The incompetent criminals ruling the U.S. are about to push millions of Americans off a terrifying financial cliff.
Jon Schwarz
https://theintercept.com/2020/07/30/coronavirus-unemployment-crisis-national-emergency/
IN SOME ALTERNATE reality, the government and corporate and union and religious leaders of the United States got together in February and told us: “The novel coronavirus is scary, and we’re all going to have to get creative and work together to crush it. Lots of jobs are going to momentarily vanish. But no one in this country will be scared of going hungry, because no one will. No one’s going to be scared of being thrown out of their home, because that’s not going to happen to anyone. This country has the power to take care of everyone’s basic material needs, and we will.”
Here in this reality, we’re governed by a blend of the criminally incompetent and incompetent criminals. As things stand today, they’re about to push a large fraction of Americans off a terrifying cliff. It’s so mercilessly cruel, economically destructive, and even contrary to their own self-interest, that if we’re going to stop them we probably need to figure out why.
Our rulers did demonstrate a spasm of rationality with the passage of the CARES Act in March. It was partly a cash-grab by big business but did get lots of people a $1,200 check and provided an extra $600 per week in federal unemployment benefits on top of state benefits.
Without these benefits, the 30 million people who lost their jobs in March and April would have already plummeted into the void. And because everyone’s spending is someone else’s income, as they fell they would have grabbed onto tens of millions more and taken them down as well.
And in fact, this downward spiral began to happen in mid-March. As the danger of Covid-19 became clear, consumer spending dropped by an astonishing 30 percent in a matter of days. But as soon as the government cash started flowing, spending began to recover, and it’s now more than 90 percent of normal. In poorer zip codes, it’s returned to almost 100 percent.
This has kept the lives of tens of millions of Americans merely bad, rather than totally impossible. But the supplemental unemployment benefits expire at the end of July. The GOP opening bid is to extend them but to cut the amount from $600 to $200. The reason, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin explained in the Oval Office, is to prevent malingering: “We’re going to make sure that we don’t pay people more money to stay home than go to work.” In addition, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Republican “red line” in negotiations is making it essentially impossible for employees to sue employers on the grounds that their workplace is failing to protect them from Covid-19. Furthermore, under the proposed new rules, employers and even the Trump Justice Department would find it easy to countersue workers for bringing a coronavirus lawsuit.
Rationally, of course, this makes no sense. For most of the unemployed, there aren’t any jobs to go back to, and won’t be until the pandemic is under control. If their unemployment benefits are cut, people without jobs will desperately cut back on spending, leading to more unemployment, which will lead to less spending, and so on. The process will be accelerated as states and cities, which until now have attempted to avoid slashing payrolls in hopes that the federal government would rescue them, finally do so.
This may plausibly lead to basic material deprivation — true hunger and homelessness — on a scale few alive today have ever seen. According to the Census Bureau, the number of America’s 249 million households reporting that they sometimes or often do not have enough to eat has already jumped from 22.5 million earlier this year to 29.3 million in July. With Republicans opposing an expansion of food stamp funding, as well as the renewal of the CARES Act supplemental food program for children, that is likely just the beginning.
Then there’s housing. The CARES Act contained a federal ban on evictions that covered about 30 percent of U.S. rental units. That ban just ended, as have most state-level bans. Forty million people could potentially lose their homes in the next several months. In states like Florida, Texas, and New York, half of the tenants will shortly be unable to make the rent.
This is a gigantic human emergency. Almost every person in the country is viscerally frightened for themselves or their family and friends.
But beyond an emergency, it’s also politically inexplicable. Donald Trump and Republicans in general are presumably aware that there’s an election this November, and that they’ll do better if Americans aren’t dying in the street. Just their crass self-interest should lead them to throw as much money at everyone as fast as possible.
But they’re not doing so. Why not? It’s easy to believe it’s because they’re mustache-twirling villains who consciously enjoy the suffering they’re inflicting upon us. But the reality is different, and in some ways scarier.
The weird fact is that even the worst people in history never ask themselves, “Are we the baddies?” On the contrary, they’re convinced they’re great heroes marching us all to a glorious future. When interrogated by the FBI, Saddam Hussein sincerely referred to himself as “a humanitarian.”
Leaders like this are able to ignore the consequences of their actions because, to a shocking degree, they honestly are not aware of the consequences. In the past, this state of malignant ignorance was much harder to maintain. There were local newspapers that could shove the facts in front of them. There were unions that they had to pay attention to, and respected liberal archbishops who attempted to speak for the voiceless.
All that’s gone now. Today conservative U.S. elites live their mental lives protected by an almost impenetrable carapace of wealth and power. None of the people they meet at fundraisers are about to be thrown into the street, so therefore no one is. There are no stories on Fox News about children experiencing brain damage from malnutrition, thus such children don’t exist.
If anyone knows what to do about this, now’s definitely the time to speak up. U.S. politics have always been a matter of life and death for some Americans. But the waters are rising fast, and a lot more people are about to find out it’s a matter of life and death for them too.
Saturday, August 1, 2020
PROGRESSIVE J.D. SCHOLTEN REJECTS DCCC HELP IN CLOSE IOWA RACE
Scholten said the House Democrats’ campaign arm “begged” him to run against Steve King in 2020. When King lost his primary, the DCCC lost interest.
Aída Chávez
https://theintercept.com/2020/07/29/progressive-scholten-feenstra-dccc-iowa/
J.D. SCHOLTEN, the progressive populist who nearly defeated Steve King in Iowa’s deep-red 4th Congressional District in 2018, wants the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to know that his campaign doesn’t want or need their help. The falling out comes as the House Democrats’ campaign arm, which encouraged him to run against King a second time, has de-prioritized the race; King, a white supremacist, lost his primary, and the district was downgraded from “tilt Republican” to “solid Republican.” But it’s still competitive: Scholten is currently leading his new Republican rival in fundraising by hundreds of thousands of dollars, and his campaign’s internal polling shows the two in a statistical dead heat.
Now, Scholten is rejecting the possibility of support and funds from the House Democrats’ campaign arm, saying he is determined to run the campaign his way. The DCCC, for its part, told Scholten he must meet its requirements, which would involve changing his campaign strategy, to receive funding — a very different message than in 2019 when DCCC Chair Cheri Bustos told Scholten it would go “all in” on his race against King.
“We have an authentic campaign that reflects who I am and my vision for this district,” Scholten said in a statement announcing the decision. “We won’t be beholden to special interests or the DCCC; instead, we’re reaching out to folks across the political spectrum to earn votes.”
Scholten is especially frustrated by the DCCC’s approach to supporting moderate candidates who focus on traditional fundraising from big-dollar donors. “The DCCC-type of campaign where you sit at home and fundraise all day doesn’t win respect, trust, or elections in these parts and wouldn’t be a good start to addressing the serious challenges facing rural America,” Scholten wrote.
In 2018, as a first-time candidate, Scholten came within 3 percentage points of beating King, building a remarkable base of grassroots support. He outperformed nearly 40 percent of the candidates in the DCCC’s “Red-to-Blue” program, which targets seats that have a promising chance to flip. But that election cycle, he said, the DCCC didn’t return his calls.
Over a year ago, Bustos reached out and “begged” him to run against King a second time, Scholten recalled, promising the DCCC would make it a top five race. He openly weighed a run for the Senate seat currently held by Joni Ernst, at one point, but Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer discouraged him from jumping in the race to try to clear the field for Theresa Greenfield, who’s now the Democratic nominee. That’s when Bustos said the House Democrats’ campaign arm would go “all in” on his race if he challenged King again.
Scholten went on to win the Democratic nomination in June, following an uncontested primary. He was preparing for a rematch against King — a white nationalist who had been censured by his colleagues in the House and stripped of his committee assignments — until the incumbent lawmaker lost the Republican primary to state Sen. Randy Feenstra, who was backed by President Donald Trump.
Last week, Scholten reached out to Bustos to check in and see where the DCCC was at, and what she meant by her promise to go “all in” on his bid. During their phone call, Scholten laid out everything they had accomplished last cycle and made his case for why the race, despite King’s loss, could present a huge opportunity. “And it just got to the point where they’re trying to dangle carrots in front of us and I was like, you know what, I’m not having it,” he said. “They wanna be in all our meetings, they want us to use their consultants and stuff like that. And I don’t feel comfortable doing that at this time.”
After discussing with his team, Scholten said, he decided, “We don’t need them and what we want is to run the campaign similar to last time and that’s what’s going to win this race.” Completely refusing the DCCC’s help also means the campaign will have to provide its own field program and do its own mailing, which Red to Blue candidates are armed with additional “organizational and fundraising support.” “That’s part of it: We didn’t feel that what they do provides enough value for what we’re trying to do,” he said.
“JD Scholten is a strong candidate working to earn voters’ trust in rural Iowa,” Cole Leiter, a DCCC spokesperson, said in a statement. “We have built a big battlefield and every candidate is going to make their own decisions about how to run their race. We wish him well.”
Though King’s defeat changed the dynamics of the race, Scholten’s campaign believes that the issues, namely Medicare for All and his vow to take on the corporate interests exploiting the second largest agricultural district in the country, will help flip the district come November. Scholten’s platform stands in stark contrast to the more moderate talking points and messaging the party establishment pushes on Democratic candidates running in red districts.
In 2018, for example, the DCCC commissioned a survey and analysis to help develop its messaging on health care. The messaging handouts, The Intercept reported at the time, “made clear where the party wants its candidates to stand when it comes to health care reform: preferably nowhere, but certainly not with single-payer advocates.” Party elites also end up influencing campaign strategy, Scholten noted. In a few weeks, his campaign will launch a tour that will go through all 375 towns in the district (while adhering to health and safety guidelines.)
“They would not agree that I should go to all 375 towns even though that’s how we earn votes,” he told The Intercept. “They want me to stay at home and just fundraise, be on the phone from the minute I wake up to the minute I go to bed.”
The Scholten campaign brought in a haul of nearly $620,000 in the second quarter of the fundraising year, making it the largest ever in a second quarter for any Democrat who has run for the seat. About 96 percent of the campaign’s contributions last quarter were under $200, thanks to its online small donor base.
“The way the DCCC’s system is, candidates like me, they don’t really care much about,” he said. “If I could self fund, they’d be all over me. I mean, the organizing and just the grassroots organization, we created something that’s so authentic and so organic that I don’t think they know how to deal with something like that. We need more working-class people in D.C., and their system is not made for that.”
Aída Chávez
https://theintercept.com/2020/07/29/progressive-scholten-feenstra-dccc-iowa/
J.D. SCHOLTEN, the progressive populist who nearly defeated Steve King in Iowa’s deep-red 4th Congressional District in 2018, wants the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to know that his campaign doesn’t want or need their help. The falling out comes as the House Democrats’ campaign arm, which encouraged him to run against King a second time, has de-prioritized the race; King, a white supremacist, lost his primary, and the district was downgraded from “tilt Republican” to “solid Republican.” But it’s still competitive: Scholten is currently leading his new Republican rival in fundraising by hundreds of thousands of dollars, and his campaign’s internal polling shows the two in a statistical dead heat.
Now, Scholten is rejecting the possibility of support and funds from the House Democrats’ campaign arm, saying he is determined to run the campaign his way. The DCCC, for its part, told Scholten he must meet its requirements, which would involve changing his campaign strategy, to receive funding — a very different message than in 2019 when DCCC Chair Cheri Bustos told Scholten it would go “all in” on his race against King.
“We have an authentic campaign that reflects who I am and my vision for this district,” Scholten said in a statement announcing the decision. “We won’t be beholden to special interests or the DCCC; instead, we’re reaching out to folks across the political spectrum to earn votes.”
Scholten is especially frustrated by the DCCC’s approach to supporting moderate candidates who focus on traditional fundraising from big-dollar donors. “The DCCC-type of campaign where you sit at home and fundraise all day doesn’t win respect, trust, or elections in these parts and wouldn’t be a good start to addressing the serious challenges facing rural America,” Scholten wrote.
In 2018, as a first-time candidate, Scholten came within 3 percentage points of beating King, building a remarkable base of grassroots support. He outperformed nearly 40 percent of the candidates in the DCCC’s “Red-to-Blue” program, which targets seats that have a promising chance to flip. But that election cycle, he said, the DCCC didn’t return his calls.
Over a year ago, Bustos reached out and “begged” him to run against King a second time, Scholten recalled, promising the DCCC would make it a top five race. He openly weighed a run for the Senate seat currently held by Joni Ernst, at one point, but Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer discouraged him from jumping in the race to try to clear the field for Theresa Greenfield, who’s now the Democratic nominee. That’s when Bustos said the House Democrats’ campaign arm would go “all in” on his race if he challenged King again.
Scholten went on to win the Democratic nomination in June, following an uncontested primary. He was preparing for a rematch against King — a white nationalist who had been censured by his colleagues in the House and stripped of his committee assignments — until the incumbent lawmaker lost the Republican primary to state Sen. Randy Feenstra, who was backed by President Donald Trump.
Last week, Scholten reached out to Bustos to check in and see where the DCCC was at, and what she meant by her promise to go “all in” on his bid. During their phone call, Scholten laid out everything they had accomplished last cycle and made his case for why the race, despite King’s loss, could present a huge opportunity. “And it just got to the point where they’re trying to dangle carrots in front of us and I was like, you know what, I’m not having it,” he said. “They wanna be in all our meetings, they want us to use their consultants and stuff like that. And I don’t feel comfortable doing that at this time.”
After discussing with his team, Scholten said, he decided, “We don’t need them and what we want is to run the campaign similar to last time and that’s what’s going to win this race.” Completely refusing the DCCC’s help also means the campaign will have to provide its own field program and do its own mailing, which Red to Blue candidates are armed with additional “organizational and fundraising support.” “That’s part of it: We didn’t feel that what they do provides enough value for what we’re trying to do,” he said.
“JD Scholten is a strong candidate working to earn voters’ trust in rural Iowa,” Cole Leiter, a DCCC spokesperson, said in a statement. “We have built a big battlefield and every candidate is going to make their own decisions about how to run their race. We wish him well.”
Though King’s defeat changed the dynamics of the race, Scholten’s campaign believes that the issues, namely Medicare for All and his vow to take on the corporate interests exploiting the second largest agricultural district in the country, will help flip the district come November. Scholten’s platform stands in stark contrast to the more moderate talking points and messaging the party establishment pushes on Democratic candidates running in red districts.
In 2018, for example, the DCCC commissioned a survey and analysis to help develop its messaging on health care. The messaging handouts, The Intercept reported at the time, “made clear where the party wants its candidates to stand when it comes to health care reform: preferably nowhere, but certainly not with single-payer advocates.” Party elites also end up influencing campaign strategy, Scholten noted. In a few weeks, his campaign will launch a tour that will go through all 375 towns in the district (while adhering to health and safety guidelines.)
“They would not agree that I should go to all 375 towns even though that’s how we earn votes,” he told The Intercept. “They want me to stay at home and just fundraise, be on the phone from the minute I wake up to the minute I go to bed.”
The Scholten campaign brought in a haul of nearly $620,000 in the second quarter of the fundraising year, making it the largest ever in a second quarter for any Democrat who has run for the seat. About 96 percent of the campaign’s contributions last quarter were under $200, thanks to its online small donor base.
“The way the DCCC’s system is, candidates like me, they don’t really care much about,” he said. “If I could self fund, they’d be all over me. I mean, the organizing and just the grassroots organization, we created something that’s so authentic and so organic that I don’t think they know how to deal with something like that. We need more working-class people in D.C., and their system is not made for that.”
Lawmakers Warn 'Onerous' New USPS Loan Terms Imposed by Mnuchin 'Could Accelerate Demise of Postal Service'
"Mnuchin and the leadership of the U.S. Postal Service appear to be exploiting this public health pandemic to hold the Postal Service to unreasonable loan terms without even consulting Congress."
by
Jake Johnson, staff writer
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/30/lawmakers-warn-onerous-new-usps-loan-terms-imposed-mnuchin-could-accelerate-demise
Leading congressional Democrats are warning that an emergency loan agreement announced Wednesday by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and new Postmaster General Louis DeJoy—a major donor to President Donald Trump and the GOP—could "accelerate the demise of the Postal Service" by giving the administration unprecedented access to the popular agency's internal operations.
"Secretary Mnuchin and the leadership of the U.S. Postal Service appear to be exploiting this public health pandemic to hold the Postal Service to unreasonable loan terms without even consulting Congress," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), and Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) in a joint statement Wednesday evening.
The agreement also requires USPS to give the Treasury Department access to proprietary information about the Postal Service's private-sector shipping contracts and bars the agency from accessing the emergency funds if its "cash balance exceeds $8 billion."According to a loan term sheet (pdf) made public by the lawmakers, the USPS will gain access to $10 billion in emergency funding approved by Congress back in March provided that the agency adheres to a number of requirements, including providing the Trump administration with "historical and protected business, financial, operational, contractual, and planning data that Treasury may determine is necessary to evaluate USPS's current and future financial condition."
In a statement, Mnuchin hailed the deal as a step in the direction of "the president's goal of establishing a sustainable business model under which USPS can continue to provide necessary mail service for all Americans, without shifting costs to taxpayers." In April, Trump called the USPS a "joke" and demanded that it dramatically hike package prices amid the Covid-19 pandemic, which caused a sharp decline in mail volume.
Maloney, Peters, Connolly, and Carper said Wednesday that the terms agreed upon by Mnuchin and DeJoy—who took over as head of the USPS just last month—"would inappropriately insert the Treasury into the internal operations of the Postal Service."
"These terms would severely limit the Postal Service's access to capital and could accelerate the demise of the Postal Service that all Americans, especially seniors, small businesses, veterans, and those living in rural communities, rely upon every day, especially during the pandemic," the lawmakers said. "We will not stop fighting to protect this critical service that communities depend on and to ensure that every American can safely participate in the November elections."
The new loan agreement comes as DeJoy continues to rush ahead with sweeping operational changes at the USPS that postal workers believe are part of a deliberate effort to sabotage the beloved government institution and put it on a path toward privatization—a longtime goal of the conservative movement.
Last week, as Common Dreams reported, USPS leadership launched a pilot program that could result in significant delays in mail delivery by barring postal workers from sorting packages during their morning operations. In Portland, Maine, letter carriers allege they are being instructed to delay first-class parcels in order to prioritize Amazon packages.
"Undermining and degrading the Postal Service helps frustrate the customer, which sets the stage to privatizing it," Mark Dimondstein, president of the American Postal Workers Union, told The Intercept. "The Trump administration is on record for raising prices, reducing service, and reducing workers' rights and benefits."
Motherboard reported Monday that "post offices around the country are slashing their hours—including during the busiest times of day—with little notice as yet another abrupt cost-saving measure" implemented by DeJoy, previously the CEO of New Breed Logistics, a private firm with a history of union-busting activity.
"In addition to West Virginia and New Jersey, post offices in Berkeley, California; Petersburg, Alaska, Youngstown, Ohio, and Knoxville, Tennessee have announced similar plans to reduce hours," Motherboard reported. "All of the changes Motherboard has reviewed were announced only by signs hanging on the post office doors."
In addition to harming the credibility of the USPS—which ranks as the most popular government agency in the United States—DeJoy's cost-cutting measures also threaten to disrupt upcoming elections as an record number of Americans turn to vote-by-mail as the safest way to cast their ballots amid the pandemic.
"The Trump administration's attempts to politicize, privatize, and gut USPS in the middle of a pandemic and unprecedented vote-by-mail is one of the biggest scandals in American politics right now," Mother Jones reporter Ari Berman tweeted Wednesday.
In an op-ed for NJ.com this week, Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.) warned that "the electoral implications for the destruction of the Postal Service are momentous."
"If it is forced to curtail its service," Pascrell wrote, "our ability to hold a national election could be obliterated."
'Racist, Classist Garbage': Trump Brags to Suburbia About His Repeal of Housing Desegregation Rule
"This is blatant racism from the President of the United States," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. "And it's disgusting."
by
Jake Johnson, staff writer
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/29/racist-classist-garbage-trump-brags-suburbia-about-his-repeal-housing-desegregation
In a pair of tweets one advocacy group denounced as "racist, classist garbage," President Donald Trump on Wednesday boasted that he is working to prevent construction of low-income housing in the suburbs by repealing an Obama-era rule aimed at combating persistent racial segregation in those communities.
"I am happy to inform all of the people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream that you will no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low-income housing built in your neighborhood," Trump tweeted. "Your housing prices will go up based on the market, and crime will go down. I have rescinded the Obama-Biden AFFH Rule. Enjoy!"
In 2018, Trump's Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson suspended the Obama-era rule. Last Thursday, HUD announced it is replacing the AFFH with a new regulatory framework (pdf) that would allow localities to monitor their own compliance with fair housing laws. The new rules are set to take effect next month.Trump was referring to the 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) rule, an addition to the 1968 Fair Housing Act that required cities and towns receiving federal funding to document and develop plans to redress racial housing segregation.
"Words can't quite capture how outrageous and racist this is," Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in response to the president's tweets Wednesday. "Trump and Ben Carson have worked hand in glove to obstruct and destroy decades of work to promote fair housing in our country."
"On this latest move," Clarke added, "we will see the administration in court."
With the 2020 presidential election a mere three months away, critics like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) characterized Trump's tweets as the president's most recent racist dog whistle aimed at white suburban voters he believes would be comforted by such messaging.
An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll last month showed Trump trailing presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden 35% to 60% among suburban voters.
The New York Times reported earlier this month that "Trump and his campaign team, already concerned about his weakness in battleground states, have become increasingly alarmed by internal polling showing a softening of support among suburban voters, especially women without college degrees."
"The Suburban Housewives of America must read this article," Trump tweeted last week, linking to a New York Post column by right-wing commentator Betsy McCaughey. "Biden will destroy your neighborhood and your American Dream. I will preserve it, and make it even better!"
Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, said in a statement last week that Trump's rescission of the AFFH rule is an "abhorrent" attempt to "use a critical fair housing tool for election year race-baiting, particularly during a time of reckoning for racial injustices."
'Utter Disgrace': GOP Proposes Legal Immunity for Corporations, $0 in Funding for States, and Deep Cuts to Unemployment Benefits
"Republicans have wasted months coming up with a proposal that, remarkably, would make the pandemic and economic pain even worse—especially a corporate immunity provision that would be a literal death sentence to countless Americans."
by
Jake Johnson, staff writer
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/28/utter-disgrace-gop-proposes-legal-immunity-corporations-0-funding-states-and-deep
With joblessness at historic levels, millions of Americans struggling to afford food, states and localities barreling toward fiscal disaster, and the U.S. Postal Service on the verge of collapse, Senate Republicans on Monday unveiled a Covid-19 stimulus proposal that would slash unemployment benefits, do nothing to expand federal nutrition aid, provide $0 in new funding for states, and leave the USPS without any additional emergency relief.
While giving short shrift to workers, the Republican package would ensure that corporations are not held accountable for putting their employees in danger by providing a sweeping five-year liability shield geared toward protecting businesses from coronavirus-related lawsuits—a top priority of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
"Um, I'm not sure that it is. Is it?" McConnell said during a press conference when asked why the FBI funds are in the bill.The GOP plan also includes billions of dollars in funds that are completely unrelated to fighting the coronavirus pandemic, such as $686 million for F-35 fighter jets and $1.75 billion for construction of a new FBI headquarters. McConnell apparently had no idea funding for the FBI building was included in the final legislation, which was crafted in his office.
Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said late Monday that "McConnell's proposal—negotiated without any input from Democrats in the U.S. House or Senate—is dead on arrival."
"Senate Republicans have wasted months coming up with a proposal that, remarkably, would make the pandemic and economic pain even worse—especially a corporate immunity provision that would be a literal death sentence to countless Americans," Gilbert added. "It's long past time for the real negotiations to begin."
On Twitter, Public Citizen denounced the the GOP plan as "an utter disgrace," noting that it wouldn't extend a federal eviction moratorium that expired last Friday or provide a penny in election assistance funding for states.
Titled the Health, Economic Assistance, Liability, and Schools (HEALS) Act, the $1 trillion opening bid from Republicans was released in bits and pieces Monday as coronavirus cases, hospitalizations, and deaths continue to surge across the U.S. and the economy remains in deep recession, with the official unemployment rate hovering above 11%.
The Republican plan would temporarily reduce the weekly unemployment insurance boost from $600 to $200 until states can implement a complicated—some say unworkable—new system that would pay laid-off workers 70% of what they earned prior to losing their jobs. Additionally, the GOP proposal would provide another round of $1,200 direct stimulus payments to most Americans, funding for U.S. schools that meet "minimum opening requirements," and $16 billion for coronavirus testing.
Tucked inside the Republican stimulus package is also a bill led by Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) that could result in deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
In a joint statement late Monday, the American Federation of Teachers, Care in Action, Community Change Action, Greenpeace, and MoveOn warned that if passed, the Republican proposal "would devastate America."
"Americans should be outraged at Senate Republicans and the Trump administration for wasting months and, at the 11th hour, offering a proposal so weak that it would only guarantee our country's backslide into the Covid-19 crisis," the groups said. "The plan put forth by Majority Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans is a non-starter that will do nothing for workers and families, and keep the United States on this devastating path."
Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy Action, slammed the Senate GOP for "coming to the table with a package that prioritizes protecting corporations from lawsuits."
"Speaker Pelosi and Leader Schumer, and all Congressional Democrats, must reject this plan outright and fight for a package that meets the scale of the crisis," said Archila, who urged Democrats to fight to extend the $600-per-week unemployment insurance boost, pass a paycheck guarantee, provide adequate hazard pay and PPE for frontline workers, and ensure that Covid-19 testing and treatment is free for everyone in the U.S.
"Anything less," warned Archila, "will only prolong the health and economic crisis, and exacerbate suffering in every corner of this country."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)