ibw electrical worker who climbs up the power lines in the middle of a storm, to keep the lights on during a storm. he calls himself 100% union guy. his job is dangerous. as he said, i quote, i don't want my kids growing up in a world where the threat of climate change hangs over their head, end of quote. folks, we all have that obligation, that obligation to our children and our grandchildren. the bipartisan infrastructure bill is also the most significant investment since we built the interstate highway system and won the space race decades ago. this is about rebuilding the arteries of our economy. across the country now there are 45,000 bridges and 173 miles, thousand miles of roads that are in poor condition. some of the bridges you don't even take a chance of going across.

they're shut down. they can't be built back to the same standard because the weather will not get a lot better. we have to keep it from getting a heck of a lot worse. we have to build back better and stronger. i want you to have to hold your breath as you run across a bridge or dangerous intersection in your hometown. we'll put hard-working americans on the job to bring track struck up to speed, good union jobs, with prevailing wages jobs you can raise a family on, as my dad would say, a little breathing room. jobs that can't be outsourced. jobs replacing lead water pipes so the families can drink clean water, improving the health of our children and putting plumbers and pipe fighters to work. jobs laying thousands of miles of transmission lines to build a modern energy grid. making high-speed internet affordable and everywhere available in rural and urban america, including 35% of rural

america that goes without it right now. this pandemic has made clear the need for affordable and available high-speed internet. the idea of a parent having to put their kids in the car for virtual learning, drive and sit in a mcdonald's parking lot so the child can access the internet when school is taught virtually, not only unnecessary it is wrong, it is wrong. as i said before these plans are fiscally responsible. they are fully paid for. they don't add a single penny to the deficit. they don't raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 a year. in fact they reduce the deficit. here's how. i don't want to punish anyone's success. i'm a capitalist. i want everyone to be able to be in they want to be a millionaire a billionaire, to be able to seek their goal but all i'm asking is, pay your fair share.

pay your fair share. pay your fair share. and right now, many of them are paying virtually nothing. last year the 55 most profitable corporations in america, 55 of them, paid zero, zero in federal income tax on about $40 billion in profit. if they report big profits to the shareholders, they should be paying taxes. it is that simple. why the build back better framework will have a 15% minimum on the largest corporations, a minimum tax of 15%. the top 1% of the wealthiest americans evade, it is estimated by the experts $160 billion a year in federal taxes. that's wrong. we're going to change that. i want to emphasize what i said from the beginning, under my plans if you earn less than

$400,000 you won't pay a single penny more in federal taxes, period. in fact these bills continue cutting taxes for middle class, for child care, health care, so much more. let me close with this. for much too long working would people of this nation and the middle class of this country have been dealt out of the american deem. it is time to deal them back in. i ran for president saying it was time to reduce the burden on the middle class, to rebuild the backbone of this nation, working people and the middle class. i doesn't have been any clearer from the very moment i announced my candidacy. that's why i wrote these bills in the first place and took them to the people. i campaigned on them. and the american people spoke. this agenda, the agenda that's in these bills is what 81 million americans voted for.

more people voted than anytime in american history. that is what they voted for. their voices deserve to be heard, not denied, or worse ignored. here is what i know, we make these investments there will be no stopping the american people or america. we will own the future. i have long said it has never been a good bet to bet against the american people. i have said that to foreign leaders as well as everybody here in this country. which means it is always a good bet to bet on the american people. just give them half a chance. that's what we're doing. that's what these plans do. they're about betting on america. about believing in america. about believing in the capacity of the american people. look at history of the journey of this nation, what becomes crystal clear is this, say it again, given half a chance the american people have never ever, ever, ever let the country down.

so let's get this done. god bless you you will and may god protect our troops and see you in italy and in scotland, thank you. [shouting questions] neil: all right. you've been hearing from the president of the united states outlining what he says is an aggressive framework. termed it a framework on a deal that can include about 1.75 to $1.85 trillion in spending down substantially from the 3 1/2 trillion dollar figure originally raised. a lot of it paid for by the rich. now the president kept pounding on the theme that even though he is not anti-capitalist, has any problem with wealth and success, he thinks it is a long time that those of the money start sharing the loot, they pay their fair share. i did notice here by bringing the top rate up to 45%, adding

another 3.8% medicare surtax, that has been expanded under this proposal, you could argue that fair share is now half their income. that is at the federal level, among the highest earners in this country. there is no separate billionaire's tax in this, as things stand right now. devil in the details making sure some of these other plans to pay for it including you know, surtaxes on, you know, corporate buybacks, 1% tax on that. while there is no tax again on billionaires per se on unrealized capital gains we're told separately progressives have not given up on that. some of the other issues that are at stake here are to pay for that are items part of this, including $555 billion to fight climate change. another 400 billion to universal pre-kindergarten for two to

four-year-olds. $165 to reduce health care premiums. $150 billion to reduce the waiting list for home care for seniors, even though it is pretty vague how you reduce the waiting list. how you get the federal government involved in doing that in state has generally mandate this sort of thing. there is another $150 billion set aside for more of a fordable housing units. the issue comes to paying for it. the president made a point 17 top economists, brokerage houses saying this is paid for. i don't know how that is possible because they didn't even have the framework of the framework of the package that the president was alluding to today i don't know where he came up with the notion it is all paid for, hunky-dory, will not add a penny to the deficit. argue the up-front costs will eclipse revenues coming in. in near terms you will have deficits to contend with here. the president saying that will not be the case. many republicans disagree.

not a single republican is for this. even among democrats there is divide, moderates say the overall figure is just about right, but progressives who fear the president hasn't gone big or bold enough. bernie sanders was cornered in washington earlier today. he met with the president yesterday. obviously not satisfied with some final figures here but he didn't say out right he would be opposed to this. krysten sinema meanwhile has been holding out on the whole income rate thing that was a big issue for her but it turns out they are raising rates in a different way, certainly on the upper income and corporate minimum tax of 15%. there is a a lot to get into he. a lot of details yet to be ironed out. the president wants the framework ironed out before he hops off to rome and later scotland. you always hear the devil is in the details. man, oh, man, there are a lot of devils and details. chad pergram with the latest

from capitol hill chad. reporter: neil, say they have a framework but there is still no firm legislative text. president biden went into the meeting on capitol hill he told democrats he needed their votes. a framework is not a bill and it is not an agreement. >> i wish i can say yes but the, there is a great deal of uncertainty within the caucus as to what's contained. i will tell you there is a will to do it and i think a positive feeling, 48 senators. we've been waiting to satisfy two senators. hopefully we can do that soon. reporter: liberals demand specifics on climate change and they are pushing back. >> we are doing in this bill what has not been done in many, many decades in protect the needs of working families, children, our environment, climate change. it is really quite consequential but i think it needs to be improved on and i will do my best. reporter: while the president talked to lawmakers, aides wheeled a bin of pumpkins

through a hallway outside of the meeting there is a joke on capitol hill if democrats don't vote on the infrastructure bill today it turns into a pumpkin. house speaker nancy pelosi told democrats the president want ad vote today on the infrastructure bill. liberals are sticklers for legislative text before they vote on the infrastructure package. >> what if the president says, congresswoman, i need your vote before i go to scott land? we need some sort of agreement on this? can that be enough? what about the power of the presidency, the bully pulpit? >> we can have the agreement, and send the president with an agreement, next week vote -- reporter: democrats hope the general framework would unlock votes on the infrastructure bill. president biden came to capitol hill a month ago hoping for a deal. he left today again without nailing down an agreement among members of his own party. neil? neil: chad, always saying from the very beginning the final figures might not be the real

final figures even if they end up being $1.85 trillion the president referred to. for example, a lot of the way they get there by limiting the universal pre-k issue from what was at the very, very beginning, 10 years to six years. the child care subsidies from eight years to six years. but what congress in its right mind would take any of that away when those expirations approach? isn't that the argument that you know some of the moderates have had that the smaller price tag is kind of with smoke and mirrors here? >> you could potentially see the things going away because, let's say republicans win the house of representatives next year, even though those things might be popular, they may not be willing to re-up those. we don't know where the senate would be. 50-50 senate, republican control. you have to get 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. so very unclear where that would go. it's a little bit after misnomer every time they turn on a

program that it stays on ad infin night up. that is not always true but it comes down to judging whether or not it is popular and how expensive it is down the road and sometimes i always say it's about the math, it's about the math, it's about the math. if they don't have the votes to re-up the programs in a year or two it goes away. we had programs, crises around christmas and new year's where they're in session at the end of the year because they're fighting to keep the programs on. it is not a done deal necessarily. neil: let me ask you about the framework argument, whether both sides get together albeit holding their noses for different reasons. it is very, very clear the president is saying right now, i need you. in meetings he was apparently saying i don't think it is hyperbole, house and senate majorities, my presidency will be determined by what happens in the next week. that is as unsubtle a sign as you can get, that he needs them

all on board and he is the modern-day gipper, make it happen. what do you think of that? >> that was the precise question i posed to ilhan omar this morning. i said this is a meeting with the president. he comes with all the trappings of the presidency and you know, that is the bully pulpit. it carries a lot of weight and still you had those progressives like omar and alexandria ocasio-cortez appeared to soften her stance, we can't do it as she put it, hokeypokey, one foot in, one foot out, we never know where anybody stands. she wants to be specific. she said it doesn't have to be legislative text. he is not fighting against republicans. he is fighting against members of his own party, the left. this is what bernie sanders was saying. so apparently that meeting and certainly the meeting back in september, he has not pulled them across the finish line. what we're seeing today is a lot of theater, a lot of stage craft, a lot of charade. we don't know necessarily that

the house will vote tonight. steny hoyer, house majority leader said he would hope there will be a vote tonight. he said that late in september. there was this big press conference with nancy pelosi late in september, brought over chuck schumer, senate majority leader, treasury secretary janet yellen, this was on the 23rd of the september, they had a framework for the revenue part on this agreement. here we are in late october, that is still not resolved. neil: nancy pelosi appears to be wanting to force the issue. what do you make of that? >> well, you know, here's the issue when it comes to transportation, the surface transportation program that is going to expire at the end of the month and the infrastructure bill. keep in mind that the senate approved the infrastructure bill in early august. so those programs covered by the surface transportation program, if the house today or by the 31st passing the infrastructure bill the house and senate are in alignment, those programs don't need to be

turned back on. otherwise they have to do a separate bill. that is why nancy pelosi is trying to push the infrastructure bill today. it comes down to the math. nancy pelosi will tell you that she does not go to the floor and lose. so if they put it on the floor, you probably have a reduction in that 45 to 50 progressive democrats who said they were going to vote no until they get a concrete agreement here. that number probably goes down. you remember have a universe of 10 to 15, maybe a few more republicans who will vote. you do not get style points. does she pass this bill with just two or three members to spare? democrats and republicans, it's a coalition come together to pass this as pelosi says. she does not go to the floor and lose. if they put it on the floor, chances are the infrastructure bill is going to pass but they don't even have, as i say, legislative text here. it is very unlikely that either today, tomorrow, this weekend, that they would vote on the social spending plan because again there is not this universal agreement just yet. neil: by the way, that is what it is going by, social spending

and climate package, right? no longer human infrastructure. it's that? >> well you know we kind of got that name, human infrastructure when they were trying to do the infrastructure bill and getting those negotiations back in may and june. it probably helps the president on the international stage going to scotland, this climate summit to put it in that framework there, again there is a lot of climate policy in this. $550 billion to try to reduce the carbon emissions back to the 2005 levels by 2030. 50% i should say. neil: all right. got it. chad, thank you very much. chad pergram following this. go to wyoming republican senator cynthia lummis on all of this. senator, the president argued this will not add a penny to the deficit. that economists have been praising this but i just wondered this framework, they don't know the details, how could anyone crunch the numbers say it will not add to the deficit when appears at first

blush it certainly will add to the deficit but what do you think of the math here, just the math? >> well there are a lot of accounting gimmicks to get them to be able to say this isn't going to cost anything and their accounting gimmicks going to be deployed in this. there just have to be in order to make the math work. from what we've seen it looks like there are at least half a trillion dollars worth of accounting gimmicks. that is almost a third of this whole bill is comprised of gimmicks. in addition look at the context in which this bill is being considered. the, there was a $1.9 trillion bill that passed earlier this year to goose the economy. we have find out today that it is only 2% gdp growth as a result of all the money that is sloshing around in the economy.

we know that they have tried to by cutting the keystone xl pipeline and granting germany and russia the right to do nord stream 2, that they're putting europe on dirty natural gas and they're cutting our ability to be energy independent and produce american climate-friendly energy. what they're talking about, their rhetoric and what is really happening to their policies does not match at all, neil. neil: so, senator, you know, you mentioned, and a lot of your republican colleagues, you too h too, inflationary, republicans back that up. democrats counter we were spending like crazy during the trump years around no inflation happened. we were going $9 trillion into debt. no inflation happened. who is to say that you know

republicans are right that this will trigger a new wave of inflation? what do you say to that? >> well, what i say is people no inflation when they see it and in the everyday world right now inflation is eating into people's -- neil: no doubt, senator. what they say it is not that spending. it is going from park to boom in the economy and demand for goods and services coming from that post-pandemic funk and that is what is doing this, not any of this spending? >> not any of the new spending they're contemplating is that what they're saying? neil: well they say the spending with see prior $2 trillion, that is not doing it. obviously you don't agree with that. >> no i don't agree with that at all. neil: you say it is going to be compounded by this. they say if that were the case spending went on in the trump years we would be seeing a boom

in inflation and we didn't see, that from those years. >> oh, you know i just think that is not a recognition of what is actually happening on the ground. i think that is a complete misnomer. try to convince the american people there is not a connection. you know there wasn't inflation during the trump presidency. inflation just started and the fed was saying, oh it is transitory and now it is even the fed saying well it is not transitory. it is going to be with us for a while. so the efforts that are being undertaken by the democrats in this bill do nothing to recognize or address the fact that inflation is no longer transitory. it is with us. it is the hidden tax on everyday working people. and it is not so hidden anymore because it is in every egg. it is in every gallon of milk. it is in every new car.

it's in every new house or used home. everything's going up. when you see that, and you hear they're all, they're going to be new taxes in this bill applicable to small businesses by the way, neil. how can that not cause havoc in our economy that is already suffering? neil: there is no doubt it is no longer transitory, you're quite right about that, senator cynthia lummis, very good catching up with you. thank you for your patience, middle of breaking news as well. wyoming republican senator cynthia lummis. phil wegmann, "realclearpolitics" white house reporter, asks good questions, very good writer. looks at big picture. the big picture for me, phil, we crunch the numbers, there are a lot of revenue raisers here, lifting the top rate to 45%. if you include the medicare surtax, now we're hovering just the federal level at about 50%.

i know the president once again admonished the rich you have to pay your fair share. are we getting closer to that now? >> well, first it is great to see you again, neil. second i think that the most interesting moment in the president's speech a second ago had a little bit of an echo of elizabeth warren when he said i'm a capitalist, i don't begrudge anyone of their success but i want the wealthy to pay their fair share. repeated the words, fair share, three different times. neil: right. >> when you look at the details you outlined there, we're talking about 50% of in terms of a tax rate. that will be difficult to swallow. it also is a push comes at a moment when we're looking at 2% gdp growth. this is, this is a framework certainly. i know the white house is trying to create a aura of inevitability. certainly if you look at the white house chief of staff's tweets it seems like they believe this is going to happen. but that could be a bitter pill to swallow and there are still a

lot of democrats who are angry at one another. neil: do you think it does come to pass though? the president really is strong-arming as best he can here, we have our differences. i know in a separate meeting he had talked about angry progressives, that there are provisions dropping now that we want still take up later. has that assuaged them? because the ones i think who appear really, really ticked off are the progressives. bernie sanders was coy on this. he didn't seem like a happy camper. but do they sort of hold their nose and end up supporting this to do it for the gipper, to make it happen, to get a victory, then to pursue other bigger things down the road? >> president biden certainly hopes so. i mean he has pushed all of his chips in on this, on this bill. i mean we saw in that meeting he didn't just say that the fate of his presidency could be at risk. he also told house democrats that their congressional majorities could be at risk, a

warning that really is punctuated by what we're seeing going on in virginia right now. he is saying that do this, you need to do this for your own self-interest as well as for my sake. but the thing is, this has a lot of echoes what we saw from just four weeks ago. progressives called his bluff, called nancy pelosi's bluff. they got something for it which was that agreement to get both the infrastructure package and the soft infrastructure package welded together. so they're still holding their cards and while there is a lot of theatric with the president going off to rome, we still don't know what the progressives end up doing. i think the white house argument, the closest we have got to a direct response to some of the progressive worries about this was from jen psaki this week when she was asked, what do you say to those democrats who supported the president even though they wanted him to be more progressives?

her message was, do you want to be part of something or want to be part of nothing? this is the biden's administration time for choosing, saying go for half the loaf because the full loaf is not is not possible because we don't agree amongst ourselves. neil: yeah. even moderates were warning, don't hang your hat on getting this passed and that will save your presidency. democrats, they argue quite the opposite, if this goes in as planned it will save the party's chances. we just don't know. very quickly on inflation, i found a different pivoting on the sort of the white house, it is good news, welcoming the fact americans are paying more for goods, balance sheets are improved. they save more money. optimistic, playing it that way, making lemonade out of lemons situation. that a little bit of inflation is good. obviously we're getting to your point a lot more than just a little, phil, i get it. they're playing it another way. wow prices are going up. mcdonald's and all the companies are reporting that people are happily paying that

in this environment. people are plunging down more dough because they're making more dough and it's a good story not being told, what do you think of that? >> you nailed their response perfectly which they say that the current inflation is transitory. their argument this is not from the spending that came earlier in the american rescue plan. their argument is inflation is not going to be hastened by any of the spending in the current proposals. instead it is the result of pent-up demand. well that seems to be a pretty big risk of an argument. certainly you know you can explain away some inflation in the moment and you can say to the american public, you know, it is more expensive for a gallon of milk and gallon of gas because we're roaring back. but if that doesn't prove to be true, that creates all sorts of problems for next year when people look around say, prices haven't come down. neil: very well-put. phil wegmann. great catching up with you.

i appreciate you stopping by. phil wegmann, real clear politics fame. markets are jumping i call it the wegmann effect. we have the nasdaq, i think technically in record territory, advance, so the market seems to like what it is -- maybe some closure one way or the other this won't be such an unknown variable. these two experts all tell me, markets hate uncertainty. go to danielle dimartino booth, quill intelligence, former fed advisor, luke lloyd investment strategist. both of you welcome, guys. danielle, first to you on the inflationary argument the administration is making acknowledging the price elephant in the room, it is not such a bad room, or a sinister element but this is good. people are happy to pay more. so many american companies telegraphing little trouble with

sales or earnings as a result. so what is the big worry? what do you think of that strategy? >> i think that it is misguided at best. that is being polite. you know, the consumer price index is rising at a 5.4% rate year-over-year. half of september's increase in inflation came from food and rent. these are the most critical aspects of any household's budget. i'm not sure where they're getting their data because there was a gdp print out this morning, growth in the united states in the three months ending september fell to 2% rate from a 6.7% rate within the report. we found out that goods spending had declined by 9.2%, and non-durable goods spending collapsed by 26.2%. the saving grace was that services spending did increase by almost 8% but that to me reflects america reopening. but when you're seeing spending

on goods and non-durables collapse as they are right now in real time the message is loud and clear that high inflation persistently high inflation, is having a very negative impact on working american families. neil: you know, luke, a lot of people are going to be getting a lot of money from this, directly, in terms of credits or benefits. and that is stimulative. you could argue that the government is going to keep stimulating the economy. to danielle's point though, this is kind of economy that will not need any of that. it will get it anyway. what's the fallout? >> they are also talking about how we'll not pay anything through taxes and you know, there will definitely be tax hikes that will pay for all of this. there has to be. talking about the rich paying their fair share i think we need to ask the question, when is the government starting receiving their fair share? they started receiving their fair share decades ago in taxes

spending hard money. we're throwing word trillions around like a kid spending money on ice cream. if you spent one million dollars every single day since jesus christ walked this earth you would have $300 billion left to spend. imagine that kind of money, neil. neil: why does the market, why does the market seem okay with it, luke? what is going on there? >> yep. so right now the stock market really only cares about earnings. neil: i guess you're right. >> they're short term minded in the market. earnings have been great so far but if you dig deeper the guidance for 2022 isn't so pretty. margins have peaked. typically multiples compress on the stock market. combine that with rising interest rate environment we're in with 2022. combine that with supply chain issues, inflation, tax increases, we're looking at a very rough year for 2022. i'm not saying tell all of your stocks. be cautiously optimistic and understand where you're money is

located. neil: i'm jumping on you with other breaking news. we're waiting for bernie sanders with other developments on progressives that could be hold quotes on this. they are not pleased with the final package. but there is no final package or a framework. they do like the direction. moderates are saying the same thing. want to hold the line right where it is. it doesn't sound like a done deal or framework otherwise to us but we're on top of it. will be one of trust and transparency. as a fiduciary, i promise to put your interests first, always. charles schwab is proud to support the independent financial advisors who are passionately dedicated to helping people achieve their financial goals. visit findyourindependentadvisor.com

(sfx: video game vehicle noises, horns beeping,) (engines revving, cars hitting one another.) (sfx: continued vehicle calamity.) just think, he'll be driving for real soon. every new chevy equinox comes standard with chevy safety assist, including automatic emergency braking. find new peace of mind. find new roads. chevrolet.

there's a different way to treat hiv. it's once-monthly injectable cabenuva. cabenuva is the only once-a-month, complete hiv treatment for adults who are undetectable. cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two injections, given by a healthcare provider once a month. hiv pills aren't on my mind. i love being able to pick up and go. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions post-injection reactions, liver problems,...and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva,

attend all treatment appointments. with once-a-month cabenuva, i'm good to go. ask your doctor about once-monthly cabenuva. ♪. neil: all right. what kind of impact will this framework if it ever gets passed certainly for the midterm elections? a good test could come as soon as next week when new jersey and virginia voters take to the polls to decide the status of their next governor. let's get the read from sarah westwood, "the washington examiner," white house correspondent. obviously it has been closely scrutinized in virginia where the race is as tight as a tick but it is probably having an impact, although spending and

other issues in new jersey the race tightened depending on a poll as you look, what was a 26 to 30 point gap in favor of phil murphy has been sliced by 2/3. what do you think of the impact getting this framework thing done by next week, if that is even possible? what do you think of that? >> i don't know that it is possible to do before tuesday. it obviously in both states early voting is underway in such a way that would undercut the impact of a bill if it was passed. but i think the broader implications of what democrats are doing here, it is really how these democrats have chosen to run their races. mcauliffe in particular but also governor phil murphy is doing this, run against trump when trump is no longer on the ballot, an attempt to sort of nationalize these races and paint republicans as too radical to be trusted with governing. that doesn't seem to be resonating with voters. in new jersey i don't think that anyone is really expecting phil

murphy to lose his re-election bid. that would certainly be an upset but there could be data points we see from the results that could worry democrats. for example, does phil murphy retain a double-digit advantage that biden had when he won the state by 16 points just last year? how do independents end up breaking? do they break as heavily for democrats as they did in 2020? what does turnout look like for democrats? it will be obviously lower than 2020 but how does it compare to other off years? how many of the 1.1 more million, 1.1 million more registered democrats in the state than republicans, does that advantage continue to deliver them huge margins? i think there are signs here that democrats could see some really troubling results on tuesday in new jersey and in particular in virginia. that's obvious. neil: you know what is sort of fascinating about this living in new jersey, interesting odd little quirk, even though the bluest of blue states, democratic governors generally

don't get reelected. republican governors do. the last democrat governor reelected after serving one term was brent ban burn in 1977. remarkable. go to christie todd whitman or chris christie, there is a long history of republicans getting reelected in the state. actually that is an uphill battle. i don't know why that is the case here, maybe like massachusetts, new jersey, we'll entertain, keeping republicans in office, maybe not all the time with democrats running the whole show. that aside, do you think inflation issue is actually trumping the mention of trump? >> absolutely. i think that is one of the number one reasons why you are seeing these two republicans running so close to their democratic opponents in two very blue states right now. i think it's because both republican jack ciattarelli and glenn youngkin in virginia focus

on kitchen table issues on the economy. both of them have been really disciplined when it comes to staying on message and democrats are really ignoring those issues to focus on making this broader argument that republicans are not trusted to govern. that is not resonating that will be a sign for democrats heading into the midterms. neil: sarah westwood, thank you so much for catching up with you. to put it in perspective, amazing to me too, the last three big governors reelected without trouble, chris christie, christie todd whitman, thomas kaine. all the democrat names, john corzine, jim mcgreevy, jim fluor yo, they didn't get a second shot of the brass ring be in the blue of blue garden state of new jersey. we'll have more of a this ♪

(rhythmic electro rock music) (crowd cheering) - bito, bito, bito, bito! - [announcer] bito, the first u.s. bitcoin-linked etf. it's another day. (crowd cheering) and anything could happen. it could be the day you welcome 1,200 guests and all their devices. or it could be the day there's a cyberthreat. only comcast business' secure network solutions give you the power of sd-wan and advanced security integrated on our activecore platform so you can control your network from anywhere, anytime. it's network management redefined. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. comcast business powering possibilities.

when the only thought on your mind is “finally” this is financial security. and lincoln financial solutions will help you get there as you plan, protect and retire. will help you get there as you plan, today, you have to deal with a lot of moving parts. you want everything to be on autopilot. and to be prepared if anything changes. with ibm, you can do both. your business can bring data together across your clouds,

from suppliers to shippers, to the factory floor. so whatever comes your way, the wheels keep moving. seamlessly modernizing your operations, that's why so many businesses work with ibm. at t-mobile for business, unconventional thinking means we see things differently, so you can focus on what matters most. whether it's ensuring food arrives as fresh as when it departs... being first on the scene when every second counts... or teaching biology without a lab. we are the leader in 5g and a partner who delivers exceptional customer support and 5g included in every plan. so, you get it all, without trade-offs. unconventional thinking, it's better for business. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> i don't want to punish anyone's success. i'm a capitalist. i want everyone to be able to if they want to be a millionaire or billionaire to be able to seek their goal but all i'm asking is pay your fair share. pay your fair share. pay your fair share. and right now many of them are paying virtually nothing. neil: i don't know, it always kind of creeps me out, pay your fair share. i know what he is trying to do. they say if you repeat something three times it registers but, do you have to do the whisper thing? anyway, i digress. welcome back, everybody with my buddy charlie gasparino. charlie, about time you pay your fair share. >> pay your fair share. it sounded like, i will tell

you, sounded like he was, i don't want to say. just did not sound -- neil: whatever the fair share ink is, right now we're going to have the top rate if you include ancillary taxes surtaxes, 50% just at the federal level. >> right. neil: leaving behind state income tax, federal chunk is over 50. what do you make of that? >> when you add the state chunks into it, it goes over 60 on the high-end. here is the interesting thing, i've been following the new york city mayoral race. eric adams likely, curtis sliwa was putting up spirited defense as a republican, looks like eric adams will be next mayor of new york city. he is meeting with business groups and wealthy new yorkers and he is trying to woo them. he is trying to get them not to move their domiciles to florida. why is that interesting? you know, these are his words. he is telling people, i fully recognize, by the way, paraphrasing a little bit here but this is pretty close.

i fully recognize that 55,000 new yorkers pay something like 60% of the taxes. he tells this to these business groups and wealthy new yorkers. then he says, i'm trying to tell this to my friends in the, my progressives friends out there like aoc types, like presumably president biden, that you know, if we keep attack these people, keep burning them they will leave new york city and deplete our tax base. one other line he also says i heard, i would rather have some of the aoc types move to florida rather than wealthy new yorkers. what he is basically saying, sounds good to tax the wealthy but there comes, there is an impact to that. that, they move to lower tax locales. it is just interesting to see if eric adams has any say what is going on in washington, whether he calls up aoc, as you know is a congresswoman from new york city, whether he calls president biden. and whether he says, listen what you're doing here is crazy

because you are forcing rich people, basically to move out. and we should point out that you know, in the past wealthy new yorkers got a break because of the s.a.l.t. deduction, state and local tax deduction. it is unclear if that is even going to be in this bill, how much of it will be in the bill because you have to pay for this. joe biden when he is not saying pay your fair share, he is also saying this costs nothing? one of the reasons why it costs nothing in his world view which i don't endorse there is all these taxes and it seems to be run counter intuitive that if you have a s.a.l.t. deduction that this thing will still cost nothing. that will cost something. i don't know how you make up the difference there. so you know, this is a crazy situation. you know, people speak a lot about how there is divisions in the republican party neil, but on this bill you see the clash of the democratic party. 60% of the democratic party

doesn't like raising all these taxes. the 40% progressive wants to do all the class warfare stuff. they're going head-to-head right now. it is playing out. the unfortunate thing, president biden, he have doesn't have the stamina, the political stroke or the will power to bring both sides together. it is interesting to see how this plays out. i will say, i give, i don't know about you, my sources are telling me that they don't see, there is a good chance this thing won't happen. i guess that's a good thing if you're worried about inflation. neil: maybe that is what is going on. charlie, you mentioned, we were talking about the fair share thing, i like to bring this up from the tax policy center. 61% of americans, about 100 million u.s. households pay no federal income taxes, none, zip. top 1%, source of criticism here, the top 1%, charlie gasparino's pay 40% of the taxes

in this country. >> yeah. neil: i know the argument is always that, look, they make more, they have to pay more but that is so lopsided, it is beyond crazy, when you have six out of 10 americans, maybe some for very justifiable reasons not paying any federal income taxes. we have never had, we never had a situation like that. this is being boone -- borne by a relative few. it is not sustainable. >> i agree. go further, where the unrealized capital-gains tax thing has some resonance. go even further, people paying taxes are paying them among wages, right? a lot of these tech billionaires and wall street billionaires, don't get paid or warren buffett types don't take wages. they take capital gains. so they're taxed at much lower rate, only when they cash out their stock or whatever investment they're n think about it this way. the tax burden is largely on

people that aren't incredibly rich but earn incomes and it leaves out the incredibly rich. now i would still argue that i don't think unrealized capital gains, i think that is tantamount to theft. that is my opinion because they're unrealized but i wish jeff bezos, some of these left wingers pushing for this big spending plan, at least acknowledge they are not financing it. that jamie dimon, who i love, he is a great guy, he is probably for this five trillion dollar thing getting whittled down to two, he should acknowledge he is not paying for it. it is being paid for by neil cavuto. neil: or you. pay your fair share. pay your fair share. >> i had a dream. i had a dream. i had a nightmare someone looking at me, saying pay your fair share. neil: [laughter]. all right my friend, you're the

best. same tax policy center we get all these stats out there, they say with improving economy, because this is dated material that goes back to 2020, height of the pandemic, we'll eventually see more people paying taxes. so that 60 plus percent not paying any federal income taxes it will get around 50%. still half not paying at all. more after this. ♪ say it's all right ♪ ♪ say it's all right, it's all right ♪ ♪ have a good time 'cause it's all right ♪ ♪ now listen to the beat ♪ ♪ kinda pat your feet ♪ ♪ it's all right ♪ ♪ have a good time 'cause it's all right ♪

♪ oh, it's all right ♪ you founded your kayak company because you love the ocean- not spreadsheets. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire moving is a handful.

matching your job description. no kidding! fortunately, xfinity makes moving easy. easy? -easy? switch your xfinity services to your new address online in about a minute. that was easy. i know, right? and even save with special offers just for movers. really? yep! so while you handle that, you can keep your internet and all those shows you love, and save money while you're at it with special offers just for movers at xfinity.com/moving.

neil: markets are shrugging their shoulder any difficulty here, maybe thinking they don't get a deal through, if they do it will not be that onerous. nasdaq in record territory. it's a story of earnings, folks, all the noise notwithstanding. all the stuff for the virus notwithstanding, it earnings, earnings. these companies are earning money and hand over fist. it is amazing. more after this.

♪ ♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need

to unveil them to the world. ♪ ♪♪ neil: all right. despite the president's optimism that a framework of a framework of a potential deal on all of that big spending, the social spending and climate package, there are no guarantees here, and on the line right now, washington state liberal democrats pennsylvania pramila t

quite sure even the bipartisan infrastructure bill would pass in this environment. in fact, if a vote were held today, it wouldn't come to pass, and that's kind of the area that nancy pelosi is sort of pushing now. she says there's simply too many no votes for that to pass. that was supposed to be one of the more, i guess, slam dunks. that's probably overstating it, but if she's right, it could be telegraphing trouble even on that front if, indeed, it does get a vote. let's go to troy carter, louisiana democrat, who's kind of enough to join us. congressman, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. happy to be here. neil: so what did you think of that, what the congresswoman is saying, that as it stands now if the votes were put pup on this bipartisan plan, it wouldn't pass? >> you know, i don't know that i necessarily agree with that. there are a lot of moving parts. this is a lot of passion. and so people are justifiably

pushing those things that are very important to them. my hope and belief is at the end of the day we will be able to come full circle and recognize that we may not all get 100% of what we want, but we're going to get a whole lot of what we need. neil: now, the president apparently had a meeting, maybe you were there, congressman, said we have a framework, we will get 50 votes in the united states senate. the president went on to say i don't think it's hyperbole that my presidency will be determined by what happens in the next week. he was all but screaming for you guys to get on the same page and get this done. do you think it will get done? >> i do. i think there's a lot of passion, and this is not just for the president of the united states, this is not just a grade for the democrats, this is a grade for the house and senate bipartisan plan, working together and fighting for the american people. we don't have the luxury of

standing in opposing corners. this is a grade on how we as a congress, republican or democrat, independent or other, move forward to care for the american people. and if that's exactly how we have to look at it. neil: you know, congressman, i just wonder when i hear bernie sanders speaking briefly with reporters today, clearly not happy with the direction or even the price tag now that it's down to supposedly $1.75, 85 trillion -- still a lot of money, but he wanted a lot more. and we're hearing similar thoughts out of progressive caucus members who are saying, you know, less is not more here. just passing something rather than failing and getting nothing isn't necessarily a good thing. what do you tell them? >> well, i would say to anyone that half a loaf is better than no loaf. and while there are parts of either bill that neither of us or any of us can say this is not enough of, we'd like to tweak it left, we'd like to tweak it

right, we'd like a little bit more of this orless of that, but -- or less of that, but in a deliberative body we have a responsibility to negotiate, to move the pieces of the if puzzle around until they fit. and it doesn't mean you quite a bit because you don't get 100% you want. people didn't send us to washington for that level of bickering. while i respect everyone's differences, i respect their right to challenge ask to push and to negotiate hard, at the end of the day people back home in all of our respective districts expect us to get something done. and we should not let perfect be the enemy of the good, and this is a good series of bills. neil: some of your moderate colleagues do not share that enthusiasm, if it does pass it could hurt democrats in the midterms, that the added spending is only going to make the inflation situation worse, and they're worried in these

tight races in virginia and even now increasingly in new jersey are a sign that americans are getting ticked off. how do you answer that? >> i think they're getting ticked off because of the indecision. i think americans are getting ticked off because it's a lot of talk and little action. i don't think they're ticked off because we're trying to do something. and the notion that somehow the build back better or the infrastructure plan will negatively impact inflation, there's been several nobel peace prize economists who vehemently disagree with that. listen, when people make more money, they spend more money. when you make money, it doesn't just go into a black hole in your backyard, it goes into the store, it goes into schools, it goes into homes and cars and providing better lives for our children -- neil: that's all true, congressman, but what -- you are making more money, quite right, but right now you're spending more of that money. and i'm wondering if americans who are sort of, you know, underwater with as a result even with those wage gains, what do you tell them?

that this is temporary? that they don't have to worry? what? >> no. i think you tell them that they need to get on the phone, and they need to call their members of congress, call their senators -- neil: well -- [inaudible conversations] just to be clear, that would ease the inflation? >> no. the inflation bite will be eased when we start to invigorate our economy, and we invigorate our economy by pumping money into it to stimulate it. it's not unlike anything that we've done before except the magnitude of the dollars that we're putting in with build back better and infrastructure are life-changing and unprecedented. and host economists -- most economists, you and i may disagree, but from my vantage point and the economists that i've looked at and listened to suggest that the money that we're putting in -- we're not talking about bs, we're talking about ts, trillions of dollars for infrastructure, for housing, for rail, for environment, these are all things that are going to pay

dividends for years and years to come. neil: all right. we shall see. troy carter, thank you for taking the time, louisiana congressman, democrat troy carter, on all these fast moving developments. in the meantime, we do talk about inflation, we do talk about these supply disruptions we've had and a lot of it hanging on the notion that's going to keep you shoulding up these -- pushing up these prices. madisonalwater is in florida where -- madison alworth where thousand the push is to spread these ports of call here. i guess, madison, they have other ideas in the florida area, right in. >> reporter: yes, there are definitely other ideas. the governor here, ron desantis, is saying to those company, come here to florida, we are ready, and we are able to bring in all those cargo ships. like you said, west coast seeing huge delays. last check the ships that are waiting out there are waiting anywhere between 9-13 days just to get to the actual docks to start getting the cargo off.

the ship behind me at port everglades, there's a zero wait time here, and that's why the governor is encouraging this. i'm here with the port director, jonathan daniels. as i mentioned, ron desantis the wants more cargo ships to come here. are you seeing an increase in activity from that call? >> yeah, we're seeing larger ships and more ships and more cargo. we haven't seen anything that's come through the panama if canal as of yet, but there is a port up the coast, jaques port, that is taking advantage of that. seeing some of the congestion up the east coast, they are seeing at least for a short period of time some movement of cargo, so we are seeing as a state of florida more cargo coming to the state based on congestion. >> reporter: okay, not new routes, but more cargo coming off the ships you already had coming into the area. a big art of this infrastructure, labor, are you guys adjusting so you can accommodate more cargo and more ships? >> we are. three new cranes, half a billion

of dollars in infrastructure development. the governor9 and the state have done a great job getting money into our hands making sure that the ports and that the state is ready to handle this next surge of international cargo. >> reporter: you're saying next surge because, obviously, we're dealing with this problem right now. short-term solutions, what do you see when it comes to shipping internationally? are we going to be seeing this forever? what is the length of this issue that we're dealing with? >> i think this perfect storm of the increased demand, increased supply coming out of asia along with the holiday season, i don't think -- it may subside a little bit, but i think long term this type of surge is here to stay. so ultimately, the ports need to see the investment or, these to make the investment in equipment and facilities to be able to handle this long term. >> reporter: thank you so much. increased cargo here, jacksonville getting new routes. the it works well, it could be a perm innocent change, and that could be -- permanent change, and that could be something we see across all eight of

florida's importants. neil: not a bad idea. madison alworth, thank you very much. we also have the problem with not enough truckers, not enough people this logistics to handle all of this. so there must be a way to train folks, get folks ready for us. kelly o'grady with us out of patterson, california, where they're doing just that. hey, kelly. >> reporter: hey, neil. patterson high school is focusing on long-term solutions to that supply chain crisis madison was just talking about. before the pandemic we were already experiencing a shortage of 60,000 drivers. that's only gotten worse since. and to address those gaps, attarson is developing a program -- patterson is developing a program that allows high school seniors hands-on driving training. it allows them to have experience behind the wheel via simulate ors like you -- simulators that you see on the screen. part of the shortage is changing the perception of the industry, and that will create a talent pipeline of young professionals

like the one i spoke to today. >> sometimes you do hear people say as a trucker you're just a number that's contracted out for a job. but what this class has shown us and what the industry partners have shown us is that it can be more than that. you can really make any sort of career starting from the trucking industry. >> reporter: now, patterson's going beyond just trucking. that focus is part of a larger supply chain and logistics program aimed at addressing the crisis our nation is facing, and it offers warehousing and forklifting as well, enabling students to fill high-paying roles in careers most don't consider as an option. >> we don't educate the students on other options after high school. it seems we have a singular focus on defining success as a four-year degree, and we don't talk about the vocational trades. >> reporter: now, you can see here behind me one of those classes, they're work on forklifting today, and patterson's working with

organizations across the country and hopes to expand this to other areas. neil, this program is not just about fixing our supply chain which is certainly helping to do, but providing purpose for the future of america's work force. frankly, i'm hoping to get up on one of these today. neil? [laughter] neil: you're a braver person than i am. kelly o'grady, fox business, following all of that. she will do that too. we are getting a couple of more details about what kind of things they're looking to get in that final framework. i think it seems like we're getting in the weeds here, but apparently they're not giving up on the suspect a.l.t. thing -- s.a.l.t. thing, the tate and local tax thing really walloped some of the blue states that have prohibitively high real estate and other taxes. but whatever they work on that is money that goes out revenue that you get from the taxes that goes out that they have to make-up for somewhere else. the indications are from key folks iting all this together

that s.a.l.t. is not dead, says one. it is not dead. okay. more after this. ♪ muck. ♪ ♪ (vo) while you may not be a pediatric surgeon volunteering your topiary talents at a children's hospital — your life is just as unique. your raymond james financial advisor gets to know you, your passions, and the way you give back.

so you can live your life. that's life well planned. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire it's another day. matching your job description. and anything could happen. it could be the day you welcome 1,200 guests and all their devices. or it could be the day there's a cyberthreat. only comcast business' secure network solutions give you the power of sd-wan and advanced security integrated on our activecore platform so you can control your network from anywhere, anytime. it's network management redefined. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. comcast business powering possibilities.

i order my groceries online now. shingles doesn't care. i keep my social distance. shingles doesn't care. i stay within my family bubble. shingles doesn't care. because if you've had chicken pox, you're already carrying the virus that causes shingles. in fact, about 1 in 3 people will develop shingles, and the risk only increases as you age. so what can protect you against shingles? shingrix protects. now you can protect yourself from shingles with a vaccine proven to be over 90% effective. shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after vaccination with shingrix. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach.

talk to your pharmacist or doctor about protecting yourself with shingrix. shingles doesn't care. but we do. this halloween, xfinity rewards is offering up some spooky-good perks. shingles doesn't care. like the chance to win a universal parks & resorts trip to hollywood or orlando to attend halloween horror nights. or xfinity rewards members, get the inside scoop on halloween kills. just say "watch with" into your voice remote for an exclusive live stream with jamie lee curtis. a q&a with me! join for free on the xfinity app. our thanks your rewards.

about the racial violence that went on here in august of 2017. >> you all remember that donald trump said they were very fine people. [background sounds] and after all of that, glenn youngkin said that donald trump represents so much of why he is running for governor. [cheers and applause] let me be clear, folks, i'm running for governor for you. >> reporter: republicans say democrats are just trying to tie youngkin to trump who lost last year by ten the percentage points because mcauliffe is in trouble this a race that is about education, crime and the economy. >> we have to teach virginia how to innovate again. we're ranked 49th in the nation as best place to start a

business. 49th. only connecticut is worse. i've been to connecticut -- trust me, trust me, and we won't be california either. friends, this is our issue. we have got to get moving. our plan works with businesses. >> reporter: haven't seen any response from connecticut or california on that, neil. these campaigns continue to try to hit their areas where the voters are, turn them out to vote. tomorrow's a big one for the mcauliffe campaign, that's in the author folk area where vice president camilla are harris -- norfolk area where vice president kamala harris will campaign for mcauliffe. back to you. neil: rich, thank you very much. the garden state, overwhelmingly democratic, it does seem incumbent democratic governor mil more -- phil murphy could have a challenge on his head. the gap is anywhere from 6-31 points. matthew arco joins us, reporter

for the star ledger, thank you for taking the time. >> thanks for having me. neil: do you see the race tightening up, and what might be contributing to it? >> yes and no. the polls do -- or the public polling has the race tightening up a little bit, but it still has the governor in a very comfortable lead. what i'd say the republican jack ciattarelli is maintaining that the polls are neck and neck in internal polling except we're not privy to that. look, what's going on in new jersey is democrats are contending with the things they always have to contend with, voter apathy. right now phil murphy is bringing in big names to try to inner in eyes the base. there's a million more registered democrats than republicans, so it's a real uphill slug for jack ciattarelli. i was just with him earlier today, and he's feeling very good, and i will say having gone and seen both campaigns on the road, jack's fans are more enthused.

they are fired up, and the people he runs into are definitely going to the polls. neil: is he getting any play off of these tapes that have emerged where a number of murphy enthusiasts are talking up the possibility of vaccine mandates, but they're keeping it hush-hush right now until after the election? >> this campaign has certainly made a large deal out of that. the governor came out quickly and said he would not be instituting such mandates. there are certain mandates for things like teachers and state workers, but in new jersey there's an opt-out option which jack ciattarelli has said that he supports, he basically supports what phil murphy has in place right now. and that's a needle, something he's trying to thread as the campaign has been going on because, by and large, people -- according to polls -- they don't kind of, they agree with the way governor murphy has handled the pandemic. again, by and large. so jack ciattarelli has sort of

came around to say, yes, i think what phil murphy's doing with the mandates, but the test-out option, he agrees with that. so i think he's trying to, it sounds like he's trying a little bit to say, okay, some things are okay because they're popular. neil: so one of the things that's not popular in polling is that inflation is hitting a lot of folks and not so coincidentally in virginia where it pops up in polls, maybe new jersey to a lesser extent. is that a secret issue of the democrats, that these higher prices people are paying is getting annoying and it's beginning really to weigh on them and they don't like it? certainly, the president's poll numbers in new jersey aren't what they were when he got elected, so something must be happening here. should the governor be worried? >> well, look, taxes is always the number one issue among new jersey voters because of the

high amount of taxes we're paying in the state to begin with. it's always usually number one. what's different is that the pandemic for a while was the number one issue, not surprisingly, it was affecting everyone's lives, but now we're starting to see it's reverting back to taxes. this is the reason why republicans can win in democratic-heavy new jersey. the they're criss hattic, they have the -- charismatic, they have the right message and they pound away on taxes, that is a winning formula in the state. it has been in the past for republicans, so it's something that, you know, i'll just say that a lot of political pundits were sort of scratching their heads when jack ciattarelli came out in the primary and was still hammering social issues. those people were saying why doesn't he focus on taxes. that's the way to win in a state like this. neil: that does seem to be the point. another thing i discovered odd in new jersey, if we see governor murphy reelected, he would be the first democratic governor reelected since byrne back in 1977.

now, all the republican governors we had in the state have, indeed, been reelected. when you go back to thomas cain, christy todd whitman and chris christie, so what is it about this curse -- if you want to call it that, depending on your allegiance -- for democratic governors? jon corzine, what is that? >> that stat is absolutely true, but there's a little bit of a california yacht which is new jersey has elected -- caveat which is new jersey has elected twice during that time democrats back to back as governor of statewide races. so it has happened, just not the same person. and, neil, i think it goes back to what i was just talking about. taxes is always such a large issue on voters' minds. this is a blue state that's getting bluer, but it hasn't completely shut the door to republican candidates. specifically for governor. i think things like u.s. senate is increasingly becoming more of a reach for republicans. but again, if you have a charismatic candidate that's able to break through to people

with the right message, history shows that voters are receptive. neil: so one final issue on phil murphy and they always try to pull out phrases he's said if taxes are a big issue to you -- i'm paraphrasing it probably very poorly -- not that new jersey shouldn't be your state or whatever. a lot of people took that to be a very dismissive, elitist tone to the incredibly high taxes in the state of new jersey and dismissive to all the corporations and others who are leaving as a result. is that backfiring on him, or is he going to survive all of that? >> if public polling is correct, he's going to survive it comfortably. was it a misstep on his senator i would think some in democratic circles would say yes. the quote was taken a little bit out of context, but this is politics, that's nothing new. and, you know, i see the ads that are running than stop, i talk to people, and that comes up time and time again. so at least the republican base

is fired up. i hear them talking about that ad all the time. does that get some independents, maybe some democrats? the polling suggests, no, but that's what you need to do in order to win in this state. jack ciattarelli can't just rally with republicans and win just with that. he needs more. neil: yeah. you need to get people to the polls. matt, thank you, i appreciate it. >> thanks, neil. neil: all right. some of the spending measures that democrats are are sort of coalesced on already are no votes right now certainly hong republicans. south carolina republican senate tim scott feels very strongly on remaining a no vote on all this spending, after this. ♪ ♪ ♪

with chase security features, guidance and convenience, banking feels good. chase. make more of what's yours.

♪♪

♪♪ ♪♪ neil: all right, well, president biden for his sport is saying pretty much democrats are all onboard with the spending plan if as it stands right now. now, at this point and given some of the tone and the remarks

we've heard from the likes of bernie sanders and others, that does not appear to be the case right now. they have serious reservations about this, so they're not all in. this guy wasn't from the very, very beginning, south carolina republican senator tim scott, kind enough to join us right now. senator, good to see you. >> thank you, neil. thanks for having me back on your show. i miss ya. neil: thank you, my friend. let's talk about where democrats stand on this because i know you're a no vote by and large on the larger spending pang that they're -- package that they're talking about here. that seems to be unanimous among your colleagues, but i do want to get your thoughts on the infrastructure-only package. now, you were not among the 19 republicans who were onboard with that in the senate, so i'm sure it would not change now your view looking at how the house handles it. but is it your sense that some of those 19 have changed their hinds on that in -- minds on that and are thousand if beginning to say, all right, if

it ever came to us again or certainly with this larger spending measure, this is a sign of things to come, we're out? >> i do think there's some, a loss of trust between the biden administration and the bipartisan coalition that supported the infrastructure package. early on you heard that these are two separate votes and then they were fused together, then they were not, now they are again. so that confusion -- neil: could you explain that to me, senator? i was talking to a producer, and have they, indeed, been put back together? because that would me gate the these to even -- negate the need to even vote on an infrastructure-only package. i would imagine democrats would have a problem with that as well, wouldn't they? >> progressives have said they're not willing to move forward unless it's all in one, so what they've been discussing is whether or not having a vote now with a promise in the future is fusing those two together. some of the democratic party say you have to have both of those votes together which means the

consensus for one is the prerequisite for the first vote. in my opinion, frankly, those shared by most people on both sides of the aisle, that's bringing those two back together. but the lack of confidence and transthe parent city in this process -- transparency in this process should be concerning to every american. an infrastructure package that's less than $10% of the overall resources -- 10% of the overall resources on roads and bridges should be concerning. we're back to the days where you have to pass the legislation to know what's in it. that's bad news for every single american, and it feels like the great american shakedown, especially as we move into the large arer, more problematic package. neil: you know what's interesting on it, senator, you though these details tar better than i, is that the president's been saying that economists say this is all paid for, don't have to worry, but how would he though that because this is very different than what was talked about. a, it's half the price, a lot more revenues than thought,

raisers, so it's very different than anything before. and we don't even though what this final, you know, package is. so where is he getting that information? >> well, out of thin air, to be honest with you. there is no way in the world you can call this package paid for. not only that, he also said the cost was nothing. costing nothing and being paid for means taking more money out of the octobers of working americans -- pockets of working americans on top of the already are negative impact of inflation for many americans well below $400,000. gas prices have gone there $1.99 in december to 3.23 with when i filled up in charleston just this past monday. so on top of that, we're going to see a $1.75 trillion package that's paid for by higher taxes. and higher taxes does not necessarily mean raising the

statutory rate. it means eliminating deductions and credits in order to generate the revenue or having a new excise tax on the wealthy people. if you remember back to the obama administration, we talked about taxing millionaires and billionaires -- or they did, i didn't. it started at $250,000. that's not a millionaire or a billionaire. and so this tax is going to be a problem. but, neil, remember the price of $1.75 trillion is bad, the costs will well exceed the 1.75 trillion. but the content fundamentally transforms america and creates a one-way ticket to socialism when you start looking at what's actually in the package and how it disincentivizes work. that's a real issue for labor force actioner if rate and the growth of our gdp that translates into more money in the pockets of everyday americans working their tails

off. that's just the wrong direction for our nation, and it's the wrong direction that we're sending from a small perspective for the next generation of workers. neil: all right. i'm going to put you could be as a maybe on the package then, senator -- [laughter] i'm kidding. but the rates, i know you were concerned about this irs bank account monitoring. >> yes. neil: as far as i know, senator, looking at some of the details they have released, that's still in there. not as onerous, at a higher level, but it's still in there as well as the funding to beef up irs enforcement that presumably go well beyond just tracking what the rich pay. that feature could be particular lay onerous, but where do you see that going? >> well, that is an awful feature of the bill, that's one of the reasons why the content is worse than the cost. when you talk about giving the irs permission to spy into every single account that has $10,000 of inflow/outflow, if you're

making minimum wage, you're iting into your account more than $10,000 on an annual basis. so that means every single working american in this country will have to fear the three letters you never want to see in your mailbox, i-r-s, as they have more opportunity to spy on your accounts. and a part of that proposal in addition to allowing the irs to have access to your financial information would be $80 billion more to the irs with the specific purpose of more audits of your accounts and your business accounts. that sends shivers down the spine. the irs will do that to the average american, and that's an additional burden not on those making over $400,000, but everybody making minimum wage. neil: senator, very quickly, the administration -- >> yes, sir. neil: -- the inflation argument

and gone on offense with it that americans are making more, they're spending more. this is all a demand issue coming out of the pandemic, it's a good reflection on america, it's not a government spending kind of an issue, it's people spending. buoyed by being flatlined during the pandemic, coming out and spending a lot more on things because theyey can and they wil. what did you think of that? >> well, from the great philosopher trey gowdy, we call that hogwash. to be honest with you, here's what they're saying, is that we're going to add $2 trillion from the covid package into the economy, add another $1.2 trillion and then add another $2 trillion on top of that nearly, and what does that do? it drives your demand up, and your supply is relatively stable. that means that the price for everything goes up. but in addition to that, let's just stop the keystone pipeline, let's stop american pursuit of our own energy independence, and let's become more dependent on

the middle east for our oil. your gas prices go up from $1.99 to 323, as i said, this past monday. but on top of that, the prices of fish, truth, meat all heading towards double digit. you're buying dresses? almost 20%. shoes, almost 10%. if you're on a fixed income in america, your buying power has gone down faster than your wages have gone up because of inflation. there's no way to spin that into a positive when the average american teals the different in their account -- feels the difference in their account. they see it with their own eyes. you can't tell them what they can already see. neil: all right. very good, senator. i did want to ask you what the heck has happened to clemson's football team, but that's another conversation, okay? >> challenges. neil: challenges. yeah, that's one word for it. tim scott, beautiful state of

south carolina. all right. the push right now to get more people to work and slow those who are leaving work, what they're doing in idaho that bears watching, after this. ♪ ♪ observing investors choose assets to balance risk and reward. with one element securing portfolios, time after time. gold. agile and liquid. a proven protector. an ever-evolving enabler of bold decisions. an asset more relevant than ever before. gold. your strategic advantage. hi, i'm steve and i live in austin, texas. i work as a personal assistant to the owner of a large manufacturing firm. i've got anywhere from 10 to 50 projects going at any given time. i absolutely have to be sharp. let me tell ya, i was struggling with my memory.

it was going downhill. my friend recommended that i try prevagen and over time, it made a very significant difference in my memory and in my cognitive ability. i started to feel a much better sense of well-being. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. to run a growing business, is to be on a journey. and along the ride, you'll find many challenges. your dell technologies advisor is here to help. so you can stop at nothing for your customers. if you used shipgo this whole thing wouldn't be a thing. yeah, dad! i don't want to deal with this. oh, you brought your luggage to the airport. that's adorable. with shipgo shipping your luggage before you fly you'll never have to wait around here again. like ever. that can't be comfortable though. shipgo.com the smart, fast, easy way

to travel. (rhythmic electro rock music) (crowd cheering) - bito, bito, bito, bito! - [announcer] bito, the first u.s. bitcoin-linked etf. i just became eligible for medicare and, can i say? it's so overwhelming. a, b, c, d - all the different plans and all those stacks of mail? i didn't know where to start. then i called humana, and they helped make everything simpler. i talked to a real live agent who treated me like a real live person. she was kind, patient, and she took the time to get to know me and answer all my questions. she told me that an all-in-one humana medicare advantage plan includes coverage for hospital stays, doctor visits and prescription drugs. most plans include dental and vision. but first, the agent i talked to, laid out all of my options. i learned that original medicare covers the basics, like

emergency care and doctor visits. it also has a deductible, and after that i typically have to pay 20% of my medical bills. then we talked about medicare supplement plans that you can add to original medicare coverage. they help pay your medicare deductibles and co-insurance. but they often have higher monthly premiums and no prescription drug coverage. but i needed coverage for my prescriptions, and that's when she told me about humana's all-in-one medicare advantage prescription drug plans. not only do i get all this coverage that includes prescription drugs, but humana has a huge network of doctors and hospitals. i can get telehealth coverage, a silver sneakers membership, and i stay covered in emergencies when i travel. whether we're visiting the grandkids or going on vacation. a humana medicare advantage plan can give me all that for as low as a $0 monthly plan premium. humana went above and beyond to get to know me, so i can find the medicare advantage plan that

is right for me. and that might be the biggest benefit of all. so give humana a call, or visit their website. talk to someone who will take the time to help you, and get your free decision guide. humana, a more human way to healthcare. ♪ neil: all right, they're calling it the great brain drain, and a lot of people don't understand what's going on, but a lot of people are just up and quitting and not necessarily for another job waiting. 4 of idaho workers, for example -- 4%, have left their job since august. the state's governor joins us right now, brad lit. governor, what's going on there? because it's happening this a lot of places -- in a lot of places. >> [inaudible] and a lot of people are getting

a better job. they're voluntarily leaving because -- in our economy right now -- [inaudible] did it now, you know, they've got lots of opportunities to have a better job and a better opportunity. neil: so how do you slow that down? >> well, my goal is to have everybody prosper this our state here, new ask better jobs is the solution to that. not only -- [audio difficulty] are wanting to move here too and that's what's creating -- housing affordability. we've got some of the -- real estate in the whole united

states. we just had a big highway structure package without raising taxes, we just did the largest tax rebate on record, and our surplus is 40% of our -- [inaudible] good things happen, unintended consequences of people moving job to job, but the standard of living is going up. neil: governor, i apologize, we're having some difficulty with your audio, sir, but i want to thank you very much for updating us. brad little, beautiful state of oregon. in the meantime, the great rush -- idaho, i should say. there's a great rush for facebook to sort of correct its ways, maybe starting by renaming its swire -- its entire company. after this. ♪ ♪

moving is a handful. no kidding! fortunately, xfinity makes moving easy. easy? -easy? switch your xfinity services to your new address online in about a minute. that was easy. i know, right? and even save with special offers just for movers. really? yep! so while you handle that, you can keep your internet and all those shows you love,

and save money while you're at it with special offers just for movers at xfinity.com/moving.

♪ >> welcome back to "cavuto coast to coast," i'm gerri willis. well, if you thought you were going to get facebook's new name this hour, you're going to have to wait. that's what we thought but, unfortunately, it hasn't been announced yet. masker zuckerberg -- mark

zuckerberg speaking today at the company's annual connect conference talking instead is, the as you can see here, about something called the metaverse, a technology that he says is going to transform our existence. listen. >> even though it's still a hong way off, we're starting to work on some of these foundational concepts today. horizon is the social platform that we are building for people to create and interact in the metaverse. >> reporter: so it's something like, golly, i think you'd have to say a jetson ises world where everything is virtual, an a alternate reality that he says will eventually 'em low millions of people. -- employ millions of people. certainly, they're already hiring 10,000 in europe to work on this idea. but the big question is whether a new name can detract from an ongoing firestorm of bad press forcing on noxious impacts on children and girls and employee efforts to deplatform

conservatives. now zuckerberg denies this is the motivation for facebook's name change and instead says he wants to double down on his multibillion investment in the metaversion, that's a 3d version of the web that would transform gaming, shopping, fitness, even your morning business meeting. think of it this way, users would access the metaverse using vr headsets. it's going to viewing a three-dimensional version of the meeting and interact inside that. of course, none of this is coming cheap. facebook's investment this year alone is expected to cut operating profit by $10 billion. and industry analysts have been cutting facebook price targets because of it. back to you. neil: gerri, thank you so much for that, gerri willis. i barely understood that. you explained it this a way that could get through my thick skull. we'll see what the name change

will be. in the meantime, this so-called framework in washington, markets have been up throughout all this, so the that because -- is that because they see some closure here or this looks impossible to pass? tim phillips is here, david asman, of course, our superstar here at fox business. gentlemen, welcome. tim, i don't know which it is the looking at the market reaction here, but you could argue that stimulus is stimulus even if you dig deep down and, again, i know the president isn't saying that's going to happen, but it will be stimulative to the economy. that is one thing he says. what do you think of that? >> we're seeing inflation like we haven't seen since the jimmy carter era, neil, led by gas prices, food prices, literally everything. it's all this government spending. americans are uneasy, they're feeling it. it's one reason president biden's poll numbers have dropped faster than any president in his fist or year in mod -- first year in modern american history. so they've got a problem.

i think what speaker pelosi's trying to do, in all candor, neil she's trying to jam something through, anything to show momentum before tuesday. this tuesday is the virginia election and, neil, they've got big problems in virginia on that governor's race. i'm here now on that, a state that trump lost by ten points last year. they could very well lose it. she knows that will further frighten hermen members into not wanting to do all this spending and socialism that they're trying to jam into this social sending/stimulus bill. i think they know tuesday could be really bad for them, and they're trying to get any kind of momentum before that. that's what we're seeing with this flurry of activity today. i don't quite think they've got the votes yet because a lot of those democrat members from swing districts, they're feeling some heat back home. neil: there's no way they can get this done by tuesday anyway, but maybe. david, some of the moderates, including on this air, among

democrats it height quietly be a good thing if none of this comes to pass because it's going to anger americans. >> right. neil: what do you think of of that, david? >> i think this is a lot of truth to that, but they're waiting for what happens on tuesday. if terry mcauliffe loses on tuesday the, you're going to see a lot of moderates who were moving to the left like jill brarngd for example, this new york -- gillibrand, she was known as a moderate in the past, but she saw the wind blowing to the left a couple of years ago, and she's been moving forth and further over there. if terry mcauliffe loses, a lot of those moderates who have been moving to the left will come center again, and that may kill this bill. but you asked about the markets. i mean, you mentioned earlier i think it's kind of simple. there are two things markets really care about or at least stocks really care about. one are earning, and they've been coming in like gangbusters, and the other are rates, and they've been staying low because

the fed is buying up 60% of all the bonds. that's causing a little bit of inflation, and it hay get worse and worse -- may get worse and worse, and the more that cuts into any wage gains among working americans, and it already has, workers are losing money now because inflation is bigger than the wage gains, the that trend keeps going, you know, they're going -- there are going to be more losses like what we may see in virginia and new jersey. neil: all right. we'll watch it closely. gentlemen, thank you very much. this is wearing on the bonn market, you don't see it. the bond $10-year -- the nasdaq is this record territory. ♪fo ♪ they have customized solutions to help our family's special needs... giving us confidence in our future... ...and in kevin's. voya. well planned. well invested. well protected. ♪ say it's all right ♪

♪ say it's all right, it's all right ♪ ♪ have a good time 'cause it's all right ♪ ♪ now listen to the beat ♪ ♪ kinda pat your feet ♪ . .

hey i'm joe montana. when you get to be our age, you have little patience for nonsense and inefficiency. after years of practice, you become a pro at pretty much everything. so when i qualified for medicare, i got with wellcare. wellcare is no nonsense. they're pros at putting everything together to make things easier. their plans include things like

prescription drug coverage dental, vision, and hearing coverage. it just makes sense. ♪ ♪ yeah. do you want a medicare advantage plan that just makes sense? a and hearing coverage to make things easier. it's a no brainer. go with a no-nonsense medicare insurance provider. call for a free wellcare guide today.

neil: all right. leave you with the nasdaq in record territory. the dow once again teasing that territory. did low the s&p 500. cheryl casone in for charles payne. cheryl: thank you, neil. we're waiting for nancy pelosi. we'll go to her in a few minutes. i'm not charles payne. i'm cheryl casone in for charles payne. the price tag is well off of what he wanted. we will look at market reaction to all of this, plus how you can take advantage of what's to come. the new disappointing gdp numbers for q3