Nov 3, 2023
House Demands IRS Cuts For $14.5 Billion Israel War Funding
The bill had no funding for Ukraine, in addition to having a major cut in the IRS funding that reins in billionaire tax-dodgers.
- 19 minutes
The House of Representatives
has passed a bill allocating $14.3 billion
in military aid funding for Israel.
However, the bill does not include
funding for Ukraine.
In fact, it falls short of the $106
billion that Biden had requested
[00:00:18]
in his military funding proposal.
That included a whole host of
other things, including just $100 million
in humanitarian aid to Palestine,
efforts to bolster our southern border.
And there were some other elements
which we'll get to in just a moment.
[00:00:34]
But first, let's talk about the bill
itself that passed and what the Biden
administration is now threatening to do.
So new speaker Mike Johnson,
a theocrat, if you will.
Package required
that the emergency aid be offset with cuts
in government spending elsewhere.
[00:00:51]
That tack established the new House
GOP's conservative leadership,
but it also turned what would
typically be a bipartisan vote into one
dividing Democrats and Republicans.
So there were many issues
that Democrats had with this legislation.
[00:01:09]
Ultimately, it passed because Republicans
control the House,
and there were enough Democrats to support
the bill that it did, in fact, pass.
We don't know if it's going
to pass in the Senate.
We're going to wait and see.
But Democrats had an issue with the fact
that it didn't
include funding for Ukraine.
And more importantly,
the GOP in the House was not kidding.
[00:01:28]
They plan on cutting funding that was
allocated for the IRS to ensure that they
were auditing millionaire tax dodgers,
but that would actually make this bill far
more expensive, because the whole point of
bolstering the IRS with that money was to
[00:01:45]
ensure that we're collecting the revenue
that the federal government is justified
in collecting from these tax dodgers.
So with that said, the nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office says that by
cutting the 14.3 billion from the IRS
in order to fund 14.3 billion toward
[00:02:04]
military aid to Israel would mean that the
outcome would actually cost $26 billion,
since the money for the IRS was supposed
to bring in about $12.5 billion.
So this is actually going to amount
to additional lost revenue.
[00:02:20]
Now, Biden has said that he would veto
the bill, which was approved 226 to 196,
with 12 Democrats joining most Republicans
on a largely party line vote.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has
warned that the stunningly unserious bill
[00:02:38]
has no chances in the Senate.
But the vote was apparently difficult for
some Democrats, mostly because of
some pressure coming from AIPAC Democrats
who wanted to support Israel
and may have trouble explaining
the tradeoff to constituents,
[00:02:53]
especially as the large AIPAC lobby
and other groups encourage passage.
In all, only two Republicans
oppose the bill.
Now, Democrats are also trying
to get Republicans to comply by arguing
that this Partizan move is only going
to delay military funding to Israel, which
[00:03:13]
seemingly is the only thing Republican
lawmakers care about when it comes to,
you know, a military aid package.
And so if Biden vetoes it
or if it fails in the Senate, then
the House is back to the drawing board.
And that's going to delay the money
to Israel, considering what's currently
[00:03:28]
transpiring in Gaza.
I'm not concerned about that at all.
But I can understand why politicians
who take campaign contributions from AIPAC
would be concerned about that.
Now, just real quick, a refresher on
what the Biden administration had wanted.
[00:03:44]
It was a $106 billion proposal.
They did not want
to pass the provisions piecemeal.
They wanted to pass one omnibus bill.
That is not
what the Republican Party wants to do.
It included $100 million
in humanitarian aid for Gaza,
[00:03:59]
while, of course, also asking for 14.3
billion in military funding for Israel.
It also had money for Ukraine's
defense against Russia, border security
and also efforts to counter China.
So, Brett, I do think that if Democrats
are really going to do
[00:04:17]
what they're threatening to do,
which is vote down this legislation
in the Senate or have Biden veto it,
they are they are right that it's going
to delay the military funding to Israel.
Again, I'm not really
concerned about that.
I think that that money
should have strings attached, considering
[00:04:33]
what's happening in Gaza right now
with the insanely high civilian deaths.
- But what is your take on all of this?
- There's a lot in it, right?
My general take is like,
the Republican Party is back, baby.
It is back in action.
It is a way to kind of appeal to the
evangelicals in the room who need enough
[00:04:51]
Jews to live in Israel for the apocalypse,
and then also at the same time,
they like to say stuff like,
aren't you tired of paying taxes?
But the plans that they put in place
only save money for super rich people,
and not the normie
or the evangelical folks in their group.
[00:05:08]
Like.
And so just to there's a lot in there,
right, for the IRS thing specifically,
that is, it is the literal worst way
to save money because it costs you money.
It is as dumb as saying,
I want to save money.
[00:05:23]
Time is money.
I use time by going to my job.
Okay, what if I just don't go to my job?
I am saving so much time
and so much money and then you get fired
and you don't make any money at all.
Like that's it.
The IRS is the thing
that makes money for the government.
[00:05:41]
They cut the funding to it.
They're just going to lose it.
And they and it exposes the Republicans
for the fiscal conservative sham
that they put out.
And all they want to do
is save rich people money.
They really don't care about the deficit
when it comes
to to large scale funding like this.
[00:05:57]
You're 1,000% right about that, right?
The whole fiscal conservative
nonsense has always been a joke.
I think it's evident in the fact
that Republicans were willing to pass
Trump's tax cuts for the rich,
which amounted to $2 trillion.
The deficit exploded
under Donald Trump's watch.
[00:06:15]
So don't believe them at all when they
claim to be fiscal conservatives.
But I also want to just say, look,
oftentimes we talk about how lawmakers
want to protect their wealthy donors.
Don't forget about the fact that these
guys are pretty wealthy themselves.
[00:06:31]
So not only would it benefit their wealthy
donors, it would benefit the very
lawmakers who are trying to gut the IRS of
the resources that were allocated to the
IRS during the Inflation Reduction Act.
By the way, the Biden administration
already agreed to cutting 20 billion
[00:06:48]
from the 80 billion that was previously
allocated for the IRS, and he agreed
to that in order to make a deal with Kevin
McCarthy to lift the debt ceiling.
And the other aspect of this is this is
like a little bit of Matt Gaetz, like Matt
Gaetz, Matt Gaetz having won some stuff
[00:07:06]
in the speaker debate, this is him.
He was the piecemeal guy.
He's the guy who's like, we should vote
for every bit of funding, one at a time.
That will delay the process for getting
stuff, but they are not doing piecemeal.
You need to know that.
[00:07:22]
And in doing so, they're giving an
out to Democrats when it comes
to getting their name on paper for funding
for Israel, it is intentionally confusing
to the average person.
No, none of us have experienced
something like this before.
The average voter doesn't know
what to do with this.
[00:07:37]
And so a lot of the Democrats who are
involved with it are like the Republicans
think it's a great thing because
they're looking at Democrats and be like,
are you not going to support Israel?
And do you want more money to the IRS,
which everyone hates?
[00:07:52]
So the Democrats are like, I don't
think anyone really understands that.
I don't think you're going to be able
to message that effectively.
I'm going to put out
a lot of messaging like this.
This is an insane thing they're trying,
which slows down getting money to
the people who we are pledged to defend.
[00:08:08]
And it doesn't get to all.
And I think the main stream media gambit
right now, and the main narrative gambit
is that all the stuff that you see
talked about a lot of places when it comes
to the specifics of Israel-Palestine,
they just don't think that's
gotten through to that many people.
So they're trying to get everybody is
trying to get it back to the status quo.
[00:08:26]
And the the gates element of the
Republican Party is trying this new thing
with piecemealing some, some funding for
Israel and taking it away from the IRS.
So I want to move on to why I actually
think voting on the various provisions
[00:08:42]
from Biden's proposal piecemeal.
Is better than doing one
large piece of legislation.
And it's because of this story that was
recently reported by In These Times.
They looked at the legislation and they
caught something that we didn't even catch
[00:09:00]
as we were reading about the bill
or the proposal from Biden.
So they found that basically,
Biden in his proposal has requested
this loophole on arms sales to Israel.
Now, right now, it's unclear
whether Republicans included that in
[00:09:17]
the legislation they passed in the House.
And if they did,
luckily Biden's going to veto it and it's
unlikely going to pass in the Senate.
However, this loophole would effectively
give Israel a check to purchase $3.5
billion in arms in complete secrecy.
[00:09:35]
And I want to be clear,
this is in addition to the $14.3 billion.
Okay, so it's buried in the $106 billion
supplemental National Security
funding request by the white House.
Here are the exact details.
As part of 3.5 billion earmarked
for foreign military financing funding
[00:09:55]
for Israel, the executive branch sought
permission to unilaterally blanket approve
the future sale of military equipment
and weapons like ballistic missiles
and artillery ammunition to Israel
without notifying Congress.
[00:10:11]
So this provision, if it gets passed,
would essentially bypass
our system of checks and balances.
Israel would be able to do this
without Congress even knowing about
what kind of weapons they're buying
and what they're using the money for
when they're using the money.
So this means that the Israeli government
would be able to purchase up to $3.5
[00:10:30]
billion in military articles and services
in complete secrecy.
The House included the waiver language in
a bill that splits off Israeli military.
They did include it. My bad.
So they did include this in the Israeli
military aid from the rest of the package.
[00:10:46]
So I wanted to look into
the actual language and find that part
of the provision, and I failed to do that,
but guess it is included.
So I want to now go to a video featuring
that State Department official who
actually ended up quitting recently over
the white House rushing weapons to Israel.
[00:11:04]
His name is Josh Paul,
and he sheds more light on what this kind
of provision really means.
Let's watch.
The language in the supplemental request
that the Biden administration set up
sent up would remove the requirement
to notify Congress of any arms sales
[00:11:22]
conducted under that funding.
Typically, there is a process
where for any major defense sale, Congress
is notified of it, and there's actually
a process prior to the formal notification
where Congress gets to ask questions,
poke, prod, delay, and then, if it wishes
to oppose the sale, can raise a joint
resolution of disapproval on the floor.
[00:11:40]
What this proposal would do is essentially
destroy all of that, remove all of that,
remove that congressional oversight,
remove
that congressional ability to object.
It is unprecedented.
I've never seen anything like it,
and I cannot imagine
that the committees of jurisdiction
are viewing it very favorably, because it
[00:11:56]
is just such a damaging approach
that also sets a horrible precedent
for other countries with whom future
administrations may decide
they don't want Congress to be involved.
He also told in These Times
that frankly, it's an insult
to congressional oversight prerogatives.
[00:12:12]
It's also redundant with existing laws.
Paul says the white House can unilaterally
approve foreign military sales
in emergency situations,
but must notify Congress
and provide a detailed justification.
The Israel waiver does not require
any communication with Congress.
[00:12:30]
And Paul says that.
So this doesn't actually reduce the time.
It just reduces the oversight.
It removes that mechanism
for Congress to actually understand
what is being transferred
at the time it is being transferred.
And so, look, you would assume
that members of Congress
[00:12:47]
who vote in favor of this know about it,
and they're okay with it.
But I'm not so sure about that.
And if they are okay with it,
the real question is then why?
Why are you working for government if you
don't believe in our system of government,
[00:13:02]
which is supposed to include
a system of checks and balances?
- Go ahead.
- Brett.
I know because you want a paycheck and you
like being in power, like it really is.
There's two reasons to vote.
The one of those reasons
is you can claim ignorance.
You didn't know.
[00:13:19]
It's not just the white House saying,
let me get past Congress.
It's Congress. People being like, make it.
So when someone asks me
and this is for anything, not Israel,
if it gets applied in the future,
it's like I just didn't know.
And there's a certain aspect of this story
that's like, this is just like a new
[00:13:35]
headline about things that happen anyway,
because like, everybody, please
tell me the last time you heard about
a large arms sale and it really affected
and it really broke through the news
when we didn't have waivers for it.
- I mean, we don't.
- We cover it.
[00:13:52]
But that's what I'm saying is like,
for most people and most like oversight
committees, like we have Josh watching
oversight committees all the time,
like most of it, is boring.
And if you're going to find an
exciting thing out of it,
you need to subscribe to YouTube.com.
Slash investigates reports.
We'll get it to you.
[00:14:07]
But the fact is,
like most people don't see any of that.
It's fine.
No one thinks that it's
a transparent process anyway.
Look, I think it's a big problem
that even before this proposal,
there's a lack of transparency.
[00:14:23]
I mean, that's something
that we should be working to fix.
And just because we live in a country
full of terrible wannabe journalists
who don't actually want to do journalism,
doesn't mean that there should be there
shouldn't be transparency in the process.
Right?
We should know, like, forget Congress.
[00:14:40]
I mean, the American people should also be
fully aware of where this money is going,
how it's being spent, especially
when we're talking about American arms
that are being sold to other countries, or
money that we're giving to other countries
to buy American arms and use it however
they please, as Israel's been doing.
[00:14:59]
Right.
There are Americans
who have a huge moral issue with that.
I'm included in that group of people.
So I have a huge problem with this.
And look, the the fact that the Biden
administration is trying to add an
extra layer of, you know, secrecy,
to make this process even more opaque
[00:15:18]
than it already is, is a huge problem.
And I'm not going
to pretend like it's not.
Right for me.
It's like, this is one of those stories
that is in the news right now
because of the Israel-Palestine thing.
And what you kind of mentioned is it
could be one of the people, the guy
[00:15:34]
that you mentioned is this could expand
to anything at all in the future and,
and make it further opaque in a pentagon
with which fails its audits every year.
Exactly.
That's that's the scary,
scary thing about it to me.
[00:15:51]
And one other thing I'll mention is.
Separately, the House passed
a resolution now on its face.
It just appears as a resolution condemning
anyone who anyone in the United States
who shows any support for Hamas,
which, look, I despise Hamas and I despise
[00:16:11]
anyone who has provided, provided cover
or justified what Hamas has done.
Slaughtering civilians is never okay
and it never leads to any success.
I mean, look at what's happening
to innocent Palestinians right now
in retaliation for what Hamas did.
But anyway, putting that aside, I don't
think that the government should try to
[00:16:30]
put out these, like, statements as a form
of like punishment against people who have
political views, who differ from them.
So that's point number one.
But aside from that, what's being
kind of hidden in that resolution
is a provision that states
that the United States will try to stop
[00:16:48]
Iran at with any means necessary
if they are developing a nuclear weapon.
And it appears that they are
setting the stage
for justification for a war with Iran.
And that scares me.
And it's just so funny how few outlets
have really reported on that provision
[00:17:06]
in the resolution, because, you know,
the thing about Hamas is non-binding,
like the government cannot punish you
for your political speech.
But read a little further and then you'll
see the provision in regard to going
after Iran with any means necessary
if they're developing a nuclear weapon.
[00:17:22]
Any thoughts on that for that?
It's like those are
the hardest ones to interpret.
Right. Because is that a justification?
And historically, these are hard ones to
interpret because you don't want to say,
you know what, Iran go go nuclear, bro.
[00:17:37]
You don't want to say that, and you don't
want to give any indication afterwards.
So there's certain things that happen,
I think, in the in the very horrifying and
terrible, maybe the world will explode.
Discussions about international relations,
different posturings to other nations
[00:17:52]
that are trying to exert influence
in a region.
And you want to protect your own where
like, you know, afterwards, of course,
Biden's going to go give me a hug
after the attack on the seventh,
but over time, you have to.
It's the developments after that that are
the most in in interesting and terrifying
[00:18:11]
and maybe edifying and give you a sense
of relief based on how they develop.
But they're going to say stuff like, yeah,
at any means, by any means necessary,
because otherwise Iran or replace that
with any other global power will
just go take what the defense gives them.
[00:18:26]
Yeah, I mean, we'll see if a resolution
will serve as a deterrent for Iran.
I'm terrified about what the future holds.
I'm I'm terrified about an
expansion of this war.
The leader of Hezbollah gave his first
speech in this entire conflict and stopped
[00:18:43]
short of committing to expanding the war.
So I guess that's good news for now.
But if things continue
the way that they are, I'm worried that.
The pressure from Arab citizens
in these Arab countries
is they're going to cave to it.
[00:18:59]
So I hope that it doesn't get
to that point,
but things look pretty dire at the moment.
Thanks for watching.
If you become a member,
you get to watch all this ad free.
Except for, of course, this ad still.
Hit the join button below.
Now Playing (Clips)
Episode
Podcast
The Young Turks: November 3, 2023
- 19 minutes
- 7 minutes
- 18 minutes
- 10 minutes
- 6 minutes
- 2 minutes
- 6 minutes
- 10 minutes
- 8 minutes