the most shockingly aggressive rescue bill of my lifetime is very likely to be signed into law. saturday after an all-night session, senate democrats passed the $1.9 trillion covid relief package in a strict party line vote. because senators made some changes to the bill, it now has to go back to the democratic controlled house which is expected to pass the identical senate version this week, possibly as early as tomorrow. so the bill would then go to the president, president biden for his signature. we're in the early part of march. not the 100-day marker yet. this is an incredible victory for both the country, the biden administrationings the democratic party which held together. they didn't get a vote in either house. they tried to break the party apart. that's bryns did by forcing tough votes on amendments and arguing against the bill in public. democrats won. and as a result, a lot of people's lives are going to get better. >> by passing this plan we would have delivered real tangible results for the american people and their families. they'll be able to see and know and feel the change in their own lives. >> there is a lot in this bill. including for starters $350 billion for state and local governments that some of whom have been hobbled by the pandemic. there's $130 billion for k-12 schools. $25 billion for relief for hard hit restaurants, part of the bill we have been focused on. there's tens of billions for covid tests, still important and vital. there's also a ton of money for vaccine distribution, other measures to fight and suppress the virus. that's the program attic money and then the money to go directly to americans. struggling americans. that includes an extension of the $300 weekly federal unemployment payment bonus that gets paid above what you would normally make for unemployment. there's also a tax break on unemployment benefits so people don't get a shocking surprise tax bill which is key. $1,400 stimulus checks for low and middle income americans coupled with $1,400 checks for adult dependents and children and a child tax credit of $3,000 or $3,600 depending on the chide's age. the child tax credit alone for one year could benefit as many as 83 million children in this country. >> taken altogether, this plan is going to make it possible to cut child poverty in half. let me say it again. it's significant. historic. will cut child poverty in half. >> advances like this, this piece of legislation, they don't come along very often. and not only is it going to impact child poverty, let's look at the $1,400 check on top of the $600 passed in the last relief package. say you're a married couple makes less than $150,000 a year, two kids with an adult dependent, a child in college or an adult that lives with you. you are looking at $7 those in direct payments from the government? $1,400 each person in the family that's a real game changer after the year that all of uts have had. white house says many americans will get that money by the end of this month. so, how did we get here? right? one thing that strikes me looking at this, right? both parties have tons of corporate donors. there's k street lobbyists working over congress. ways in which both democrats and republicans overly influenced by big money, corporate interests, the rich. right? look at the difference in the distributional priorities. when donald trump's republican party got elected they tried to gut the aca twice and then successfully passed a massive tax cut primarily for the rich and corporations. first thing out of the gate biden and the democrats passed a bill in which the poorest 20% of americans are expected to see a 20% boost in income according to a new analysis while the richest 1% will receive an income boost of 0. 0%. and then take -- think about that. think about the difference in the distributional affects here and then think about the fact that republicans these days keep insisting in the words of josh hawley, a working class party. and it is true the 2020 election suggested that the gop is actually increasingly relying on less affluent voters while the democratic coalition is getting more professional and more affluent. but the republican rhetoric around standing for the working class is just not reflected in policy. i think that's why republicans would rather talk about dr. seuss. culture wars. because they don't particularly seem to actually have a policy agenda to help the working class. republicans would rather enflame resentiments in hopes of increasing their power. >> when i was elected, i said we were going to get the government out of the business of battling on twitter. and back in the business of delivering for the american people. making a difference in their lives. giving everyone a chance, a fighting chance of showing the american people that their government can work for them. and passing the american rescue plan will do that. >> there is a notion, right, that the two parties are increasingly hopelessly polarized. and while that's partly true it is not the whole truth. because what's happening is not symmetrical. not a single republican backed the new covid relief bill but just think back over the past year. when donald trump and the republican president was president, and the economy cratered and republicans were essentially forced to pass stimulus bills democrats backed that legislation. they vote for economic stimulus multiple times in an election year even though they had to know and it probably did help donald trump's re-election bid. even though drimp put his name on the checks. democrats i guess if they wanted to play hardball, if they were psychos back in the spring and thought the better the economy's doing, the better donald trump will do in re-election they could have acted the way republicans are acting now but for a bunch of different complicated fascinating reasons, democratic politicians really are committed to the project of using government as a means of helping people that are struggling. the proof is in the pudding in this bill. and republicans, well, let's just say they're making a different calculation. why senator mazie hironi and joins me now. it was a rare all nighter for the members of the united states senate. >> yes. >> but how are you feeling now that you've come out of it with a bill? >> at the end of the day, although the republicans tried, they spent many, many hours trying to weaken the bill and at the end of the day we democrats knew that we were going to get a bill to help millions of people and that's what our commitment was and we -- it was worth it. >> was there any waivering? it was a long session, a back and forth. a vote held open. joe manchin on the phone with the white house. inside the caucus, you have the thinnest possible margin, a one-vote margin. is there like a huddle? did you get together physically? i don't know if you can do that in covid times. does everyone know we have to do this and we are going to do this or are there moments like this could sideways? >> i had little doubt to get this done because the democrats voted to use the reconciliation process. we all voted for the reconciliation bill so that was a commitment to get things done. and we did. it goes to show that we have a diverse caucus but at the end of the day we are here to help people. we believe government can do good for people. that's our belief and we act on that. >> are you surprised you didn't get a single republican vote? particularly because there's extended negotiations with ohio senator portman of adding changes to the bill that he wanted to see made. i think polling between 65% and 75%, very popular and will put money in people's pockets. are you surprised not one republican voted for it? >> i'm sr. disappointed that not one republican voted for it and neither did any republican in the house. my hope is that the american people will hold them to account and that they'll have to go back to their constituents and explain why they didn't lift a finger to get checks in people's hands to extend unemployment benefits, to help the state and counties get out of the economic crisis that they're in due to the pandemic. they should have to explain to their constituents not a single one deserve their help and vote. >> what lessons have democrats learned about legislating in this era of hyper polarization, particularly in the wake of 2009, the last time democrats controlled both houses of congress and the white house? >> understanding that mitch mcconnell's goal is to retake the senate and will not be us and pushing legislation that joe biden wants so that reality and recognition should hit us pretty soon and means that we are going to need to do filibuster reform. >> i want to follow up on that but first to go back it is striking looking at the two big domestic priorities of the administration and came in 2017, there were no democrats who voted on their way on either the aca or the tax cuts but on spending, on the big omnibuses and things like that it was a normal legislative process. there were negotiations, bipartisan working groups that were sort of working out what will be in the must pass spending bills and rolled along in the background. do you think those days are dead now with a republican -- a democratic president and michl mcconnell has the goals you say he does? >> it makes a huge difference in the calculation. his goal is to take back everything. that makes him very ruthless and frankly he doesn't have a philosophy of helping people that guides him. his guidepost is we need to take back the power so that's what we're up against and sadly we're going to need to do voting rights bill and fk. infrastructure. for the time that mcconnell was in power he did not bring a lot of legislation to the floor where the democrats were in the minority to exercise the vote powers. that's why he wants that filibuster to remain intact because we democrats are going to bring to the floor bills for debate that will help people and that's not where the republicans want to be, certainly not mcconnell. but i believe the reality of not getting things done for the american people will hit us pretty soon and will be talking about filibuster reform. that is my hope. >> you point to another important asymmetry here. we would remark in the last four years in the trump administration that after the two big legislative priorities, mcconnell stopped legislating. there was nothing left on the to-do list and confirmed judges all day. it was driving you all insane. >> yes. >> senate democrats have a very, very -- you can list eight to ten bills that you guys want in that body. >> yes. yes. mitch mcconnell wants to be able to be the guy that stops all of them and intent on keeping filibuster intact and why we need to change that to accomplish things. >> how active is that conversation inside the caucus? i have seen klobuchar, tina smith. you have been on this for a while but i know that not a lot of senators worry about protecting the role of the minority in a sort of partisan sense. hoump is that conversation developing in the senate? >> it's very much developing. when you hear even joe manchin say that maybe we should do filibuster reform requiring anybody against a measure to come to the floor and have to talk all night and all day if possible, that is an opening on joe manchin's part for filibuster reform. >> yeah. he made those xheptds this week and it is true that we don't have any talking required and saw ron johnson with an objection to the reading and sat there and then chris van hollen was able to swoop in. only so long senators are willing to sit in the chamber. senator, thank you so much for coming on the program. >> thank you so much. stay safe. be kind. >> all right. the two georgia senate races, the ones that just happened january 5th, that gave democrats control of the senate, they were the most expensive congressional races of time. combined $800 million spent on those two races. democrats could have spent a lot more and it still would have been worth it because the two wins paved the way for $1.5 trillion, conservativeliest mated in more in aid for desperate americans. the lessons democrats have learned about going big with paul who was there the last time around, next. ♪ ♪ ♪ when it comes to your financial health, just a few small steps can make a real difference. ♪ ♪ ♪ learn, save and spend with guidance from chase. confidence feels good. chase. make more of what's yours. (deborah vo) i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair, but nobody even sees them. (vo) discover the exclusive, new miracle-earmini- a nearly invisible hearing aid from the brand leader in hearing aids with over 70 years of experience. (deborah) when i finally had miracle-ear and i could hear for the first time, i started crying. i could hear everything. new miracle-earmini. so small and comfortable that no one will see them, but you'll notice the difference. call today to start your 30-day risk-free trial at your local miracle-ear. a lot of people think dealing with copd is a walk in the park. if i have something to help me breathe better, everything will be fun and nice. but i still have bad days flare-ups (coughs), which can permanently damage my lungs. my lungs need protection against flare-ups. so it's time to get real. because in the real world our lungs deserves the real protection of breztri. breztri gives you better breathing symptom improvement, and flare-up protection. it's the first and only copd medicine proven to reduce flare-ups by 52% breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. for real protection ask your doctor about breztri. the dangers of undershooting our response are far greater than overshooting. we should have learned the lesson, we should learn the lesson of 2008 and '09 when congress was too timd and it took years -- >> insisting on a big covid relief package. is because of what happened during the last big crisis. right? around 12 years ago. that is the last crisis presip tatded by a republican president that democratic administration immediately had to try to get out of. despite having both houses of congress and the white house the res lue package was in res to suspect too small to do what was needed and one of the loudest voices calling for more stimulus back then was nobel prize winning economist paul krueger. he himself joins me now. i have been covering this since back then. i was writing about the debates over the recovery act back then and the stimulus and now. what has changed? why -- how do you account for the massive difference between the approach this time around and last time? >> well, first of all, i think democrats have learned two things. one economic and one political. they have learned that when you're kind of at bottom, particularly when interest rates are already zero, there's a tremendous economic asymmetry. if you overshoot, okay, the federal reserve can raise interest rates and inflation can be contained. if you undershoot they can't cut but they have learned that political, that they have learned about the nature of their opposition. apparently according to accounts there were people in the obama inner circle thought if the first stimulus turned out not to be big enough they could go back for more. that may have been true when dirksen was the leader but not true when mitch mcconnell is the leader. if it is not big enough the other guys say, a-ha, see? the economic philosophy doesn't work and don't get a second chance and learned that. some of us did warn about that back then but now i think everybody gets it. >> i think there's -- on the political level it was interesting to see the republican governor of west virginia, again, this is a state trump carried by 40 points saying things like this. right? sounds like paul krugman circa 2009. it is this. at the end of the day if we overdo it a little bit, downside risk is minimal. if we underdo it, the downside risk is enormous. that did sink in broadly past just like little -- you know, the corp.er of econ twitter where people debate this. >> i have to say, i spent moets of my career as a pundit, you know, making arguments that turn out -- not always right but arguments that turn out to be right and vindicated in principal but never have it right in realtime. this time the democrats actually acted on it. people actually learned the lesson. and did the right thing. so i mean, it is -- i'm pinches myself wondering if this is a dream because we are responding more or less adequately to the crisis at hand. >> one thing i think about now as we watch the vaccinations which are right around 2.2 million a day, we conceive of a herd immunity and the rescue money, i'm not an economic prognosticator but the second half of the year could be really good. >> yeah. >> there's pent-up demand. it is not a natural disaster that took out physical capital. like the airplanes are all there and the hotels, broadway is still there. like you have to just -- we could have a pretty good second half of this year. >> there isn't the overhang of bad debt that we have this time around. >> right. >> so we really are -- i mean, to coin a phrase, this could very well be morning in america. goldman sachs, they have a very good team of economists, they're predicts that we will have 8% of growth this year. enough to get the economy back to full employment by early next year. now, that's not the end of the story. there's a tremendous amount of stuff to do down the line but i am expecting that a year from now we are going to be looking and saying, wow, incredible how much better things have gotten. >> one of the points of contention the last time around that you argued against was the case on other side made by respected economists, as well as folks on cnbc and the business press that there's no such thing as a free lunch and then you have crazy inflation and you're like zimbabwe and will overshoot and the economy will overheat and people make that argument again. in their defense the scale of intervention is much bigger this time but what's your -- how do you see that now? the threat of quote overheating? >> it is not a completely stupid thing to say. this is a very big package. the economy could be very strong by the end of the year so inflation ticks up a bit. that's not a problem. and for what's it worth i look at the latest is the of forecast, business forkers surveyed by bloomberg and predict a goldilocks recovery, not too hot or cold but just about right and gets us where we should be by early next year. they could be wrong. but it's not looking so bad and i'm actually really struck by where have all the real crazies gone? we have a debate between fairly sensible people about whether this package is maybe a bit too big or not but the people who were warning hyper inflation, collapse, frogs, boils, death of the firstborn back in 2009 seem to be all obsessed with dr. seuss instead so it's a -- i've been gratified to see that the really crazy people have been largely absent from the discussion this time around. >> it such a good point because the contours of the debate are different on that score. we noted that here that there haven't been a lot of arguments against presented by the republicans that fought it around the edges but never launched a full frontal assault on it as the way they did against the recovery act. >> a situation where if you want to have a big debate about this plan the people you roll out is me and larry summers. >> righ