This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/opinion/coronavirus-federal-relief-inaction-debatable.html
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Inaction in the Throes of a Calamity | |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| This article is part of the Debatable newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it on Tuesdays and Thursdays. | This article is part of the Debatable newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it on Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
| On Tuesday, as congressional leaders and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin headed into yet another round of negotiations over a new pandemic relief package, the sides remain locked in a stalemate, or a game of chicken. | On Tuesday, as congressional leaders and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin headed into yet another round of negotiations over a new pandemic relief package, the sides remain locked in a stalemate, or a game of chicken. |
| “Every day the script is the same,” Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, said. “And the script is we had a pleasant conversation, but we don’t feel like making a deal.” | “Every day the script is the same,” Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, said. “And the script is we had a pleasant conversation, but we don’t feel like making a deal.” |
| In the meantime, tens of millions of Americans are being battered financially, if not physically, by the virus. Whatever agreement Congress and the Trump White House come to is likely to be the last major item they tackle before this November’s presidential election. Rarely in Washington do the policy stakes get higher. | In the meantime, tens of millions of Americans are being battered financially, if not physically, by the virus. Whatever agreement Congress and the Trump White House come to is likely to be the last major item they tackle before this November’s presidential election. Rarely in Washington do the policy stakes get higher. |
| So, via Slack, I reached out to my colleague Binyamin Appelbaum, a member of the editorial board and a former Washington correspondent for The Times, who has covered economic debates for years, to get a firmer grip on what’s going on, what may happen next and how the emergency aid that has been enacted so far could shape policymaking in the coming years. | So, via Slack, I reached out to my colleague Binyamin Appelbaum, a member of the editorial board and a former Washington correspondent for The Times, who has covered economic debates for years, to get a firmer grip on what’s going on, what may happen next and how the emergency aid that has been enacted so far could shape policymaking in the coming years. |
| T.J.S.: So, Binya, the country has just gone through its worst economic quarter in over half a century. States and cities are experiencing budget shortfalls just as bad or worse than the crunch they faced during the Great Recession. And emergency unemployment insurance for as many as 30 million Americans has expired. Oh, and the pandemic is surging through the country again. | T.J.S.: So, Binya, the country has just gone through its worst economic quarter in over half a century. States and cities are experiencing budget shortfalls just as bad or worse than the crunch they faced during the Great Recession. And emergency unemployment insurance for as many as 30 million Americans has expired. Oh, and the pandemic is surging through the country again. |
| Without putting too fine a point on it — though feel free — what is Congress doing? | Without putting too fine a point on it — though feel free — what is Congress doing? |
| B.A.: Well, we probably shouldn’t talk about Congress as a unit. The original package of coronavirus aid, passed in March, has mostly run out. Democrats, who control the House, passed a perfectly serviceable extension and expansion of those aid programs in May. Republicans, who control the Senate, insisted until recently that they didn’t see the need for another bill, so they ignored it. Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, now says he’d like to do something but a) his plan is much narrower than what Democrats favor and b) a lot of Senate Republicans are not onboard and c) the White House can’t seem to make up its mind. | B.A.: Well, we probably shouldn’t talk about Congress as a unit. The original package of coronavirus aid, passed in March, has mostly run out. Democrats, who control the House, passed a perfectly serviceable extension and expansion of those aid programs in May. Republicans, who control the Senate, insisted until recently that they didn’t see the need for another bill, so they ignored it. Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, now says he’d like to do something but a) his plan is much narrower than what Democrats favor and b) a lot of Senate Republicans are not onboard and c) the White House can’t seem to make up its mind. |
| T.J.S.: What, if any, workable theories are there for the Senate’s inaction so far? | T.J.S.: What, if any, workable theories are there for the Senate’s inaction so far? |
| B.A.: I think some Republicans genuinely don’t understand how the economy works. They’ve taken legitimate observations about the limits of government’s powers and turned them into religious principles about the futility of any government intervention. Others, including McConnell, may simply be playing a game of chicken, trying to see how much Democrats are willing to concede on Republican priorities — notably, legal protections for businesses whose workers get sick. | B.A.: I think some Republicans genuinely don’t understand how the economy works. They’ve taken legitimate observations about the limits of government’s powers and turned them into religious principles about the futility of any government intervention. Others, including McConnell, may simply be playing a game of chicken, trying to see how much Democrats are willing to concede on Republican priorities — notably, legal protections for businesses whose workers get sick. |
| The most cynical interpretation — which isn’t to say that it’s wrong — is that Republicans expect to lose power in November. During the early years of the Obama administration, Republicans sabotaged economic stimulus efforts because they thought it would help them return to power. And it worked — although only at the expense of millions of Americans. | The most cynical interpretation — which isn’t to say that it’s wrong — is that Republicans expect to lose power in November. During the early years of the Obama administration, Republicans sabotaged economic stimulus efforts because they thought it would help them return to power. And it worked — although only at the expense of millions of Americans. |
| T.J.S.: Of course, there is a certain someone — President Trump — who has every reason, if he wants to do all he can to get re-elected, to push Mr. McConnell and other Senate Republicans into passing a package of moderately generous emergency aid extensions through November. But by Trumpian standards, he seems to have barely made a peep. | T.J.S.: Of course, there is a certain someone — President Trump — who has every reason, if he wants to do all he can to get re-elected, to push Mr. McConnell and other Senate Republicans into passing a package of moderately generous emergency aid extensions through November. But by Trumpian standards, he seems to have barely made a peep. |
| B.A.: Trump does seem to be sabotaging his own re-election prospects. I’m not going to try to climb inside the president’s head, but I would note that it can be misleading to think of the presidency as a single person sitting there making autonomous decisions. A president is encrusted in advisers who filter what he hears and who inform what he decides. So the reasons for the Senate’s inaction may well apply to the White House too. | B.A.: Trump does seem to be sabotaging his own re-election prospects. I’m not going to try to climb inside the president’s head, but I would note that it can be misleading to think of the presidency as a single person sitting there making autonomous decisions. A president is encrusted in advisers who filter what he hears and who inform what he decides. So the reasons for the Senate’s inaction may well apply to the White House too. |
| T.J.S.: If only we could climb inside the president’s head. | T.J.S.: If only we could climb inside the president’s head. |
| Moving on from the palace intrigue, I recently read a fascinating essay in Barron’s by Matthew Zeitlin. He observes how the $600 weekly payment that Congress approved for the unemployed — many of whom are now bringing in more than they did from their previous jobs — has provided an informal case study of government aid. As he puts it, “even with a limited run, the benefit has provided a wealth of data, insight, and experience that should reshape how we think about unemployment benefits and social policy.” | Moving on from the palace intrigue, I recently read a fascinating essay in Barron’s by Matthew Zeitlin. He observes how the $600 weekly payment that Congress approved for the unemployed — many of whom are now bringing in more than they did from their previous jobs — has provided an informal case study of government aid. As he puts it, “even with a limited run, the benefit has provided a wealth of data, insight, and experience that should reshape how we think about unemployment benefits and social policy.” |
| Because of the benefits these payments have provided to the economy, he says, “they — or something like them — could be a permanent feature of U.S. economic policy.” | Because of the benefits these payments have provided to the economy, he says, “they — or something like them — could be a permanent feature of U.S. economic policy.” |
| It’s definitely bold, and only something elected Democrats, and those to their left, would even consider. But vote-counting aside, what do you make of the ideas he covers in the piece, like wage subsidies or a mini universal basic income on the merits? | It’s definitely bold, and only something elected Democrats, and those to their left, would even consider. But vote-counting aside, what do you make of the ideas he covers in the piece, like wage subsidies or a mini universal basic income on the merits? |
| B.A.: It’s one of the few things that has gone right since the crisis started. For me, the $600 payments really underscore that we need two different kinds of unemployment benefits, one for normal times and one for bad times. In normal times, the state only replaces a portion of lost wages because we want to encourage people to go back to work. In bad times, when work is hard to find, it makes sense to give people more money. And we could switch automatically between those two kinds of programs based on the level of unemployment. | B.A.: It’s one of the few things that has gone right since the crisis started. For me, the $600 payments really underscore that we need two different kinds of unemployment benefits, one for normal times and one for bad times. In normal times, the state only replaces a portion of lost wages because we want to encourage people to go back to work. In bad times, when work is hard to find, it makes sense to give people more money. And we could switch automatically between those two kinds of programs based on the level of unemployment. |
| The details, though, get a little tricky. The average weekly unemployment benefit is a little less than $400. Congress added the $600 because the combination replaces the wages of an average worker. That meant a lot of people were making more than they did while they were working, which drove Republicans crazy. But they acquiesced because the Labor Department told them states didn’t have the necessary systems to calculate actual wage replacement. | The details, though, get a little tricky. The average weekly unemployment benefit is a little less than $400. Congress added the $600 because the combination replaces the wages of an average worker. That meant a lot of people were making more than they did while they were working, which drove Republicans crazy. But they acquiesced because the Labor Department told them states didn’t have the necessary systems to calculate actual wage replacement. |
| But there’s another big problem. Benefits vary widely by state. In Florida, the maximum is $275; in Massachusetts, it’s $873. If you move to a system where the federal government is covering the difference between state benefits and full wage replacement, you’re basically subsidizing Florida’s stinginess. | But there’s another big problem. Benefits vary widely by state. In Florida, the maximum is $275; in Massachusetts, it’s $873. If you move to a system where the federal government is covering the difference between state benefits and full wage replacement, you’re basically subsidizing Florida’s stinginess. |
| I do have reservations about viewing expanded unemployment benefits as a proof-of-concept for U.B.I. The rationale for providing people with money during economic downturns is very different than the rationale for providing a constant subsidy. This probably isn’t the place to get into the details. | I do have reservations about viewing expanded unemployment benefits as a proof-of-concept for U.B.I. The rationale for providing people with money during economic downturns is very different than the rationale for providing a constant subsidy. This probably isn’t the place to get into the details. |
| T.J.S.: All fair points. In the spirit of this being a relatively informal place, not fit for all the details, here’s a question based purely on speculation: Assuming the polls hold relatively steady and President Trump loses re-election, what is the first economic policy that a hypothetical Joe Biden administration should pursue? | T.J.S.: All fair points. In the spirit of this being a relatively informal place, not fit for all the details, here’s a question based purely on speculation: Assuming the polls hold relatively steady and President Trump loses re-election, what is the first economic policy that a hypothetical Joe Biden administration should pursue? |
| B.A.: My answer is baby bonds, actually. The basic idea is that every kid gets a $2,000 government savings account when they’re born, and then additional annual contributions based on family income. To me, one of the defining challenges facing our society is to give kids a better chance to succeed. Right now, it matters way too much how much money your parents have — and those wealth inequalities really map onto racial lines. | B.A.: My answer is baby bonds, actually. The basic idea is that every kid gets a $2,000 government savings account when they’re born, and then additional annual contributions based on family income. To me, one of the defining challenges facing our society is to give kids a better chance to succeed. Right now, it matters way too much how much money your parents have — and those wealth inequalities really map onto racial lines. |
| Giving every kid a nest egg is a very powerful idea: It would improve every kid’s opportunities. It’s like Social Security, but for the beginning of life. | Giving every kid a nest egg is a very powerful idea: It would improve every kid’s opportunities. It’s like Social Security, but for the beginning of life. |
| T.J.S.: Indeed. I think that’s a good place to leave it. Thanks, Binya. | T.J.S.: Indeed. I think that’s a good place to leave it. Thanks, Binya. |
| B.A.: Thank you. | B.A.: Thank you. |
| Do you have a point of view we missed? Email us at debatable@nytimes.com. Please note your name, age and location in your response, which may be included in the next newsletter. | Do you have a point of view we missed? Email us at debatable@nytimes.com. Please note your name, age and location in your response, which may be included in the next newsletter. |
| “Mitch McConnell Could Rescue Millions. What Is He Waiting For?” [The New York Times] | “Mitch McConnell Could Rescue Millions. What Is He Waiting For?” [The New York Times] |
| “Virus Relief Talks Resume With Little Movement on Biggest Issues” [Bloomberg] | “Virus Relief Talks Resume With Little Movement on Biggest Issues” [Bloomberg] |
| “If Congress Cuts Jobless Benefits, ‘It Would Be a Disaster’” [The New York Times] | “If Congress Cuts Jobless Benefits, ‘It Would Be a Disaster’” [The New York Times] |
| “12 People in a 3-Bedroom House, Then the Virus Entered the Equation” [The New York Times] | “12 People in a 3-Bedroom House, Then the Virus Entered the Equation” [The New York Times] |
| Here’s what readers had to say about the last debate: Fascism: A Concern. | Here’s what readers had to say about the last debate: Fascism: A Concern. |
| Peter from Truro, Mass.: “I feel one part of my understanding of fascism that seems left out is the corporate/business cooperation that certainly existed in European fascism in the ’30s and ’40s. Hitler needed cooperation from many German and U.S. corporations to support his existence and war effort. Our corporations certainly have incredible influence through donations and are rewarded with business-friendly policies now and historically.” | Peter from Truro, Mass.: “I feel one part of my understanding of fascism that seems left out is the corporate/business cooperation that certainly existed in European fascism in the ’30s and ’40s. Hitler needed cooperation from many German and U.S. corporations to support his existence and war effort. Our corporations certainly have incredible influence through donations and are rewarded with business-friendly policies now and historically.” |
| Erik from Chicago: “A fascist politician or leader is one who is a product of a nation with extreme capitalism (wealth inequality) who demonizes minorities to gain or maintain power. | Erik from Chicago: “A fascist politician or leader is one who is a product of a nation with extreme capitalism (wealth inequality) who demonizes minorities to gain or maintain power. |
| “In a sense, fascism is the next evolution of extreme capitalism. This is not 1939, so fascism today will be a little different than fascism in the past. For example authoritarians of all stripes today maintain trappings of democracy; Russia, Iran and North Korea, for example, all have sham elections. | “In a sense, fascism is the next evolution of extreme capitalism. This is not 1939, so fascism today will be a little different than fascism in the past. For example authoritarians of all stripes today maintain trappings of democracy; Russia, Iran and North Korea, for example, all have sham elections. |
| “Let’s not sugarcoat it by debating how it may or may not be fascism. The takeaway of having the fascism debate at all is that we’re living in incredibly extreme times.” | “Let’s not sugarcoat it by debating how it may or may not be fascism. The takeaway of having the fascism debate at all is that we’re living in incredibly extreme times.” |