Go For The Gold
Democrats have one choice when it comes to passing COVID-relief and it's not bipartisanship.
Congressional Democrats are facing an increasingly do-or-die question: do they proceed with plans to enact President Biden’s ambitious $1.9 billion COVID-relief bill via the budget reconciliation process (allowing it to pass with only Democratic votes), or do they enter negotiations with Republicans for a smaller bipartisan bill?
This shouldn’t even be a question. The first option is the only viable choice for Democrats, even as ten Republican senators announced their support on Sunday for a smaller, $600 billion relief package. That Republicans are willingly stepping up to the table and embracing a stimulus measure is a positive development. Ten Republicans, plus all 50 Democrats and independents is the magic number to break a filibuster in the Senate. But no one should confuse this offer with a serious legislative proposal.
The GOP plan would reduce proposed stimulus checks from $1400 to $1000 and target them more directly than Biden’s plan. The Republican proposal would not include money for state or local aid (a key Democratic priority) would reduce emergency unemployment benefits, and does not indicate support for a $15 minimum wage. In short, this is not remotely close to what Democrats want to see enacted - and of course all it would take is one of them to back off from the proposal to doom its chances of passage in the Senate.
The GOP offer is at its core a public relations move, intended to give off the appearance that Republicans are interested in a bipartisanship, when in reality they’re playing the proverbial role of Lucy from the Peanuts, holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick it and then moving it away as soon as he swings his foot (pictured above).
With the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump beginning a week from today - and Senate business being shut down - Democrats don’t have time to waste on drawn out negotiations that, if past experience is any indication, will go nowhere.
Back in 2009 when Democrats spent months negotiating with Republicans over health care reform they did so not necessarily to strike a deal, but rather to signal to red state Senate Democrats that they were making every possible effort to reach a bipartisan agreement. Like the GOP relief proposal it was mainly a performative gesture. Centrist Democrats like Evan Bayh of Indiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, or Joe Lieberman of Connecticut were not going to agree to a completely partisan piece of legislation unless Democrats had gone through the motions of trying to work with Republicans. They did, Republicans balked, and 60 Senate Democrats came together to pass Obamacare.
Democratic leaders don’t face the same problem now. With the exception of Joe Manchin of West Virginia and perhaps Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, Democrats remain united behind the path of reconciliation. Indeed, Democratic Senator Jon Tester of Montana said in a CNN interview over the weekend, “I don't think $1.9 trillion, even though it is a boatload of money, is too much money. I think now is not the time to starve the economy.” Tester is one of three Democratic senators who represent states won by Donald Trump in 2020 and yet he does not sound like a man who is having second thoughts about embracing a legislative package that relies exclusively on Democratic votes.
To Tester’s point, the more money that Democrats can pump into the economy (and into the pockets of American voters) the better the political impact. Would you rather be the politician that goes to voters and brags about putting $1400 in their pockets or the one that voted against it? In addition, considering the political upside of nearly $2 trillion in stimulus vs. $600 billion there is no good reason for Democrats to think small.
Having said all that I fully expect the price tag of Biden’s relief package to be reduced. Manchin may demand some pare back and the White House may try to shave off a few billion in order to win over the support of a handful of Republican senators. Just because Democrats can pass reconciliation with 50 votes plus Vice President Kamala Harris’s tie-breaking vote it doesn’t mean they have to; and, in general, it would be better to get a few Republican votes if only to give the final package greater political legitimacy. Just a few Republican voters in favor of the legislation would allow President Biden and the Democrats to call it a bipartisan accomplishment (even though it really wouldn’t be).
But make no mistake, as nice as it might be to pass a bipartisan bill, the benefits of doing so pale in comparison to passing a significant relief bill - and quickly. As Elliot Morris points out in his excellent Substack newsletter, “almost every element of Biden’s agenda enjoys plurality support among all American adults, and most are popular with a majority. That’s true even if you adjust the polls for being biased toward liberal opinions.”
In more basic political terms, Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii made clear the stakes in a tweet over the weekend. “We were elected to deliver Covid relief,” he wrote. While that’s not 100 percent accurate, it’s pretty clear that Democrats see passing COVID relief as crucial to fulfilling the promises they made on the campaign trail in 2020. Statements like these from Schatz, which have been echoed by other Democratic senators, only increase the pressure on them to get something done.
As much as voters might like it if everyone in Washington gets along they care far more about results. Democrats can deliver but only if they worry less about how it will look and more about the impact it will have.
I think that taking a closer look at where the relief money is going is not a bad idea. Here in MN we have so many help wanted signs and no one going to work because they are making more money at home with these relief programs. Then we have small businesses struggling because their workers are not coming back, because they make more money staying home. Then we have the families making the $100,000 and getting $ they outright say they don’t need and simply put into savings or play with the stock market. And then there are those who really do honesty need the money- for example a teacher whose spouse works an hourly job, whose hours were cut but not enough to qualify for any type of unemployment or other Covid aid, so those checks are used to pay bills. The government is determining how much and who gets checks based upon Tax records. Maybe look at those and really find those who need it- making below $70-50,000. Look at small buisness and send them their payroll money from taxes as well as rent, etc they spend to jeep their business going and to get their workers back. Jobs are out there- yes there are those who cannot work, no doubt and they deserve to be taken care of and helped. But there are many who were working before the pandemic but are choosing to not go back because they are making more at home.
Also, give money to schools specifically for their heater/air conditioning systems. Study upon study has shown air filtration is the key- schools are old and many have horrible heating systems so give them the funding to fix and to buy room purifiers for every classroom and office! People make this so complicated- air filtration in schools is key to getting children back into classrooms- not really “reopen” as schools are OPEN- teachers teach daily online.
ACA wasn't the only program that Pepublicans played bait and switch with. Until they fess up to lying about the past election they can watch from the sidelines.