House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) speaks during a news conference with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) at the U.S. Capitol January 25, 2019 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Zach Gibson/Getty Images)
Apr 21, 2020
This is developing story... stay tuned for updates...
Progressives exploded in frustration Tuesday as the Senate prepared to pass an interim funding bill for coronavirus relief that once again included no funding for the Post Office, food banks, or election security, and provided no bailout oversight and no funding for states and cities--leading critics to wonder why Democratic lawmakers refused to use their leverage and hold up the bill.
"This isn't good," tweetedThe Nation's national affairs correspondent Jeet Heer. "It's imperative to get money out the door fast but these are one sided agreements."
\u201cThings NOT expected in bill likely to be voted on by Senate today: \n\n-- Hazard pay 4 frontline workers;\n\n-- $ for states & cities; \n\n-- Elections security; \n\n-- More oversight on bailout; \n\n-- Food stamp $; \n\n-- Rent freeze; \n\n-- More stimulus checks\n\nTiming on "Phase 4" unclear\u201d— Jeff Stein (@Jeff Stein) 1587496106
According to Politico, a deal on the legislation was reached Tuesday afternoon after negotiations between Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and the White House yielded a bill that all parties were happy with. President Donald Trump has indicated he will sign the legislation.
As Politico reported:
Aides in both parties said they were still finalizing the legislation throughout the day and making sure it could pass unanimously. Schumer said staffers were working out the specifics of the massive $484 billion package, which will mark Congress' fourth major infusion of coronavirus aid.
The bill does include $321 billion for small businesses, $75 billion for hospitals, and $25 billion for coronavirus testing. But to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities president Robert Greenstein, that's not enough.
"While providing needed support to small businesses and hospitals, the new COVID-19 package announced today falls short even as an interim measure, failing to deliver crucial state and local fiscal relief and food assistance," Greenstein said in a statement Tuesday.
Critics of the bill pointed out that House Democrats could have moved to pass their own bill addressing issues important to progressives.
Mother Jones reporter Ari Berman noted that the bill, which contains no election funding, flies in the face of assurances by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that it would.
\u201c.@SenWarren told me next recovery bill needed to include $4 billion in election funding to states to avoid another Wisconsin. This one has nothing https://t.co/KqX7RA8Qyi\u201d— Ari Berman (@Ari Berman) 1587496999
In the context of the missed opportunities, journalist Jack Mirkinson questioned whether Democrats were in fact "caving" on the legislation.
"Democrats control the House and could have passed their own bill and negotiated from there, so this doesn't seem like a 'cave' so much as a 'choice' from them," said Mirkinson.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
This is developing story... stay tuned for updates...
Progressives exploded in frustration Tuesday as the Senate prepared to pass an interim funding bill for coronavirus relief that once again included no funding for the Post Office, food banks, or election security, and provided no bailout oversight and no funding for states and cities--leading critics to wonder why Democratic lawmakers refused to use their leverage and hold up the bill.
"This isn't good," tweetedThe Nation's national affairs correspondent Jeet Heer. "It's imperative to get money out the door fast but these are one sided agreements."
\u201cThings NOT expected in bill likely to be voted on by Senate today: \n\n-- Hazard pay 4 frontline workers;\n\n-- $ for states & cities; \n\n-- Elections security; \n\n-- More oversight on bailout; \n\n-- Food stamp $; \n\n-- Rent freeze; \n\n-- More stimulus checks\n\nTiming on "Phase 4" unclear\u201d— Jeff Stein (@Jeff Stein) 1587496106
According to Politico, a deal on the legislation was reached Tuesday afternoon after negotiations between Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and the White House yielded a bill that all parties were happy with. President Donald Trump has indicated he will sign the legislation.
As Politico reported:
Aides in both parties said they were still finalizing the legislation throughout the day and making sure it could pass unanimously. Schumer said staffers were working out the specifics of the massive $484 billion package, which will mark Congress' fourth major infusion of coronavirus aid.
The bill does include $321 billion for small businesses, $75 billion for hospitals, and $25 billion for coronavirus testing. But to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities president Robert Greenstein, that's not enough.
"While providing needed support to small businesses and hospitals, the new COVID-19 package announced today falls short even as an interim measure, failing to deliver crucial state and local fiscal relief and food assistance," Greenstein said in a statement Tuesday.
Critics of the bill pointed out that House Democrats could have moved to pass their own bill addressing issues important to progressives.
Mother Jones reporter Ari Berman noted that the bill, which contains no election funding, flies in the face of assurances by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that it would.
\u201c.@SenWarren told me next recovery bill needed to include $4 billion in election funding to states to avoid another Wisconsin. This one has nothing https://t.co/KqX7RA8Qyi\u201d— Ari Berman (@Ari Berman) 1587496999
In the context of the missed opportunities, journalist Jack Mirkinson questioned whether Democrats were in fact "caving" on the legislation.
"Democrats control the House and could have passed their own bill and negotiated from there, so this doesn't seem like a 'cave' so much as a 'choice' from them," said Mirkinson.
This is developing story... stay tuned for updates...
Progressives exploded in frustration Tuesday as the Senate prepared to pass an interim funding bill for coronavirus relief that once again included no funding for the Post Office, food banks, or election security, and provided no bailout oversight and no funding for states and cities--leading critics to wonder why Democratic lawmakers refused to use their leverage and hold up the bill.
"This isn't good," tweetedThe Nation's national affairs correspondent Jeet Heer. "It's imperative to get money out the door fast but these are one sided agreements."
\u201cThings NOT expected in bill likely to be voted on by Senate today: \n\n-- Hazard pay 4 frontline workers;\n\n-- $ for states & cities; \n\n-- Elections security; \n\n-- More oversight on bailout; \n\n-- Food stamp $; \n\n-- Rent freeze; \n\n-- More stimulus checks\n\nTiming on "Phase 4" unclear\u201d— Jeff Stein (@Jeff Stein) 1587496106
According to Politico, a deal on the legislation was reached Tuesday afternoon after negotiations between Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and the White House yielded a bill that all parties were happy with. President Donald Trump has indicated he will sign the legislation.
As Politico reported:
Aides in both parties said they were still finalizing the legislation throughout the day and making sure it could pass unanimously. Schumer said staffers were working out the specifics of the massive $484 billion package, which will mark Congress' fourth major infusion of coronavirus aid.
The bill does include $321 billion for small businesses, $75 billion for hospitals, and $25 billion for coronavirus testing. But to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities president Robert Greenstein, that's not enough.
"While providing needed support to small businesses and hospitals, the new COVID-19 package announced today falls short even as an interim measure, failing to deliver crucial state and local fiscal relief and food assistance," Greenstein said in a statement Tuesday.
Critics of the bill pointed out that House Democrats could have moved to pass their own bill addressing issues important to progressives.
Mother Jones reporter Ari Berman noted that the bill, which contains no election funding, flies in the face of assurances by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that it would.
\u201c.@SenWarren told me next recovery bill needed to include $4 billion in election funding to states to avoid another Wisconsin. This one has nothing https://t.co/KqX7RA8Qyi\u201d— Ari Berman (@Ari Berman) 1587496999
In the context of the missed opportunities, journalist Jack Mirkinson questioned whether Democrats were in fact "caving" on the legislation.
"Democrats control the House and could have passed their own bill and negotiated from there, so this doesn't seem like a 'cave' so much as a 'choice' from them," said Mirkinson.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.