtained by Axios, said the leak "represents one of the most fundamental and troubling breaches of Supreme Court 'confidentiality and secrecy' in its history."

The members asked the DOJ for any documents or communications regarding a probe into the leak and "a description of all potential laws violated."

They also requested "the number of open investigations into any threats made against members of the Supreme Court," and information on the steps they are taking to "prevent violence" and pursue the leaker.

Finally, they said they want a briefing from DOJ officials on the matter by May 10.

The other side: A spokesperson for Democrats on the panel told Axios it is "telling" that Republicans have focused on the leak rather than the ruling, arguing their denunciations are "feigned outrage."

"Republicans are desperate to talk about anything other than the fact that, if finalized, this opinion would represent the culmination of the Republican Party’s sustained assault on the right to abortion," the spokesperson said.

A Department of Justice spokesperson declined to comment on the letter.

The backdrop: Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has already said he plans to have the Marshal of the Court investigate the leak.

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment from a spokesperson for Democrats on the House Oversight Committee.

Scoop: House GOP panel seeks DOJ probe into Supreme Court leak

Republicans on the House Oversight Committee sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call

Supreme Court

Axios Future

From housing to child care to energy, the U.S. is beset by rising costs for the goods and services needed most — and part of the reason is there isn’t enough to go around.

Why it matters: Economists and other experts worry that subsidizing those costs could make things worse. They argue a better, fairer and more abundant future is one where policy focuses on increasing supply, not merely socializing demand.

Driving the news: President Biden's top domestic priority — the $1.75 trillion Build Back Better plan — hit another roadblock on Thursday, as it became clear the legislation was stalled in the Senate and wouldn't pass before the end of the year.

A key obstacle is Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who has balked at the bill's price tag, among other complaints.

Yes, but: To some experts, however, the bill is emblematic of deeper problems in policymaking, and instead of reducing the rising costs of essential services like child care — as the Biden administration has claimed — it could actually make them worse.

The case for creating more of everything

Instead of a politics of subsidies, the future needs a politics of abundance

Sections

Axios Local

Axios gets you smarter, faster with news & information that matters.

About

Subscribe

Policymaking

The big picture

The case for creating more of everything

First look: Yellen, Raimondo lobby business for Biden

Biden's latest executive order: Buy American

Romney on impeachment: "It's pretty clear that the effort is constitutional."

The policies that could help fix policing

Congress' partisan divide on paid family leave

All Policymaking stories