Democrats purposely delaying Stimulus Package

Democrats are sort of in a serious pickle with this stimulus package.

On one hand they know they need to produce some kind of serious response to the damage from the coronavirus. Americans want it. Both left and right Americans. Do nothing is not an alternative.

On the other hand- and this is actually a serious problem for them- all, and I do mean to say all, of their free shiite that they thought was going to get them elected before this crisis came along is very, very, very expensive too. So if they get cornered into supporting a four trillion dollar stimulus plan along with the republicans..........HOW MUCH APPETITE DO YOU THINK THE AVERAGE AMERICAN IS GOING TO HAVE FOR THE COST OF THEIR FREEBIE NON-CORONA PLANS? That's why they are trying to get all their pet projects attached as riders to the corona plan bailout. I mean, yes, that game always gets played to a large extent with every big bill, but this one is sooooo large that they know that they will only get groans if they pass a smaller bill but then try to come back before the election with their campaign free stuff proposals.

You can see the pickle they are in. Even the dem candidates- Poco and Bernie being prime examples- were tossed out on their arses because they could not get the public to digest their big dollar proposals. Try running reparations, and free college, and student debt forgiveness, etc up the flagpole and see how much appetite there is for it after this bill passes. Thats why they are trying to squeeze all that stuff in so that they can get some wins. They know they are not going to get another chance at bat on that and green new deal shit after this bill passes. If they can get them attached, well then they have some feathers in their caps to take to the election, but if they don't, they are screwed blue and tattooed.
 
I try to stay out of politics, but if the Dems were going to go hold up the bill they had better go big.

1T more I'd say is it. Never mind what's in it, the headline number will work.
 
I have never heard of Gallaudet University charter school in DC. Why on earth would SanFranShitholeNan want taxpayers to give it $7,000,000 in the coronavirus bailout?

Minority banks and credit unions? Can someone spell "Maxine Waters' Husband"?

And the list goes on. Tards being snookered.

Someone is licking someone's asshole. Must be a demonrat thing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1242214528642879497
 
One section of the House Democratic bill, titled "Diversity Report," would establish a congressional oversight panel requiring any corporation that receives federal aid related to coronavirus to provide "diversity data" to congress. The panel would publish a report on its findings the following year.

The required data would include demographic information about the corporation's employees and board members in terms of "race, gender, and ethnic identity." The panel would also demand demographics data on the corporation's suppliers, service providers, consultants, and the various financial institutions utilized by the company.

GFY
 
DTB2 said:
One section of the House Democratic bill, titled "Diversity Report," would establish a congressional oversight panel requiring any corporation that receives federal aid related to coronavirus to provide "diversity data" to congress. The panel would publish a report on its findings the following year.

The required data would include demographic information about the corporation's employees and board members in terms of "race, gender, and ethnic identity." The panel would also demand demographics data on the corporation's suppliers, service providers, consultants, and the various financial institutions utilized by the company.

GFY
More...


Cry more, nothing passes without Pelosi's say so.

Deal with it.
 
DTB2 said:
One section of the House Democratic bill, titled "Diversity Report," would establish a congressional oversight panel requiring any corporation that receives federal aid related to coronavirus to provide "diversity data" to congress. The panel would publish a report on its findings the following year.

The required data would include demographic information about the corporation's employees and board members in terms of "race, gender, and ethnic identity." The panel would also demand demographics data on the corporation's suppliers, service providers, consultants, and the various financial institutions utilized by the company.

GFY
More...

This sounds good to me.
 
Opinion | The Coronavirus Bailout Stalled. And It’s Mitch McConnell’s Fault. - The New York Times
www.nytimes.com
Advertisement

Continue reading the main story




This article has been updated.

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky failed to do his job this weekend. As the economy spiraled downward, Mr. McConnell, the Senate majority leader, said he would produce a bipartisan bailout bill authorizing an infusion of desperately needed aid.

Instead, Mr. McConnell emerged on Sunday evening with a bill that would provide a lot of help for corporate executives and shareholders, and not nearly enough for American workers. It would let the Treasury Department hand out hundreds of billions of dollars to corporations — potentially including businesses owned by President Trump — without requiring a binding commitment to preserve jobs and wages. And the bailouts could remain secret for six months.

Senate Democrats, refusing to play along, blocked the bill in a procedural vote on Sunday night and again on Monday afternoon. But responsibility for the deadlock rests squarely on Mr. McConnell’s shoulders.

The Federal Reserve unveiled a new set of needed programs to support the economy on Monday morning, expanding its “whatever it takes” crisis response. The operational independence of the central bank is once again proving its value, but Congress must resist the inclination to treat the Fed’s actions as an alternative to fiscal policy. Instead, senators must emulate the Fed’s urgency and authorize a set of supersize economic rescue programs.

$250 billion, to most households.


But the urgency of the moment does not justify the egregious misuse of public resources.

The basic formula for helping businesses is straightforward. The federal government needs to provide the money that companies are unable to earn or borrow because of the pandemic. In exchange, companies need to maintain employment and wage payments. That’s the necessary grand bargain — the standard any bailout package should be required to meet.

The Republican bill would let small businesses borrow up to $10 million, and those loans would then be forgiven for any business that avoided cuts in jobs or wages. That’s a fair deal.

But Republicans are proposing different rules for big businesses. Recipients of government bailouts would be required to avoid job or wage cuts only “to the extent practicable” — a loophole so large it amounts to a lack of any meaningful obligation.

The bill would create a $500 billion bailout fund for corporations. Most of the money would backstop the Federal Reserve’s broad-based emergency lending programs, but the Treasury would also get $75 billion for targeted bailouts. The Treasury undoubtedly needs resources and flexibility to confront the crisis. But it would be unpardonable folly for Congress to grant too much latitude to an administration that has repeatedly proved itself to be a careless steward of public resources. To take just one example, the bill would let the Treasury bail out hotels owned by Mr. Trump on whatever terms his administration might care to dictate — and Mr. Trump refused on Sunday night to pledge that he would refrain from taking any federal aid.

Senate Democrats want more from Republicans in other areas, too. They are pushing to deliver more funding for health care, and for state and local governments, and to expand unemployment benefits. These are worthy goals that deserve bipartisan support. Bringing the spread of the coronavirus under control remains the single best way to limit damage to the economy, and health care providers and local governments are on the front lines and running low on money. The need extends beyond public health: The crisis threatens the viability of critical public services, including mass transportation systems. And expanding benefits for unemployed workers would provide aid to those who need it most.

In each of these areas, however, the path to a compromise is straightforward, and something is clearly better than nothing. This is the third coronavirus bailout bill. There will be a fourth.

But what is the point of passing a bailout that does not protect jobs and wages?

Republicans can quickly resolve this standoff by accepting the necessary changes to protect the public interest. Alternatively, the Senate could table the big-business bailout. Boeing, the major airlines and other companies clamoring for help simply do not need federal assistance with the same urgency as small businesses and individual workers do — particularly because the Fed in recent days has stepped in to help big companies borrow money.

Or the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, could help Mr. McConnell do his job by passing a bill containing the necessary compromises and sending it to the Senate for approval.

The federal government is already lagging badly in its response to the coronavirus crisis. People are losing their jobs, and their businesses, with every passing day. It is time to act
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top