Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowPresident Donald Trump’s push for $2,000 COVID-19 relief checks is on hold in the Senate after Republicans blocked a swift vote proposed by Democrats and split within their own ranks over whether to boost spending or defy the White House.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signaled an alternative approach to Trump’s checks that might not divide his party so badly, but could result in no action at all.
The GOP leader filed new legislation late Tuesday linking the president’s demand for bigger checks with two other Trump priorities—repealing protections for tech companies like Facebook or Twitter that the president complained are unfair to conservatives as well the establishment of a bipartisan commission to review the 2020 presidential election he lost to President-elect Joe Biden.
Pressure is mounting on the Senate. Trump wants the Republican-led chamber to follow the House and increase the checks from $600 for millions of Americans. A growing number of Republicans, including two senators in runoff elections on Jan. 5 in Georgia, have said they will support the larger amount. But most GOP senators oppose more spending, even if they are also wary of bucking Trump.
Senators will be back at it Wednesday as McConnell is devising a way out of the political bind, but the outcome is highly uncertain.
“There’s one question left today: Do Senate Republicans join with the rest of America in supporting $2,000 checks?” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said as he made a motion to vote.
Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said some of the $600 payments might be sent by direct deposit to Americans’ bank accounts as early as Tuesday night. Mnuchin tweeted that paper checks will begin to go out Wednesday.
The showdown over the $2,000 checks has thrown Congress into a chaotic year-end session just days before new lawmakers are set to be sworn into office for the new year. It’s preventing action on another priority—overturning Trump’s veto on a sweeping defense bill that has been approved every year for 60 years.
“The Senate will begin a process,” McConnell said. He said little more, only that he would bring the president’s demand for the $2,000 checks and other remaining issues “into focus.”
The president’s last-minute push for bigger checks leaves Republicans deeply split between those who align with Trump’s populist instincts and those who adhere to what had been more traditional conservative views against government spending. Congress had settled on smaller $600 payments in a compromise over the big, year-end relief bill Trump reluctantly signed into law.
Liberal senators led by Bernie Sanders of Vermont who support the relief aid are blocking action on the defense bill until a vote can be taken on Trump’s demand for $2,000 for most Americans.
“The working class of this country today faces more economic desperation than at any time since the Great Depression of the 1930s,” Sanders said as he also tried to force a vote on the relief checks. “Working families need help now.” But McConnell objected a second time.
The GOP blockade is causing turmoil for some as the virus crisis worsens nationwide and Trump amplifies his unexpected demands.
The two GOP senators from Georgia, David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, announced Tuesday they support Trump’s plan for bigger checks as they face Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock in runoff elections that will determine which party controls the Senate.
“I’m delighted to support the president,” said Perdue on Fox News. Loeffler said in an interview on Fox that she, too, backs the boosted relief checks.
Trump repeated his demand in a tweet ahead of Tuesday’s Senate session: ”$2000 for our great people, not $600!”
Following Trump’s lead, Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Marco Rubio of Florida, among the party’s potential 2024 presidential hopefuls, are pushing the party in the president’s direction.
“We’ve got the votes. Let’s vote today,” Hawley tweeted.
Other Republicans panned the bigger checks saying the nearly $400 billion price tag was too high, the relief is not targeted to those in need and Washington has already dispatched ample sums on COVID aid.
“We’ve spent $4 trillion on this problem,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.
The House vote late Monday to approve Trump’s request was a stunning turn of events. Just days ago, during a brief Christmas Eve session, Republicans blocked Trump’s sudden demand for bigger checks as he defiantly refused to sign the broader COVID-19 aid and year-end funding bill into law.
As Trump spent days fuming from his private club in Florida, where he is spending the holidays, millions of Americans saw jobless aid lapse and the nation risked a federal government shutdown Tuesday.
Dozens of Republicans calculated it was better to link with Democrats to increase the pandemic payments rather than buck the outgoing president and constituents counting on the money. House Democrats led passage, 275-134, but 44 Republicans joined almost all Democrats for a robust two-thirds vote of approval.
It’s highly possible that McConnell will set up votes ahead on both the House-passed measure supporting Trump’s $2,000 checks as well as his own new version linking it with the repeal of tech company liability shield in “section 230” of communications law as well as the new presidential election review commission.
That’s a process that almost ensures neither bill will pass.
Trump’s push could fizzle out in the Senate but the debate over the size and scope of the package—$900 billion in COVID-19 aid and $1.4 trillion to fund government agencies—is potentially one last confrontation before the new Congress is sworn in Sunday.
For now, the $600 checks are set to be delivered, along with other aid, among the largest rescue packages of its kind.
The COVID-19 portion of the bill revives a weekly pandemic jobless benefit boost—this time $300, through March 14—as well as the popular Paycheck Protection Program of grants to businesses to keep workers on payrolls. It extends eviction protections, adding a new rental assistance fund.
Americans earning up to $75,000 will qualify for the direct $600 payments, which are phased out at higher income levels, and there’s an additional $600 payment per dependent child.
Biden supports the $2,000 checks and said Tuesday the aid package is merely a “down payment” on what he plans to deliver once in office.
Economists said a $600 check will help, but that it’s a far cry from the spending power that a $2,000 check would provide for the economy.
“It will make a big difference whether it’s $600 versus $2,000,” said Ryan Sweet, an economist with Moody’s.
The president also objected to foreign aid funding that his own administration had requested and vowed to send Congress “a redlined version” with spending items he wants removed. But those are merely suggestions to Congress. Democrats said they would resist such cuts.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
I am still trying to figure out the need for this extra money. If people on unemployment are getting the same or more than what they made, why are they not paying rent and needing these checks? Basic economics, income remains the same, expenses should be lower (transportation, eating out, social activities), where are these peoples money going? School lunches are free. These checks will go towards credit card debt from the holidays. I am all for supporting people, but not understanding what people are doing with the same money they had pre-pandemic.
My impression is that very few on unemployment are still receiving funds equal to the amount they received when they were employed. Therefore, how could they possibly be able to pay their bills?
Most made more than their income for months, then it was reduced to making about the same. You also need to reduce spending when your income changes. There are people that need help, there are services to help those people. Sending checks to a household making $150K is just confusing to me.
FYI – we have had issues hiring people, and I know several other businesses in the same boat, due to people making more to stay home. The economics don’t work.
The money needs to be put back in the small businesses so they can continue to hire and keep their employees employed.
David – the bill revives the PPP program for small businesses.
Also … what are you paying per hour/week/month, and how much risk of coronavirus infection do employees have to take when working at your place of employment?
Joe – I am all for the PPP and to keep employees paid. My employees didn’t miss a dime when we were closed. PPP and my pocket kept them paid and employed. What I pay my employees is irrelevant. If you are paid more to stay home, people will do it. If people are out due to Covid and you work for a company with less than 500 employees, you should be paid 2/3 of your salary for the time you are out through the FFCRA program. I then paid the other third. Minimal risk in our office, but outside socializing did catch up with people.
I’m 100% behind the PPP program and hope it is done better this time around to help small business, but to put random money in pockets isn’t going to help the whole story.
Each bill should be voted on its own merits. The election commission and section 230 have nothing to do with providing aid to the American people. As such, there is zero good reasons other then petty politics for associating them.
The $2,000 payouts are meant to not only help individuals who, in one way or the other all need it, but to boost the economy for all. Attaching legislation to go after Facebook or Twitter for opposing the current administration and to investigate further the fact that Trump got his ass kicked in the election, even after state after state proved their was no fraudulent acts at the polls, is an attack on ALL Americans who deserve better!
The best thing that can happen in the days ahead is for the two Democratic Senatorial candidates to win the Runoff Election in Georgia!
That’s the worst thing that can happen. We need divided government to hold the parties in check. You may think it will be wonderful if Democrats can do whatever they like, but It’s not going to be good in the long run especially if the far left side of the party gets it’s way.
Spare me the concerns with a handful of far left Congress folks. The Trumpublicans are out there trying to overturn the result of the election they lost. That should be the #1 concern of ALL voters. Reminder, the only fraud perpetrated in the 2020 election was that there was fraud that would change the result. The Congress folks who vote against accepting the results on January 6th should be forced to resign for their treasonous behavior.
Divided government to hold each other in check is a great idea if both parties are functioning. But it doesn’t work when the Republican Party has to figure out if they’re a Donald Trump personality cult uninterested in democracy and functioning government … or just a party interested in slashing taxes for the rich and benefits for the rest of us. That’s a far bigger gulf than what the Democrats have going.
Also, the Democrats just responded to your concerns about the far left by nominating the most centrist, boring candidate they had. What’s really happening is that the Republicans are moving farther right than the Democrats are moving to the left… so if you’re a centrist, you end up being a Democrat because the Republicans are leaving the realm of rational political discourse.