Republicans just proved it: If the filibuster doesn’t end, we cannot restore our democracy

The founding fathers, chafing under the malign thumb of Britain's monarchy, most definitely envisioned the potential for a Donald Trump. Alexander Hamilton pretty much nailed Trump in 1792: "When a man unprincipled in private life[,] desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper … despotic in his ordinary demeanour—known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may 'ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.'"

Thus we have the tool of impeachment and the checks and balances of a legislative, executive, and judicial system. What the founders apparently didn't account for in their careful crafting of the three branches was a Mitch McConnell, a lawmaker so unprincipled that he would enter into a bargain with Trump to enhance his personal power at the expense of the whole Senate, and use that power to subvert the third branch—the judiciary. The reasonable "cooling saucer" of the Senate created to counterbalance the rabble in the House of Representatives wasn't supposed to become a tool of the corrupt, but here we are—and not for the first time. There's a throughline in all of American history for the fight against majority rule democracy: white supremacy. Every sustained backlash against progress has come from privileged whites. We saw its violent and very public resurgence in Trumpism, a storm Republicans have been happy to ride. There are myriad reforms the country has to undertake to beat that back down again, but it has to start now and in the Senate, with the filibuster.

Campaign Action

The vehicle for that is singular: H.R.1, the For the People Act of 2021, and its companion in the Senate, S.1. The House bill, first passed in 2019 and subsequently ignored by McConnell, would enact substantial and groundbreaking electoral reforms. It would remove existing barriers to voting, secure the elections processes to secure the integrity of the vote, expand public financing to fight the pernicious entrenched and monied interests, and ban congressional gerrymandering to ensure equal and fair representation in the House of Representatives. It would also start to chip away at the imbalance of representation in the Senate—where states like Wyoming have a fraction of the population of the nation's largest cities—by granting statehood to the District of Columbia.

That bill is not going to pass the Senate if the filibuster holds, nor is any of President Joe Biden's agenda. Senate Republicans made that abundantly clear from Biden's first day in office, and even before. When the Senate flipped into Democratic hands on Jan. 5 with the runoff results in Georgia, McConnell started in, refusing to bring the Senate out of recess until Jan. 19. (That also built in his excuse for not voting to convict Donald Trump in his impeachment—he could say then, duplicitously, that a former president couldn't be convicted.) McConnell then spent three weeks refusing to allow Biden to form a complete Cabinet by blocking an organizing resolution for the Senate, the necessary piece of business for all of the committees assignments be made and the committees to start serious business, like considering legislation referred to them and processing Biden's nominees.

McConnell—with the tacit support of 49 Republican senators—insisted that this was all in the name of "unity," just like Biden wanted. His stance was that Democrats had to prove that they wanted unity by capitulating to his demand that they promise not to get rid of the filibuster and let him continue to block Biden's agenda and his nominees. To Schumer's credit, he didn't get that. To Joe Manchin's and Kyrsten Sinema's discredit, they agreed with McConnell. Sinema, in fact, has continued to do so.

Sinema is insisting that she'll oppose a minimum wage increase in the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill that Democrats are pushing through using budget reconciliation, a limited tool that isn't subject to the 60-vote majority rule and thus can't be filibustered. More than that, Sinema says: "I want to restore the 60-vote threshold for all elements of the Senate's work." That would mean handing a veto of every Biden nominee—including potentially to the Supreme Court—to McConnell.

Sinema is undoubtedly trying to hedge her bets just in case Republicans retake the Senate in 2022, trying to worm her way into their good graces. As if McConnell and team would reward a Democrat for anything. As if it wasn't a betrayal of her own constituents, who support a minimum wage increase. As if it wasn't a betrayal of the LBGTQ community in which Sinema claims membership. She's expressed her willingness to help Republicans filibuster the Equality Act, which bans discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. She's saying that she'll reimpose the 60-vote threshold to block Biden's pro-equality judges after Trump appointed so many anti-equality judges, needing just 51 votes.

She somehow believes that this can be put in the hands of Senate Republicans, only seven of whom voted to convict the guy who incited and directed an insurrection against them, a mob that was primed quite literally for their blood—and very nearly got it.  So, sure, these will be the people who will provide the 10 votes necessary to help Biden save the nation from COVID-19, provide health care to everyone in the aftermath of this pandemic, and finally enact comprehensive immigration reform to help border states like Arizona.

Which takes us back to the For the People Act. The events of Jan. 6 and the Senate Republicans' acquittal of Trump underline just how critical it is that Democrats respond forcefully and quickly to stamp down the radicalized Republican Party, to end its ability to maintain outsized power while representing the minority of the nation's population. It means, particularly for the likes of Manchin and Sinema, realizing that the Republicans they pal around with everyday are not their friends. That they would perhaps lament their deaths at the hands of a violent mob, but aren't going to act to prevent it from happening. It means ending the filibuster.

The For the People Act is the vehicle to use to do just that, because it would level the playing field for Democrats. More than that, it would allow for actual majority rule—for the majority of voters to have their will enacted. To have universal accessible and affordable health care. To have an economic system that's not weighted against them. To not have their families living in fear of separation. To have a government taking on the changes in the climate that threaten to make living in their home regions impossible.

None of that happens without a profound change in our electoral system, and H.R.1/S.1 would start that process. It's also where to dare Sinema and Manchin to thwart the will of the majorities who elected them, to dare them to stand with the white supremacist Republican Party that is fighting to keep whole communities of color disenfranchised.

Gretchen Whitmer Rebuffed By Michigan County As Residents Are Told To ‘Self-Determine’ Safety Measures

A Michigan county defied Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) this week by passing a resolution that tells residents to do what is in their own self-interest when it comes to safety measures regarding COVID-19.

Michigan County Rebels Against Whitmer

Missaukee County commissioners directly went against Whitmer in saying that it is “the right and responsibility of individuals to self-determine what is best for their own health, liberty and pursuit of happiness is necessary and ensured by our Constitution, which we have taken an oath to defend and uphold,” according to meeting minutes from February 9.

“The Missaukee County Commission calls upon the Michigan Legislature to exercise their co-equal authority by adopting constitutionally sound measures which limit the unchecked exercise and abuse of executive power, which restore individual responsibility and accountability, and which return Michigan to the ranks of freedom-loving governments everywhere,” the commissioner added.

The Missaukee County Commission went on to say that it would not support county funds being used “for the purpose of arrest and prosecution of any person accused of violating” orders from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS).

This is the agency that Whitmer utilized when her executive orders were ruled unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court in October.

Related: Gretchen Whitmer Claims She ‘Can’t Stand People Who Have One Rule For Others, Different One For Themselves’

Commissioner Speaks Out 

Commissioner Star Hughston, the sponsor of the resolution, told Breitbart that the commissioners just want residents to be treated like adults, as they believe they can make their own decisions.

Hughston added that this is not about the science behind COVID-19, and is instead about whether the governor has the right to “come down with these rules.”

“No one had the right, especially her, to tell us that we have to” wear masks, close businesses, and her various other orders, he said, adding, “We are not idiots. We can decide what is best for us, and if you choose to wear a face mask and you have health concerns, then in my opinion, you would need to wear one. But if you don’t choose to wear one, then it’s your right.”

Related: Gretchen Whitmer Finally Relaxes Restaurant Restrictions After Biden Is Inaugurated

This comes one month after Chippewa County called on Whitmer to reopen the state “immediately.”

“At this point it just doesn’t make sense anymore that we’re closed,” Commissioner Scott Shackleton told 9&10 News. “Wisconsin is open for dining—in house dining. Indiana is, Ohio is, Minnesota is, and here we sit closed up tight.”

Whitmer has become infamous in many circles over the past years for enacting some of the strictest COVID-19 measures in the country on her state.

This piece was written by James Samson on February 13, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
James Clyburn Issues Brutal Warning To Trump – ‘This Is Just The Beginning’
Van Der Veen Owns Impeachment Trial Fourth Day
Lindsey Graham Predicts ‘Not Guilty’ Impeachment Votes Are Growing After ‘Absurd’ Arguments From Democrats

The post Gretchen Whitmer Rebuffed By Michigan County As Residents Are Told To ‘Self-Determine’ Safety Measures appeared first on The Political Insider.

GOP Rep. Calls For Cuomo To Be Prosecuted For Withholding Alleged COVID Nursing Home Deaths

Rep. Elise Stephanik (R-NY), along with other Republicans have called for the prosecution of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as well as anyone on his staff who may have been involved in knowingly withholding coronavirus death tolls in nursing homes. 

This comes after a report came out in which an aide of Cuomo’s admitted that they had done just that.

Full Story: Andrew Cuomo Aide: To Avoid Federal Investigation, New York Hid COVID-19 Nursing Home Deaths

Stephanik tweeted out a statement that said, “Governor Cuomo, the secretary to the Governor, and his senior team must be prosecuted immediately-both by the Attorney General of New York state, and the U.S. Department of Justice.”

“This bombshell admission of a cover-up and the remarks by the secretary to the Governor indicating intent to obstruct any federal investigation is a stunning and criminal abuse of power,” she added.

A Stunning Admission

The horrific admission came from Cuomo’s Secretary Melissa DeRosa while on a video conference call with New York state Democrat leaders. In a report from the New York Post, DeRosa claimed that the Cuomo administration had rejected a request from the New York State Senate back in August for a complete tally of COVID deaths. 

DeRosa went on to say that former President Trump had turned the New York state numbers “into a giant political football.” During the meeting, DeRosa said of Trump that, “He starts tweeting that we killed everyone in nursing homes.

“He starts going after [New Jersey Gov. Phil] Murphy, starts going after [California Gov. Gavin] Newsom, starts going after [Michigan Gov.] Gretchen Whitmer,” and that “Trump directs the Department of Justice to do an investigation into us. And basically we froze.”

RELATED: James Clyburn Issues Brutal Warning To Trump-‘This Is Just The Beginning’

Multiple Calls For Investigation/Prosecution

In addition to Congresswoman Stephanik’s call for investigation and possible prosecution of Cuomo, other state and national Republican office holders have come out in support of holding Cuomo and his staff to account for possible obstruction of an investigation.

New York State Senate Minority Leader Robert Ortt demanded a “top to bottom investigation.

Chairman of the New York State Republican Committee Nick Langworthy called for the impeachment of Cuomo, and state Assembly Minority Leader William Barclay called for subpoenas and subsequent hearings.

Even some Democrats were outraged enough to speak out. Democrat Assembly Woman Yuh-Line Niou called the Cuomo administration’s actions “criminal.”

RELATED: Dave Ramsey Says If Stimulus Check ‘Changes Your Life…You Were Screwed Already’

The Numbers And Those Effected

Bill Hammond, Senior Fellow for Health Policy at the Empire Center, sent out a tweet in September 2020 that stated that the CDC “unfortunately made it optional for nursing homes to report COVID deaths in March, April, and early May of 2020. this was when NY’s pandemic was at it’s worst.” 

He went on to say that “some homes did the right thing, and often gave numbers strikingly higher than reported by NYS DOH.”  In September on the Empire Center website, he said that:

“The result is that a major public health disaster affecting New York’s nursing home residents is not being accurately documented by either of the agencies responsible for protecting them-because state officials are refusing to share the true numbers, and federal officials haven’t yet asked for them.” 

One of the most outspoken critics of the Cuomo administration’s COVID nursing home policies is Fox News Channel Meteorologist Janice Dean, who lost both of her in-laws to Governor Cuomo’s nursing homes. 

On Thursday, Dean said that,”I would like to thank whoever that Democratic lawmaker that was the leak yesterday that gave us that information because i believe all of them should go to jail.”

“We need to see these people on the stand, with a jury, with us, the people that lost our loved ones, in the audience to see them tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth,” she added.

“Justice needs to be served,” Dean continued. “We don’t have our loved ones here today, but by God, I am here to be a voice for all of them.”

 

The post GOP Rep. Calls For Cuomo To Be Prosecuted For Withholding Alleged COVID Nursing Home Deaths appeared first on The Political Insider.

GOP Congressman Reed Announces Plan To File Criminal Complaint Against Cuomo Aide Over Nursing Home Deaths

Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY) spoke out on Friday to announce plans to file a criminal complain against New York Secretary to the Governor Melissa DeRosa after a report came out stating that she had admitted to hiding nursing home COVID-19 data so that the federal government wouldn’t find out how many people died.

Reed Attacks Cuomo 

“[N]ow we have Gov. Cuomo’s second in command, essentially, on a taped confession to fellow Democratic lawmakers admitting she committed criminal activity to cover up for what they were hiding from the federal officials that were responsible to get to the bottom of this, and make sure that,” Reed told Fox Business.

“We learned what happened with the COVID-19-positive order that sent 15,000 [people] to their death that Cuomo issued back in March,” he continued. “This, obviously, cannot go unaccounted for.”

“And that’s why we were arguing this in the committee yesterday, when we demanding that transparency and accountability be part of this COVID-19 package,” the Republican said. “But, most importantly, the days of Cuomo are going to be numbered in Albany here. But, most important, we need to start with this second in command.”

Related: Andrew Cuomo Aide: To Avoid Federal Investigation, New York Hid COVID-19 Nursing Home Deaths

“I’m demanding — I’m going to be looking at filing a personal criminal complaint against this individual, today, in local law enforcement offices, as well as federal offices,” Reed continued. “Because she needs to be arrested today. [L]et’s get this second in command arrested, hopefully today, by filing this criminal complaint.”

DeRosa Admits Cuomo Admin Hid Data

This comes after DeRosa apologized to Democrat leaders for hiding the true nursing home coronavirus death toll, saying “we froze” out of fear that the true numbers would “be used against us.”

She said in a video conference that they rebuffed a legislative request for the tally in August because “right around the same time, [then-President Donald Trump] turns this into a giant political football.”

“He starts tweeting that we killed everyone in nursing homes,” DeRosa said. “He starts going after [New Jersey Gov. Phil] Murphy, starts going after [California Gov. Gavin] Newsom, starts going after [Michigan Gov.] Gretchen Whitmer.”

Related: GOP Rep. Calls For Cuomo To Be Prosecuted For Withholding Alleged COVID Nursing Home Deaths

She went on to say that Trump then “directs the Department of Justice to do an investigation into us…And basically, we froze.”

“Because then we were in a position where we weren’t sure if what we were going to give to the Department of Justice, or what we give to you guys, what we start saying, was going to be used against us while we weren’t sure if there was going to be an investigation,” DeRosa said. “That played a very large role into this.”

DeRosa’s ‘Apology’

Instead of apologizing to the public, DeRosa apologized to Democrats for putting them in a difficult political position.

“So we do apologize,” she said. “I do understand the position that you were put in. I know that it is not fair. It was not our intention to put you in that political position with the Republicans.”

This piece was written by James Samson on February 12, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
Jim Jordan Claims Democrats Are ‘Scared’ Of Trump
Lindsey Graham Predicts ‘Not Guilty’ Impeachment Votes Are Growing After ‘Absurd’ Arguments From Democrats
Gowdy Takes On House Impeachment Managers, Trump Livid

The post GOP Congressman Reed Announces Plan To File Criminal Complaint Against Cuomo Aide Over Nursing Home Deaths appeared first on The Political Insider.

Republican Rep. Accuses Pelosi Of Stopping Her Naval Academy Son From Attending Her Swearing-In

Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY) has accused Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) of stopping her son, who is an active duty Marine, from attending her swearing in ceremony.

Pelosi has denied this, with her office claiming that he only could not attend because of COVID-19 restrictions put in place by the House Sergeant at Arms and the congressional Attending Physician.

Tenney Lashes Out At Pelosi

The race for New York’s 22nd Congressional Race was only just decided this week, with Tenney being declared the victor over Democratic incumbent Rep. Anthony Brindisi by 109 votes, as decided by the New York Supreme Court.

Tenney was first elected to Congress in 2016, only to be ousted by Brindisi in 2018.

Tenney was sworn in on Thursday, and she asked to have her son, a graduate of the Naval Academy and an active duty Marine, join her for the ceremony.

“I just would have loved to have my son with me. I raised him as a single parent,” Tenney told Fox News on Friday. “We’ve been with each other, nothing greater day than his graduation from the U.S. Naval Academy, it was such an honor and now he is serving our country.”

Tenney Says Pelosi Denied Her Request 

Tenney claimed that Pelosi denied her request despite allowing other members who were sworn in last month being to have one family member present.

“We’ve asked repeatedly, can I just have my son in the gallery,” Tenney said, pointing out that she didn’t even ask for him to be on the House floor. “There was no reason indicated.”

Related: Republicans Call for Pelosi To Be Fined After She’s Caught Avoiding Metal Detector In Congress

She went on to say that there was “no discussion of COVID,” adding that her son “manages COVID protocols” in the Marines.

“We just thought it was the least we could ask,” Tenney said, saying that her son eventually just “waited outside the gallery door.”

“It was nice of him to take time out of his busy job serving our country to come and support me as I got sworn into the House,” Tenney said. She continued by saying that not having her son there was “very disappointing and we got no real answers as to why this was denied.”

“He was disappointed,” she concluded. “He just wanted to be there for me. We are very close.”

Pelosi’s Spokesman Responds

Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill denied this, chalking up the reason behind Tenney’s son not being allowed to attend to coronavirus restrictions, something he says the Speaker does not handle.

“The COVID restrictions are set by the House Sergeant at Arms and the Attending Physician,” Hammill said.

He added that this “has nothing to do with politics” and said that “the same thing would happen to a Democratic member.”

Read Next: Pelosi Blasts Republicans For Refusing To Remove Greene From Committees – ‘Profoundly Concerned’

This piece was written by James Samson on February 12, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
Jim Jordan Claims Democrats Are ‘Scared’ Of Trump
Lindsey Graham Predicts ‘Not Guilty’ Impeachment Votes Are Growing After ‘Absurd’ Arguments From Democrats
Gowdy Takes On House Impeachment Managers, Trump Livid

The post Republican Rep. Accuses Pelosi Of Stopping Her Naval Academy Son From Attending Her Swearing-In appeared first on The Political Insider.

Biden’s COVID Team Warns There Might Not Be Herd Immunity Until Thanksgiving Or Even Later

Some members of President Joe Biden’s COVID response team leaders are saying internally that it might be Thanksgiving, or even later, before the U.S. reaches herd immunity, which is months later than was originally predicted.

This news comes from two senior administration officials who spoke to The Daily Beast.

Herd Immunity Is The Goal

Biden told CBS News this week that it would “very difficult” to reach herd immunity – which means enough of the population is resistant to the virus for life to return to some semblance of normalcy – “much before the end of the summer.”

Biden said this based on the approximately 1.3 million vaccine doses that are being  produced and/or administered daily.

The Daily Beast reported on Tuesday, “Other top officials working on the federal government’s COVID-19 response say the are uneasy about vaccine supply long term and the impact on herd immunity, and have begun to explore ways to expand U.S. manufacturing capacity, potentially through new partnerships with outside pharmaceutical firms.”

RELATED: Texas Sheriff Claims Biden Admin Releasing Illegal Immigrants Into U.S. Without COVID Testing

Top officials are also reportedly worried about how new variants of the virus might affect achieving herd immunity:

“Together, the recent data has alarmed health officials in the Biden administration who are now raising questions about what more can be done to not only shorten the herd immunity timeline—not just to return Americans to some sort of normalcy but also to ensure the country does not experience another surge in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths.”

It continued, “Officials have spent the last several days discussing ways to ramp up genome sequencing to track variants and how to push out the message that Americans need to more closely follow public health guidelines to reduce transmission as B117 variant cases begin to increase.”

Fauci: ‘We’re Going In The Right Direction’

The Daily Beast notes that White House pandemic leader Dr. Anthony Fauci had previously said that about 75 percent of Americans and those in the U.S. would need to receive a vaccine to reach herd immunity, but was “cautiously optimistic” this goal could be reached by the beginning of the fall.

“I still think that is possible,” Fauci said. “As I’ve said before, once we get into mass vaccination when the general public starts getting it by the end of the spring—April, May, June …and we get past any vaccine hesitancy, then we should be able to reach that 70 or 75 percent mark.”

“We’re going in the right direction.” Fauci added.

In December, however, the New York Times reported that Fauci admitted to moving the goal posts upward, to 80 or 85 percent.

Centers for Disease Control Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky addressed the potential dangers of COVID variants on Monday. 

RELATED: PBS’ Yamiche Alcindor Defends Democrat Double Standard On Impeachment – ‘Wasn’t Storming Of The Capitol’ After Maxine Waters’ Speech

‘We’re Still At Over 100,000 Cases A Day’

“The virus is going to continue to mutate no matter what we do,” Walensky said. “The types of mutations we’ll see will change as more people are immunized.”

This news comes as many states and municipalities across the U.S. are loosening their COVID restrictions. 

Walensky warned against this, particularly regarding masks. 

“We’re still at over 100,000 cases a day,” she said. “I think we have yet to control this pandemic. We still have this emerging threat of variants. And I would just simply discourage any of those activities.”

“We really need to keep all of the mitigation measures at play here if we’re really going to get control of this pandemic” she added.

The post Biden’s COVID Team Warns There Might Not Be Herd Immunity Until Thanksgiving Or Even Later appeared first on The Political Insider.

Biden Administration In ‘Active Conversation’ To Require COVID Test Before Domestic Flights

On Sunday, Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said that the Biden administration is in active conversations with the CDC about requiring Americans to have a negative COVID-19 test before traveling by plane to another U.S. state.

Buttigieg made his comments during an Axios interview when the Democrat was asked what he thought “of requiring a COVID test before someone flies even domestically?”

RELATED: Dan Rather Says It May Have Not Been ‘Responsible’ To Air Commercials Of Crowds Maskless During Super Bowl

Buttigieg: ‘Going To Be Guided By Data, By Science’

“Well, there’s an active conversation with the CDC right now, what I can tell you is this going to be guided by data, by science, by medicine, and by the input of the people are actually going to have to carry this out,” Buttigieg replied.

The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana and 2020 presidential candidate continued, “But here’s the thing, the safer we can make air travel in terms of perception as well as reality, the more people are going to be ready to get back in the air.”

Buttigieg also argued that most Americans’ typical work schedule might be permanently changed due to the pandemic.

Buttigieg said we should start looking more closely at different types of transportation like “bikes, scooters, wheelchairs” because “roads aren’t only for vehicles.”

‘Mayor Pete’ Defends Keystone Pipeline Cancellation

“Mayor Peter” also defended President Joe Biden recently killing the Keystone Pipeline by executive order.

During Buttigieg’s Senate confirmation hearing, Sen. Ted Cruz pressed Buttigieg on that issue, asking, “So for those workers, the answer is somebody else will get a job?”

Buttigieg replied, “The answer is we are very eager to see those workers continue to be employed in good-paying union jobs, even if they might be different ones.”

RELATED: Trump Lawyer’s Demand Senate Impeachment Trial Be Dismissed, Top Dem Admits ‘Not Crazy To Argue’ It’s Unconstitutional

It’s safe to assume the many Americans put out of work by the Biden administration’s decision to axe the Keystone Pipeline XL might take a very different view.

Several unions have blasted the move.

Even the head of America’s largest labor union, the AFL-CIO, declared his disappointment.

“I wish he had paired that more carefully with the thing that he did second by saying, ‘Here’s where we’re creating jobs. We can do mine reclamation. We can fix leaks. We can fix seeps and create hundreds of thousands of jobs doing that stuff,’” AFL-CIO leader Richard Trumka said of the move.

The post Biden Administration In ‘Active Conversation’ To Require COVID Test Before Domestic Flights appeared first on The Political Insider.

Sanders, Wyden fight to keep survival checks from being cut by ridiculous austerity arguments

Democrats are having a public fight over something that really matters: how much assistance hurting people are going to get from them in survival checks. It's a stupid fight, summed up best by Sen. Bernie Sanders:

Unbelievable. There are some Dems who want to lower the income eligibility for direct payments from $75,000 to $50,000 for individuals, and $150,000 to $100,000 for couples. In other words, working class people who got checks from Trump would not get them from Biden. Brilliant!

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 7, 2021

He's not alone in this with powerful support from Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, the new chair of the Finance Committee. The other side is being spearheaded by Sen. Joe Manchin, with back-up from Mitch McConnell's favorite "bipartisan" water carrier, Sen. Susan Collins. They're trying to keep payments from what they call "high-earning" families.

Campaign Action

Look at how Manchin explains this: "An individual of $40,000 income or $50,000 income would receive it. And a family who is making $80,000 or $100,000, not to exceed $100,000, would receive it," Manchin said. "Anything over that would not be eligible, because they are the people who really are hurting right now and need the help the most." Who's missing there? Yeah, everybody making more than $50,001. So he's not even arguing in good faith here, couching this as cutting off payments at $80,000 when that's not what he wants to do.

The gap between $50,000 and $80,000 includes a lot of people who, as Sanders says, got two checks already from the Trump administration and are expecting the third one everybody is talking about, a point also made by Wyden: "I understand the desire to ensure those most in need receive checks, but families who received the first two checks will be counting on a third check to pay the bills." That's so glaringly apparent that it's hard to understand there is any constituency for this fight, including in the White House.

It gets even worse when you drill down to find out where the impetus for the cut comes from, as David Dayen has done at The American Prospect. The debate is being driven by a paper from Harvard economics professor Raj Chetty and others which showed higher-income households not spending the last, $600 round of checks immediately. Dayen uncovers the fact that the Chetty research is not on household-level income data. Instead, data for about 10% of U.S. credit and debit card activity sorted into ZIP codes by the address associated with the card. Those ZIP codes are then grouped "using 2014-2018 ACS (The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey) estimates of ZIP Code median household income," according to the appendix in the Chetty paper. So, as Dayen says, the conclusion that low-income people spent their checks immediately while higher-income people did not, "is by saying that ZIP codes that had lower-income people in them between three and seven years ago contained a higher level of immediate spending than ZIP codes with higher-income people during this period." A period before the pandemic.

That's a damned big supposition. Claudia Sahm, a former Federal Reserve and Council of Economic Advisers economist, tells Dayen, "I think the paper is unsuitable for the policy discussion. […] It's one paper at odds with 20 years of research. […] I know the sampling error has to be in the thousands of dollars, there's no way it’s that precise." What's even worse about this paper is that they didn't even disclose the out-of-date ZIP code basis for their data until late last week, more than a week after it had been highlighted in the traditional media and started taking hold. It's still out there, with The New York Times opinion page giving Chetty and colleagues space to continue their badly sourced argument.

All that's aside from the larger argument: we're in the middle of a global pandemic and the economy is in tatters—just spend the money helping as many people as possible and worry about sorting out who should have to pay any of it back later. Because the need is so great and this isn't a time to skimp. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has said as much, and thankfully appears not to be so much on board with this push to reduce payments, though the White House has been vaguely supportive. "The exact details of how it should be targeted are to be determined, but struggling middle-class families need help, too," Yellen said on CNN this weekend. Asked if she thinks the targeting should be higher than $50,000 per person but less than $75,000, Yellen responded: "Yes, I—I think the details can be worked out. And the president is certainly willing to work with Congress to find a good structure for these payments."

There's also this: they're still going to base the payments on 2019 income unless they have 2020 income filed by the time the relief bill is passed. Which means you need to file immediately if you've had a big drop in income. Which means the IRS is going to be flooded with returns at the same time it's trying to make income determinations and trying to determine who gets what. But at least there is the recognition that a lot of people did not have the same income in 2020 as 2019.

Again, the survival checks have been means-tested already, with the first rounds of checks phasing out starting at $75,000 based on out-of-date data. Compounding that is this new argument based on really bad and irrelevant information. Not that what anybody does with their survival checks really matters right now, anyway. Worry about saving the maximum amount of people possible. That will make the economy come back stronger and faster and then the rest can be sorted out, if necessary, with tax reform.

Sen. Bill Cassidy on Rep. Greene: ‘She’s part of a conspiracy cabal’

Sen. Bill Cassidy, of Louisiana, is one of 10 Republicans to meet this week with President Biden about the administration's COVID relief bill, and one of only a handful of medical doctors serving in Congress. He joins Judy Woodruff to discuss Biden's plan, former President Trump's impeachment trial and the future of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.