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 was all but dead Wednesday as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell proposed an alternative approach of loading up the bill with other White House priorities that appeared destined to fail.
The roadblock mounted by Senate Republicans appears unsurmountable, even as pressure builds to approve the bigger checks. 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, agree. But most GOP senators oppose more spending, even if they are also wary of bucking Trump.
Senators will be back at it after McConnell blocked a vote Tuesday, but his new bill—which makes the $2,000 payments contingent on the formation of a commission to investigate the 2020 election as well as a complicated repeal of big tech liability protections—does not have enough support to pass.
“What we’re seeing right now is Leader McConnell trying to kill the checks—the $2,000 checks desperately needed by so many American families,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said at the Capitol.
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.
Trump has berated Republican leaders for the stonewalling, finding rare common cause with the Democrats pushing them to act. Leading Republicans warned that the GOP’s refusal to provide more aid as the virus worsens will jeopardize next week’s Senate election in Georgia.
“The Senate Republicans risk throwing away two seats and control of the Senate,” said Newt Gingrich, the former congressional leader, on Fox News. He called on Senate Republicans to “get a grip and not try to play cute parliamentary games with the president’s $2,000 payment.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “These Republicans in the Senate seem to have an endless tolerance for other people’s sadness.”
Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said some of the $600 payments were being sent by direct deposit to Americans’ bank accounts as early as Tuesday night. Mnuchin tweeted that paper checks will begin to go out Wednesday.
Saying little, McConnell is trying to provide an offramp for GOP senators to avoid a tough vote. Republicans are 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.
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.
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. “Working families need help now.” He also tried to force a vote on the relief checks, 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.
Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Marco Rubio of Florida, among the party’s potential 2024 presidential hopefuls, also are pushing the party in the president’s direction.
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.
In the House, 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 on Monday for a robust two-thirds vote of approval.
It’s highly likely 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, as a way to give senators a chance to show they took action.
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 year-end package—$900 billion in COVID-19 aid and $1.4 trillion to fund government agencies through September—is potentially one last confrontation before the new Congress is sworn in Sunday.
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.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
The fact that some portion of the billions in headshaking foreign aid can’t be converted to pay for these larger checks is just mind blowing to common sense Americans from either side of the isle. For the GOP Senators to decide that this is the moment they want to claim fiscal responsibility is beyond embarrassing.
Shame on McConnell and shame on those who stand behind this sorry excuse for a representative of the PEOPLE….To all those Kentuckians who voted to keep him in office, what were you thinking? Could you have used the $2,000? Too late…
McConnell is doing what experienced legislators have done for years; take a popular issue that he hates, add to it “deal killer” items then pretend he is trying to do something popular when in reality he is killing it. His refusal to bring a stand alone bill up for a vote is probably being quietly encouraged by several R senators who do not want to vote against it and be on record for that “no” vote. Another common legislative tactic.
Quote: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “These Republicans in the Senate seem to have an endless tolerance for other people’s sadness.”
Right, Nancy, which is why you stonewalled Trump’s proposed earlier legislation “to relieve other people’s sadness” that would have benefited Trump’s reelection, you two-faced @#$%&%$#.
Bob I see you hate the Speaker, but the ball is in the GOP Senate’s court. It could have been approved via voice vote and out to people today. This is what Mitch has been doing since he vowed to make Obama a 1 term President.
Bob, you ever watch Schoolhouse Rock for how legislation works? Trump can propose whatever he wants. Someone needs to introduce the bill and get it passed.
Did any Republicans pass a bill, any bill, in the last six months out of the Senate (which is controlled by them) over to become Nancy Pelosi’s fault?
The House passed a bill back in May that the Senate did nothing with. The Senate has had plenty of ability to pass a bill of their own – or even vote up/down on the House bill – but they’ve yet to do so. Mitch McConnell hasn’t wanted to do anything the last six months save shove more unqualified judges into lifetime appointments.
It’s amazing the Republican stance against this bill … we shouldn’t pass it, some money might go to people who don’t need it … funny enough, when they pass a big tax cut for their ultra-rich donors, some of those folks don’t need that money either … I know, I know, that’s different…
I really have trouble understanding these stimulus checks. If we have expanded UI benefits, then why would we be sending $2k to most Americans? A lot of people simply do not need these income based stimulus checks, it is a waste of money. If we did expanded UI benefits, min of $300 extra, then increased based on COL index, seems like that would cover assistance to those who need it. Or better yet, tie UI benefits to a ratio of 80% of current income. Maybe I am missing something.
That’s what many other industrialized countries have done. So, obviously, it couldn’t be done here because we are America … which means we don’t learn from or listen to other countries.
The Republican plan for helping people is simple … there is no plan. Just like their plan to fix healthcare… there is no plan.
You’re on the right track, here, S.B.
Remove the pork from the previous bill and redirect to the American people and everyone would probably get $10K apiece
“All but” means “anything except” which would mean the bill is not dead. Is anybody else annoyed how the connotative meaning of “all but” has lead to it meaning the exact opposite of what the words would indicate?
It’s always funny reading these comments. Apparently Trump supporters now like socialism, as long as it’s coming from their dear leader.
Right, D.M; that works for raising children, doesn’t it? Buy them whatever they scream for at Wal-Mart and they’ll surely grow up to be well-adjusted, respectful, responsible adults, right? NOT
Not me, Wesley. I’m an ardent Trump supporter but know that when I see HELP WANTED signs wall-to-wall in front of most businesses, people need an incentive to go work, not an excuse to wait at home for “the government” to send them yet another check to put off having to go to work.
The United Auto Workers is a prime example of this. Go to any car lot and note the low inventory of new vehicles they have for sale. Do you know why? Because the U.A.W. has allowed them to collect almost full pay and all manner of “unemployment” benefits, using the Wuhan Virus epidemic as an excuse to not go to work building new cars and trucks if an individual member is “afraid” of the virus.
So Bob, are you willing to admit Donald Trump is a socialist? He’s sounding quite similar to Bernie Sanders lately…
Strong pro-life position there, Bob.
Here’s a crazy idea: maybe places can’t find help because they don’t pay a wage that’s worth it. Offer more in pay and see if that encourages people to work for you. I see lots of fast food places offering “up to” $13 an hour; I never see such signs outside Costco and I’ve never had a bad customer experience there. Wouldn’t be because you can work your way up to $25 an hour at Costco (plus time-and-a-half on Sundays) and bonuses and holidays with your family and paid time off, would it?
I have to agree with SB, on expansion of the UI benefits, getting in the hands of those who really need it. I haven’t seen a single positive comment in any media that thought sending buckets of money to countries such as Pakistan for gender studies was worth depriving Americans. It reminds me of ALW’s Evita and the song, “And the money keeps rolling in, we don’t know how…” Let’s see, should we send it to Flint, Michigan to help rebuild their water infrastructure or send it to a foreign country for their use in prevention of poaching. Our people and families are hurting; we can help.
Or we can do both. We’ve enough money to do it. Foreign aid is simply another part of national defense. Buy ‘em off, hopefully they don’t attack. Not always a perfect strategy, admittedly.