Former Treasury Department Official Claims Inflation Reduction Act Will Move US Toward ‘Neo-Marxist’ Economic Model

President Joe Biden (C) signs the Inflation Reduction Act with (L-R) Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), and Rep. Kathy Catsor (D-Fla.) in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, on Aug. 16, 2022. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

A high-ranking official at the U.S. Department of Treasury has taken aim at the Inflation Reduction Act recently signed into law by President Joe Biden, alleging that the act which purports to prioritize environmental concerns is a means of “reengineering” the U.S. economy to favor “neo-Marxist” ideals.

Monica Crowley, who served as assistant press secretary for the Treasury Department under President Donald Trump, spoke to reporters on Fox News on Tuesday, warning that the Inflation Reduction Act marks a departure from free market ideals and toward the collectivist economic models favored by communist dictatorships.

“Here we have another bill that is moving this country away from economic freedom and free market capitalism toward a more neo-Marxist kind of collectivist model,” Crowley said. “So when the Left talks to you about climate change, when they say they’re really interested in preserving the environment, they might have some top-line concern about those issues. But that’s not what any of this is about. What it’s about is, again, reengineering the U.S. economy, and because the energy sector is the biggest lever that’s available to them in order to achieve that, that’s what they continue to attack, and that’s why they continue to spend the way they do.”

Crowley’s emphasis on the environmental promises of the act is in keeping with the content of the bill itself, which entails a great deal of ink spilled over policies to reduce man-made carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere, among other provisions seemingly unrelated to inflation.

The Inflation Reduction Act entails a broad scope of new policies, which the bill’s authors summarize “will make a historic down payment on deficit reduction to fight inflation, invest in domestic energy production and manufacturing, and reduce carbon emissions by roughly 40 percent by 2030. The bill will also finally allow Medicare to negotiate for prescription drug prices and extend the expanded Affordable Care Act program for three years, through 2025.”

Administrative Overreach?

The act earmarks more than $360 billion to fight climate change, but many economists and policymakers believe that additional government spending can have an inflationary effect by circulating more money in the economy. A release by the bipartisan Congressional Joint Economic Committee found that the current level of inflation may be the result of COVID-19 stimulus spending, claiming that “rising inflation may be the direct result of government stimulus, which significantly increased household income and demand at a time when labor markets and other business functions remain below their pre-pandemic strengths.”

The Inflation Reduction Act has been lampooned by critics who allege that the title of the bill misleads as to its true contents, focusing on environmental concerns while reducing inflation in name only.

“The Patriot Act wasn’t patriotic. The No Child Left Behind Act leaves tens of millions of children behind. The Affordable Care Act makes health care more expensive. In unrelated news, government just passed the Inflation Reduction Act,” remarked Spike Cohen, founder of the libertarian-leaning Political Action Committee You Are The Power.

However, despite its ambitious spending on clean energy and climate change measures, the bill also includes many provisions to support the fossil fuel industry, likely as a measure to appease Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), whose interest in protecting the coal industry in his home state has caused him to oppose the more radical proposals of environmental activists. Consequently, the Inflation Reduction Act also includes provisions for investment in new pipelines, oil and gas drilling, and carbon capture technology.

If polling is any indication, the bill’s branding as an anti-inflation measure has failed to convince the great majority of the American public. A recent survey conducted by The Economist, for example, found that only 12 percent of respondents believed that the Inflation Reduction Act would reduce inflation, compared with 40 percent who believed the act would increase inflation. While the survey did not ask respondents whether the act would also result in more “neo-Marxist” economic policies, it appears clear that many people are not buying the bill’s promise to reign in inflation.