Some portray events as a quid pro quo in which money was funneled to her contemporaneous with negotiations, thereby securing her roadblock of the legislation until Democratic leadership capitulated to her demands./Flickr
Opinion: Sen. Kyrsten Sinema was not kowtowing to the private equity industry when she pushed to change some provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act.
By Dan Mahoney opinion contributor
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., did not use the Inflation Reduction Act to troll for donations, which some media reports seem to suggest.
Much of the media would have us believe that Sen. Kyrsten Sinema was bought off by the private equity (PE) industry and other Wall Street barons in the recent negotiations over the Inflation Reduction Act.
Some portray the events as a quid pro quo in which money was funneled to her contemporaneous with negotiations, thereby securing her roadblock of the legislation until Democratic leadership capitulated to her demands.
This characterization is not only revisionist history but also promotes a dangerous narrative.
Let’s set the record straight.
Sinema spelled out her opposition long ago
One recent AP article attempted to create a direct link between Sen. Sinema’s receipt of political donations and her decision to oppose increases to certain corporate and individual taxes previously contained in the Act.
To wit: “The donations [from the private equity industry], which make Sinema one of the industry’s top beneficiaries in Congress, serve a reminder of the way that high-power lobbying campaigns can have dramatic implications for the way legislation is crafted … .”
It is a false inference.
