Wrong. I am “middle class” and bought a brand new Electric-hybrid Prius a year ago for $20,000 after a dealer discount and federal and state tax benefits. I am averaging 163 mpg. The first 25-30 miles I drive are entirely on the battery—after that it works as a hybrid. It is a great car. A new gasoline powered Camry would have cost more $ than what I spent for the Prius. And the Build Back Better bill will increase the federal tax benefits for buying electric cars, making cars like mine even more affordable, and the credit is further increased if the car is built in the USA

"As the week began, Democrats were celebrating final passage of a long-overdue infrastructure bill, which will address a range of pressing needs from lead water pipes to crumbling bridges to broadband deserts, while it will likely create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Meanwhile, Republicans were livid that a few of their representatives v**ed for the bill, and took their anger out on Big Bird.

In a way, those Republicans are right to be mad, because infrastructure improvements are indeed a liberal plot to undermine everything the contemporary GOP stands for.

Yes, some Republicans — 19 in the Senate and 13 in the House — did v**e for the bill. In those v**es you can see the fading vestiges of an age when members of both parties considered it their obligation to deliver tangible benefits for their constituents. That’s how you got reelected: a repaired bridge here, a new hospital wing there, all celebrated with a ribbon-cutting at which the congressman or senator who brought home the bacon was center stage for the local media.

But your hometown paper has probably gone out of business or been bought up by private equity vultures and stripped for parts. And for most Republican officeholders, what matters now is what’s airing on Fox News, where the culture war is king.

Which is where Big Bird comes in. Republicans spent the weekend pretending to be outraged that “Sesame Street” was telling kids not to be afraid of v******tions, even though Big Bird has been talking to kids about v*****es for half a century. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) immediately denounced it as “Government propaganda...for your 5 year old!” Across Fox News, apoplectic talking heads pummeled the show. An Arizona state senator tweeted “Big Bird is a c*******t.”

All of which no doubt left the Republican base with the warm feeling that can only come from a good round of shaking your fist at liberals. Meanwhile, Democrats are asking themselves whether their infrastructure bill can actually be turned into a political winner.

There are at least a few Republicans who worry that it might. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (who v**ed for the bill) is touting the good it might do for his home state of Kentucky; he clearly doesn’t want Democrats to get all the credit. But the more visible its effects are — and the more Republicans characterize it as a socialist boondoggle (or attack their own leadership because a few of their members in the House helped pass it) — the more Democrats will have an opportunity to use it as a case study in what Democratic governance actually does for people’s lives. Already, the White House is dispatching Cabinet secretaries and members of Congress across the country to promote the coming repairs and upgrades to roads, bridges and much more.

So why do I say this is indeed a fundamentally liberal accomplishment? A few reasons.

First, it avoided most of the gimmicks and giveaways Republicans usually employ when crafting similar bills. You’ve probably forgotten by now, but amid all the “Infrastructure Week” jokes, the Trump administration did at one point in 2018 put out an infrastructure plan. It was full of misleading numbers and public-private “partnerships” in the form of gigantic tax gifts to private companies to build wh**ever projects they found most profitable. Rather than the government owning the bridge or road, the private company would — and they’d then charge us tolls to use it forever.

Second, the fact that Republicans failed to pass infrastructure improvements everyone acknowledged were necessary when they were in charge, but Democrats succeeded, reveals a key t***h: Only one party is serious about governing these days.
If you’re a wealthy person looking for a tax cut, Republicans will come through for you. But on more fundamental obligations of government, such as making sure you have clean water to drink, only one party will really try to deliver. It wasn’t always that way — Dwight Eisenhower was substantially responsible for building the interstate highway system — but it is now.

And finally, infrastructure is fundamentally liberal because, when it’s done well, it reinforces the idea that there are important things that only government can do. As long as you believe that, you’ll be favorably inclined toward politicians who actually want government to do those things — and just as important, can make it happen.

That doesn’t mean the administration will have an easy time convincing v**ers that this bill (and the Build Back Better social infrastructure bill, should it pass as well) is a great reason to get out and v**e for Democrats. Many of the benefits will take months or years to be felt in people’s lives. And in a polarized age, nothing drives v**er turnout like anger.

Which is why they should argue that what matters about that new bridge in your town is not only that Democrats delivered it but that Republicans fought against it. Will it work to say, “While our opponents are complaining about Big Bird, we’re actually helping improve your lives”? It’s certainly worth a shot."

Paul Waldman The Washington Post