The Covid Relief Bill

[timschochet 35,713]

1. 75% of the American public supports the COVID relief bill. 
2. Over 50%of Republicans support it. 
3. The vast majority of Republican governors and state legislators support it. 
4. The main opposition to the bill was the minimum wage increase; that will not be part of the final bill so it is no longer an issue. 
5. During impeachment Republicans complained that we needed to move on as a nation to work on bipartisan proposals like COVID relief. 
 

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

Edited March 6 by timschochet

[rockaction 27,879]

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

1. 75% of the American public supports the COVID relief bill. 
2. Over 50%of Republicans support it. 
3. The vast majority of Republican governors and state legislators support it. 
4. The main opposition to the bill was the minimum wage increase; that will not be part of the final bill so it is no longer an issue. 
5. During impeachment Republicans complained that we needed to move on as a nation to work on bipartisan proposals like COVID relief. 
 

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

More importantly, who cares? It's not like the public is going to hold feet to the fire when they get their checks and Republicans can always point to the waste elements of the bill and claim they were for austerity measures and the checks, keeping themselves in good stead in the public eye.

And because they're politicians who are a bit rotten. Why else?

[timschochet 35,713]

7 minutes ago, rockaction said:

More importantly, who cares? It's not like the public is going to hold feet to the fire when they get their checks and Republicans can always point to the waste elements of the bill and claim they were for austerity measures and the checks, keeping themselves in good stead in the public eye.

And because they're politicians who are a bit rotten. Why else?

Any Republican who claims to be worried about austerity after the Trump years is going to look ridiculous. 

[IvanKaramazov 23,621]

11 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

[Doug B 7,318]

1 minute ago, IvanKaramazov said:

12 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

So ... what do people like Romney, Sasse, and Murkowski have to lose? If you don't hard-support Trump-nationalism anyway, you're no longer considered "Republican" anymore. Why draw the line on the COVID bill?

[NorvilleBarnes 4,445]

Covid Relief

[timschochet 35,713]

9 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

This might make some political sense if the Republicans had the power to kill the bill. But they don’t. So Biden still gets the win, and the GOP is deliberately giving itself...a loss? 

[timschochet 35,713]

Apparently this is that old motto: if you can’t beat ‘em, lose. 

[Sand 6,470]

25 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

There have been two efforts to replace that ridiculous Silicon Valley tunnel and redirect those monies to mental health issues due to COVID.  It was quashed both times.  

I'll explain the above if you can explain how that stays in a COVID relief bill.

[jm192 2,281]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-gop-covid-relief-bill-pet-projects

This outlines a lot of the gripes.  

Perhaps if Dems sent a bill that said "1400$ checks for all Americans," you'd be right that Republicans just think party over country. 

[timschochet 35,713]

4 minutes ago, Sand said:

There have been two efforts to replace that ridiculous Silicon Valley tunnel and redirect those monies to mental health issues due to COVID.  It was quashed both times.  

I'll explain the above if you can explain how that stays in a COVID relief bill.

OK here goes: 

Every large bill that passes through Congress inevitably has pork in it. Some of it, by itself, is indefensible. Unfortunately that’s the way business is done in Washington. If you choose to oppose this bill due to this way of doing business, I can respect that so long as you’re willing to consistently oppose every bill with pork attached. So far as I know, there is not a single legislator in either party who can make this argument. 

In this specific case I can’t comment on the Silicon Valley issue but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was indefensible. But of course the larger issue of the bill as a whole outweighs it. 
 

Your turn. 

[Summer Wheat 983]

39 minutes ago, timschochet said:

1. 75% of the American public supports the COVID relief bill. 
2. Over 50%of Republicans support it. 
3. The vast majority of Republican governors and state legislators support it. 
4. The main opposition to the bill was the minimum wage increase; that will not be part of the final bill so it is no longer an issue. 
5. During impeachment Republicans complained that we needed to move on as a nation to work on bipartisan proposals like COVID relief. 
 

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

I think they would if it was actually for COVID Relief.

[supermike80 1,884]

29 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

Boom.   I have to agree with this.  I have a feeling if there was a chance it wouldn't pass without republican support, some possibly many would flip.  But they dont need to.

[dgreen 3,355]

19 minutes ago, timschochet said:

This might make some political sense if the Republicans had the power to kill the bill. But they don’t. So Biden still gets the win, and the GOP is deliberately giving itself...a loss? 

What are they losing?

[Sand 6,470]

5 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Perhaps if Dems sent a bill that said "1400$ checks for all Americans," you'd be right that Republicans just think party over country. 

This would pass by large margins and by both sides.

 

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Your turn. 

The answer is both tribalism and the fact that most of the bill (not just a little pork) is a blue state bonanza of slush.  We still haven't spent 1T from the last bill.  So tribalism combined with items such as blue state budget bailouts generally make this bill a poison pill for the red team to vote for.  And, let's be clear, that's by design.  It's written so that it passes, but in a way for one team to decry the other as being evil and hating the citizenry.

[Mile High 5,372]

47 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Perhaps if Dems sent a bill that said "1400$ checks for all Americans," you'd be right that Republicans just think party over country. 

Maybe my remembering is off but didn't the Senate turn down a $2000 offer before they lost the Senate majority?

Edited March 2 by Mile High

[Mile High 5,372]

50 minutes ago, Sand said:

This would pass by large margins and by both sides

Probably but on Dec 28th 132 Republican house members voted against a $2000 stimulus bill. The Republican lead Senate didn't even vote on it.

Edited March 2 by Mile High

[Cowboysfan8 8,157]

1 hour ago, rockaction said:

More importantly, who cares? It's not like the public is going to hold feet to the fire when they get their checks and Republicans can always point to the waste elements of the bill and claim they were for austerity measures and the checks, keeping themselves in good stead in the public eye.

And because they're politicians who are a bit rotten. Why else?

This

Also, I’d guess 90% of Americans (that approve the Bill) don’t even know what’s in the Bill 

[shadrap 1,993]

1 hour ago, Sand said:

This would pass by large margins and by both sides.

 

The answer is both tribalism and the fact that most of the bill (not just a little pork) is a blue state bonanza of slush.  We still haven't spent 1T from the last bill.  So tribalism combined with items such as blue state budget bailouts generally make this bill a poison pill for the red team to vote for.  And, let's be clear, that's by design.  It's written so that it passes, but in a way for one team to decry the other as being evil and hating the citizenry.

bingo!

[rockaction 27,879]

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

In this specific case I can’t comment on the Silicon Valley issue but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was indefensible. But of course the larger issue of the bill as a whole outweighs it.

Not really. It depends what the pork is and how much a portion of the bill it takes up. I understand you come from the Jack Germond hardened/pragmatist school of politics, but let's not pretend they didn't just try and backdoor a huge increase to the federal minimum wage in there. People like you screaming to "just pass it" would have been willing accomplices to a bad idea shoved through in a bill maximizing a taking advantage of the situation. Bad news all around. 

[parasaurolophus 7,775]

8 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

This

Also, I’d guess 90% of Americans (that approve the Bill) don’t even know what’s in the Bill 

90% of congress probably doesnt either.

[Cowboysfan8 8,157]

10 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

90% of congress probably doesnt either.

Good point 

[jon_mx 9,623]

2 hours ago, timschochet said:

1. 75% of the American public supports the COVID relief bill. 
2. Over 50%of Republicans support it. 
3. The vast majority of Republican governors and state legislators support it. 
4. The main opposition to the bill was the minimum wage increase; that will not be part of the final bill so it is no longer an issue. 
5. During impeachment Republicans complained that we needed to move on as a nation to work on bipartisan proposals like COVID relief. 
 

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

Besides being wasteful spending.  It should be opposed, but i am not sure there is one fiscal conservative left in Washington DC

  

[jm192 2,281]

1 hour ago, Mile High said:

Maybe my remembering is off but didn't the Senate turn down a $2000 offer before they lost the Senate majority?

Has there been a single proposal that didn't include a bunch of extraneous funding?

I admittedly haven't looked closely at every proposal.  But what I have looked at seems to always have a ton of pork tied to it.  

Then we get a thread "Why don't Republicans want COVID relief?"  

I think they do, it's the pork we're hung up on.  If Dems love Americans so much, hack out all the pork and let's go.  Fund your bridges and tunnels other ways.

 

[BladeRunner 3,318]

So, we get another massive misrepresentation and gaslighting thread from Tim.  Great.

Tell me again this story about wanting to heal wounds and bring both sides together.  Seems like it was a nice fairy tale to tell.

Edited March 2 by BladeRunner

[ekbeats 731]

Because it’s not just a Covid relief bill.  And you know this. But what fun would it be if you didn’t get to demonize Republicans some more, right?

Edited March 2 by ekbeats

[jm192 2,281]

Maybe if we all stopped entertaining these threads, he stop posting them

[BladeRunner 3,318]

1 minute ago, jm192 said:

Maybe if we all stopped entertaining these threads, he stop posting them

Dude has been doing this for like 175 years.  At this point, nothing is going to stop him.

[Shula-holic 2,625]

2 hours ago, Sand said:

This would pass by large margins and by both sides.

 

The answer is both tribalism and the fact that most of the bill (not just a little pork) is a blue state bonanza of slush.  We still haven't spent 1T from the last bill.  So tribalism combined with items such as blue state budget bailouts generally make this bill a poison pill for the red team to vote for.  And, let's be clear, that's by design.  It's written so that it passes, but in a way for one team to decry the other as being evil and hating the citizenry.

Yes, and often pork is a way to get the votes of a region's representative.  Since they don't need any R votes there really isn't anyone here to "buy" with the pork.  It's just a product of the D's having the votes to do what they want so they can fill it with pork for their home areas.  The R's are never going to vote for this because they get no credit for it anyway and so why not take the side of not voting for it due to the pork.  

[Mile High 5,372]

47 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Has there been a single proposal that didn't include a bunch of extraneous funding?

The CASHact voted by the house was a bill to increase the stimulus check by $1400. The house passed it, the Republican lead Senate never voted on it.

[the rover 5,560]

3 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

Isn't pushing things through without any need for even a single Republican vote a win?   He will get all the credit; the GOP will get none.   If they actually worked in a good faith bipartisan manner, they could have taken a lot of the credit from Biden.   

[Stoneworker 315]

This from Romney's WSJ editorial...

*  The Congressional Budget Office’s recent analysis of the plan found that more than a third of the proposed funding—$700 billion—wouldn’t be spent until 2022 or later, undermining the administration’s claim that the massive price tag is justified for urgent pandemic-related needs.

*  The Biden stimulus calls for $170 billion for education yet has no realistic plan to reopen K-12 schools. Further, of the $80 billion Congress has already authorized for education, $68 billion hasn’t yet been used by schools and universities. Stunningly, the CBO says only 4% of the K-12 spending in the Biden bill would occur in 2021 and that some education and labor funds would remain unspent in 2029, after a potential Biden second term.

*  Extending federal supplemental unemployment benefits beyond March 14 is a good idea that merits bipartisan support. But the Biden stimulus calls for checks of $400 a week in addition to state checks through September. At that level, the majority of the unemployed would make more by not working. 

*  Senate Republicans will support whatever is needed to expand Covid testing, accelerate vaccine delivery and support health providers. We will likewise support robust assistance for those who have been crushed financially by the pandemic, including by losing their jobs.

[Mile High 5,372]

58 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Fund your bridges and tunnels other ways.

They don't really have too in this instance. They will pass a bill through Congress. Nothing gets done in this country without control of all 3 branches of government so might as well get what you can while you can.

[NorvilleBarnes 4,445]

3 hours ago, timschochet said:

Apparently this is that old motto: if you can’t beat ‘em, lose. 

Why am I not surprised that this is a motto that resonates with you.

[The Commish 14,424]

3 hours ago, Summer Wheat said:

I think they would if it was actually for COVID Relief.

You'd be wrong, but it IS nice to imagine this would be true.  We have short memories if we can't remember just a few months ago where a direct proposal of X dollars per person with NOTHING else in it was rejected by the GOP.  This is all about "sides".

Edited March 3 by The Commish

[FairWarning 1,334]

11 minutes ago, The Commish said:

You'd be wrong, but it IS nice to imagine this would be true.  We have short memories if we can't remember just a few months ago where a direct proposal of X dollars per person with NOTHING else in it was rejected by the GOP.  This is all about "sides".

Until an election year, yes.

[Drunken Cowboy 1,660]

4 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

Exactly, McConnell hasn't been shy about admitting this strategy in the past 

[Summer Wheat 983]

18 minutes ago, The Commish said:

You'd be wrong, but it IS nice to imagine this would be true.  We have short memories if we can't remember just a few months ago where a direct proposal of X dollars per person with NOTHING else in it was rejected by the GOP.  This is all about "sides".

It guess really does not matter as it will get passed.  I just don`t get why all these bills that are touted for health care and COVID end up with all these pet projects attached to them.  

[CletiusMaximus 9,802]

7 hours ago, timschochet said:

4. The main opposition to the bill was the minimum wage increase; that will not be part of the final bill so it is no longer an issue. 
 

Why on earth did they cave on this?  Yes, it’s a rhetorical question.  

[Drunken Cowboy 1,660]

20 minutes ago, CletiusMaximus said:

Why on earth did they cave on this?  Yes, it’s a rhetorical question.  

They didn't really have a choice 

[unckeyherb 1,637]

Is it not possible to simply put forth a bill that funds COVID relief and only COVID relief?  I get the idea that pork is included in most maybe all bills.  But the numbers I’m seeing is that something like 9% of the bill is actually funding for people affected by COVID to be applied this year.  Shame on everyone for playing politics with this.  Just propose a bill that does what it is intended to do.  If the gop still turns their nose up at it then they can suffer the consequences.  I doubt that would be the case.  ####### ridiculous 

[tonydead 8,483]

8 hours ago, Sand said:

 

 

The answer is both tribalism and the fact that most of the bill (not just a little pork) is a blue state bonanza of slush.  We still haven't spent 1T from the last bill.  So tribalism combined with items such as blue state budget bailouts generally make this bill a poison pill for the red team to vote for.  And, let's be clear, that's by design.  It's written so that it passes, but in a way for one team to decry the other as being evil and hating the citizenry.

[timschochet 35,713]

6 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

Dude has been doing this for like 175 years.  At this point, nothing is going to stop him.

Awful silly. I’ve started plenty of threads congratulating Republicans. If they would get on board here I’d be the first to do so again. 

[Drunken Cowboy 1,660]

I think people need to remember this is primarily an economic stimulus bill.

[FairWarning 1,334]

5 hours ago, CletiusMaximus said:

Why on earth did they cave on this?  Yes, it’s a rhetorical question.  

Maybe they listened to small business for a change.  If NYC wants to pay their workers $15/hour, go ahead.  

[FairWarning 1,334]

2 hours ago, timschochet said:

Awful silly. I’ve started plenty of threads congratulating Republicans. If they would get on board here I’d be the first to do so again. 

OK, I'm on board ONLY if they drop everything else.  Are the D's for a Covid relief bill on those terms?  DOubtful.  

[jon_mx 9,623]

11 hours ago, Shula-holic said:

Yes, and often pork is a way to get the votes of a region's representative.  Since they don't need any R votes there really isn't anyone here to "buy" with the pork.  It's just a product of the D's having the votes to do what they want so they can fill it with pork for their home areas.  The R's are never going to vote for this because they get no credit for it anyway and so why not take the side of not voting for it due to the pork.  

Whose vote did they have to buy?   No one.  It was just an opportunity to get $1.8 trillion of leftwing goodies under the guise of providing $0.2 Triilion in free money for voters under the guise of being COVID relief.  

[The Commish 14,424]

11 hours ago, Summer Wheat said:

It guess really does not matter as it will get passed.  I just don`t get why all these bills that are touted for health care and COVID end up with all these pet projects attached to them.  

This is the way it's been since forever.  It's too hard to do things the correct way, so this is the way they do them.  Part of the reason it's easy for me not to "stand" with either party.  They're two sides of the same coin no matter how different each "side" thinks they are from the other.  I mean, in this very thread there is alleged "outrage" that this thing is passing by one side who was cheering on the tax cuts (which are temporary to you and me, but permanent to corporations) and some of the labeled "fat" in this bill people are "outraged" over even after acknowledging that infrastructure projects are necessary and something almost all of us agree on.  

[The Commish 14,424]

11 hours ago, FairWarning said:

Until an election year, yes.

It's all about sides ESPECIALLY in an election year.   

[Ramblin Wreck 14,688]

6 hours ago, timschochet said:

Awful silly. I’ve started plenty of threads congratulating Republicans. If they would get on board here I’d be the first to do so again. 

  You'll congratulate Republicans when they go along with your side?  How about removing all the pork from the bill and trying again?