Progs stalled it because the mods killed the original idea.
Which is fine by me. Many dems and nearly all pubs didn't like the idea it was borrowing against the debt in the original iteration. They wanted a shift in spending which already mutes the effects. For this whole thing to actually work it has to be new spending. But then if it's new spending, the money has to be coming from somewhere today or "tomorrow" ( in the case of taxation vs borrowing) and then you have to assume that the multiplier is greater with government spending versus private sector spending ( or really we are talking about investment into a bloated stock market).
It could be more beneficial to take what otherwise would be savings and run it into real infrastructure tied to transportation, but that wasn't going to happen with the progs. You'd also need the money to come from direct taxation and not borrowing. That way you'd squeeze the savings bubble and then maximize the economic impact through indirect and induced effects tied to supply chains and new consumption (think new paychecks on a large scale).
Those particular ideas are not digestible to moderate dems as it includes tax increases and indigestible to progs as the plan would be too socially limited.
www.nationalreview.com
