The Senate spent 25+ plus hours doing it, but the much debated Covid relief package is now passed and on the way back to the House for consideration.
The Senate approved President Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package Saturday, over 24 hours after opening debate on the bill. A grueling amendment process, known as a “vote-a-rama,” was stalled for nearly 12 hours on Friday due to disagreements within the Democratic caucus over an unemployment insurance benefit.
The final vote was 50-49, with all Democrats voting in favor of the bill and all Republicans voting against it. The passage of the bill was met with cheers and applause from Democrats, celebrating the passage of one of Mr. Biden’s key priorities. Vice President Kamala Harris did not need to visit the Capitol to break any ties, as GOP Senator Dan Sullivan left due to a family emergency on Friday.
The amended legislation now heads to the House for consideration, after the House passed a slightly different version of the bill last week. If it is approved by the House, it will then go to Mr. Biden’s desk for his signature.
The economic relief legislation is broadly popular, with recent polling showing that a majority of Americans support it, particularly the provision that provides $1,400 in direct checks to earners making under $75,000. Senate Democrats reached a deal to limit the eligibility for who receives direct checks earlier this week.
The final vote came after an arduous “vote-a-rama,” in which the Senate debated, considered and voted on 39 amendments over a 25 hour period. The process was initially delayed by a deadlock involving Senator Joe Manchin, moderate from West Virginia who has become a critical player in the evenly divided Senate. On Friday evening, Senate Democrats reached a deal accepted by Manchin, after he had an extended meeting with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. The compromise amendment extends additional unemployment insurance benefits through September 6 at $300 per week. It also makes the first $10,200 of unemployment insurance benefits non-taxable for households with incomes under $150,000, and extends tax rules regarding excess business loss limitations to 2026.
The amendment was approved by a vote of 50 to 49 shortly after 1 a.m. It was almost identical to an amendment proposed under a deal reached Friday morning by progressives and moderates, with the only change being the income limit for the non-taxable benefits.
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1368271684134912006?s=20
“Democrats just passed a $1.9 trillion bill with zero Republican support and told deficit hawks to shove it. This is a changed party.”Report
https://twitter.com/EricLevitz/status/1368235676135735299?s=20
“where *Joe Biden* is going to deliver the largest direct increase in worker purchasing power in U.S. history. Imo, to look at that and decry Democrats as indistinguishable from Republicans is both mendacious and more conducive to advancing nihilism than progressive change”Report
This was an absolutely necessary minimum that Biden needed to move forward. I’m happy he was able to get it- it speaks well to his ability to work with his party. It remains to be seen what happens going forward after this but at least, he managed to get this.
Also it’ll be fascinating to see if the rights’ hyperinflation shows up. Waiting for Godot since the aughts has transmogrified into waiting for inflation.Report
The only things that have gotten more expensive are urban housing, tuition, and health care.
Electronics and food have pretty much stayed stable.Report
Yes and there’re plenty of non-inflation related explanations for all of that so inflation qua inflation remains flat to negative.Report
I’m worried that we’re in a Goodhart’s Law situation.
Or maybe we’re just 15 minutes before the housing bubble bursts again.Report
Sure, maybe we are and inflation has turned into something else? Who knows? Maybe some huge bubble is about to burst? That’d be awful. And if that happens Biden is screwed, but then he would be screwed anyhow so still makes sense pushing the bill through in case none of those things happen and it ends up helping.Report
Oh, if there’s going to be inflation, it won’t be because of the $1400 checks.
It’s going to be because of the other stuff in the 1.9T. (And, yes, the non-relief parts of the previous covid relief).Report
If there is, happily, the fed knows what to do and I have no doubt Biden will unhappily let them do it.Report
Jaybird, can you tell me what part of the bill do you think will cause inflation?
https://twitter.com/erikalyoung/status/1368403453421174788/photo/1
Is it the tax credits for kids, the expansion of UI, the state & local aid to fill in holes in budgets, the money to reopen schools, or the money to vaccinations?
Because obviously, you should have some actual evidence for your claims, or is it your usual contarian BS that comes directly from right wing Twitter, all as you say you’re totally not a right winger.Report
Out of those, I’d say it’s the “the state & local aid to fill in holes in budgets” part.
You know, the whole “pouring money into the black hole of pension liabilities”.
You know what you get if you divide $1.9T by 350M? You get $5428.57. Subtract the $1400 per person from that, and you get $4k.
It’s that $4k that holds the inflation.
your usual contarian BS that comes directly from right wing Twitter, all as you say you’re totally not a right winger.
I get *SOME* of these takes from “Shitty Outflanking Leftwing Twitter”, Jesse.
But you’re a centrist so you probably know better than to listen to those naïve idealists who actually care about stuff like children in cages, bombing brown people, and segregated schools. The world is a complicated place! YOU HAVE TO MAKE TRADEOFFS SOMETIMES.Report
Related:
Report
As far as the whole 4k thing, which is again, a thing I literally saw on various right-wing Twitter accounts, the 4k is going to pay for an expanded child credit for millions of working-class families to cut child poverty, money to open schools, money to fill holes in state budgets, including yes, evil things like pension plans for middle class government employees and truckers (I know though, as a former libertarian, you still think public employees should have just as shitty retirement plans as private employees who decided not to unionize do), and keep UI expanded for millions of people out of work.
Sorry if I don’t care about a bunch of 20-something leftists on Twitter who were quiet about Trump’s escalation of drone war after they called him a dove compared to Hillary, who decided to care again about drone strikes once a Democrat was in office, all while they complain that while still employed, they aren’t getting a bigger check, so we can help actual working class families.
I’ll stand with the 70%-ish of American’s who support the bill, and you can stand with the whiny left and the whiny right.Report
money to fill holes in state budgets, including yes, evil things like pension plans for middle class government employees and truckers (I know though, as a former libertarian, you still think public employees should have just as shitty retirement plans as private employees who decided not to unionize do), and keep UI expanded for millions of people out of work.
I don’t mind stuff like expanded UI and “cutting child poverty”, but stuff like the pension plans is them literally not meeting an obligation that they had and then expecting other people to fill it.
It’s not about whether public employees deserve an awesome retirement in the best part of Florida or Arizona. Of course, every single one of them does.
The problem is that they were promised a benefit and then the benefit was not delivered and then they said “okay, we’ll just have your kids pay for it”.
This isn’t them meeting an obligation. This is them failing to meet an obligation and then having someone else meet it.
That should bug you, even as a centrist.Report
But even all that notwithstanding, that is where I see the inflation coming from.
So, like, if there is no inflation (or if inflation remains low, it’s just that housing, tuition, and health care skyrockets while electronics remain stable), you can point out that, ha! You said that there would be inflation but there isn’t!
And if there is, you can say “well, people deserve to retire!”Report
So I’ll try your approach to these sort of things:
Given that states and counties are legally required to balance their budgets, what else would you have had them cut due to lagging revenues?
And why are you conflating funding pension obligations with generalized inflation increases?Report
Given that states and counties are legally required to balance their budgets, what else would you have had them cut due to lagging revenues?
This goes back further than that. They made promises that they literally could not keep but made them anyway.
And why are you conflating funding pension obligations with generalized inflation increases?
I’m conflating the printing of money to meet the pension obligations with generalized inflation increases.Report
On the one hand, it’s always tricky to plan for sufficient money that far in advance. One economic downturn and loss of tax revenue, and you not only lose money from investments declining, but you also can’t inject additional capital because tax revenue is also declining.
But on the flip side, economies are cyclic, and politicians pretend that they aren’t, and thus promise a lot while not actually planning for the downturns. They don’t raise taxes to make up short falls, or otherwise divert what they can during the good times, because (much like infrastructure maintenance), you don’t get ego-boosting headlines by doing that.
And there is no sufficient pain point to use to force smart behavior, because, IIRC, public sector pensions do not have to follow the same funding rules that private sector ones do.Report
Let me see if I can make this argument work.
And there is no sufficient pain point to use to force smart behavior, because, IIRC, public sector pensions do not have to follow the same funding rules that private sector ones do.
Ahem. Why are you opposed to old people not having to pick between food and medicine?Report
Public Pension issues long pre-date Covid. In this sense, Covid simply accelerates the gap in funding – which was already widening.
As best I can tell, ‘only’ $195B is earmarked for States… which at most keeps obligations from lagging further; it can’t possibly address the (as of 2018) $1.24T funding gap.
Pre-covid this was a looming national issue… post-covid it is still a looming national issue.
Spending on Operational losses (which is the Covid plan) is likely the right course in the short term… but failing to address (or addressing inadequately by things like min wage) the the fundamental economic distribution and taxation issues (of which public pensions are a symptom) will keep these as looming National issues.Report
Why is it unsurprising that Jaybird has become a deficit hawk once Democrats decided to ignore Republicans?Report
Saul, I am not a “deficit hawk”. I got asked “where is the inflation going to come from?” and I said “this bill and it’s non-individual checks wishlist” (and I even mentioned the previous relief plan and its non-relief portions).
This is not me saying “THEY OUGHT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE!”
This is me saying “oh, you’re asking where the inflation is going to come from? It’s going to come from here.”
And me arguing that California shouldn’t use federal tax dollars to meet its unmeetable pension obligations as me being a deficit hawk.
Jeez louise.
Me saying “you shouldn’t write checks you can’t cash, knowing you can’t cash them, knowing that someone else will pay them” is not me giving a shit about the freaking *DEFICIT*.
(One good point that I saw a while back: If you’re trillions of dollars in debt… wouldn’t you see inflation as a *GOOD* thing?)Report
Put your money where you mouth is, then. Tell me what the inflation rate will be on Inauguration Day, 2025 is making sure a million middle class workers keep their pensions is going to inflation us to destruction.
But, yes, if you’re more worried about filling in pension obligations than the trillions of dollars in pointless tax cuts over the past 40 years, then OK, maybe, you’re not a deficit hawk, you’re just a typical right-winger who thinks we should screw over workers because of the decisions of politicians.
Also, we also bailed out $85 billion dollars in private union pension plans, so not only do lazy, terrible, evil public employees get a decent retirement, so will lazy, terrible, evil private sector employees as well.
https://twitter.com/JHWeissmann/status/1368730870111211520Report
Tell me what the inflation rate will be on Inauguration Day, 2025 is making sure a million middle class workers keep their pensions is going to inflation us to destruction.
If I’m wrong, do you feel like it’d be appropriate to ask me how I got it wrong and make me explain it?
But, yes, if you’re more worried about filling in pension obligations than the trillions of dollars in pointless tax cuts over the past 40 years, then OK, maybe, you’re not a deficit hawk, you’re just a typical right-winger who thinks we should screw over workers because of the decisions of politicians.
This isn’t even me saying “I’m worried”. Let alone “more worried”, let alone “more worried about this than that”.
You’re attributing emotional states to me that I do not hold.
As such, I’m thinking that you’re misunderstanding what I’m saying.
Also, we also bailed out $85 billion dollars in private union pension plans, so not only do lazy, terrible, evil public employees get a decent retirement, so will lazy, terrible, evil private sector employees as well.
Promises kept, I guess.
Hey, did those private sector companies get the tax cuts? Because they should use that money to pay their pension obligations.
Oh, wait. I guess that paying for things is just something that other people do now.Report