Was The Trump Tweet Yesterday A White Flag?

Trump's tweet was hilarious Wednesday morning. I wondered if it gave McConnell heart failure; I'm certain it sent Pelosi into a state of near exultation, if not euphoria. He completely undercut McConnell's already weak bargaining position on the must-pass pandemic relief bill-- telling the Republicans (i.e.- McConnell) to "go for the much higher numbers." It also looks like Trump told Meadows to get a bill done. Right after the tweet, Meadows told the media he feels "optimistic" and that "If the Speaker is willing to stay in, I'm willing to stay in, the Secretary [Mnuchin] is willing to stay in and negotiate."

In May the House passed a $3.4 trillion bill (Heroes Act), which McConnell has refused to even allow to be debated. Instead a joke of a "skinny bill," offering a shameful $650 billion. The Republican bill doesn't give any money to local governments, doesn't do anything about battling COVID-19 and would trigger a Depression. Yesterday, before the tweet, The Atlantic's Derek Thompson suggested the reason Trump, stuck in a Pollyannaish fantasy of his own making," isn't trying to save the economy. Bad economies defeat incumbent presidents and, noted Thompson "The 2020 economy is worse than weak; it is, for many, an outright catastrophe. Look beyond the healthy housing market and the stock market, and you will see a depressed leisure-and-hospitality sector, 8 percent unemployment, and tens of thousands of small businesses on the brink of collapse. The implication seems obvious. President Donald Trump faces an array of obstacles on his path to reelection. But he could do one thing, right away, that would, in all likelihood, immediately improve his odds with almost no downside risk: Call for Congress to open the cash spigot and buoy the lackluster economy on a wave of stimulus. All he has to do is announce his intention to sign a second major economic relief bill-- a CARES Act II, essentially-- and count on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to muddle through. Such a law would almost certainly improve the financial state of countless families at a time of mass desperation, and just weeks before the election."

Maybe Thompson's article is what spurred Trump's tweet. It wouldn't surprise me. But why hasn't he done so before yesterday's tweet? Thompson reiterated that "With no pressure from the top, Senate Republicans rejected the HEROES Act, the multitrillion-dollar stimulus package that Democrats passed in the House, and countered with a stingy-- or “skinny”-- stimulus that did not include another round of checks for taxpayers or state and local government aid."

On the campaign trail and in his television ads, Trump proclaims that a great and historic economic recovery is afoot. The notion that the economy is sick enough to require a trillion-dollar booster shot is in direct tension with the claim that it’s thriving. So, the theory goes, Trump is unwilling to advocate for stimulus, because he doesn’t want to acknowledge that the economy is broken in the first place.

Trump’s approach to the enfeebled pandemic economy resembles that of a certain cartoon dog sipping coffee in a burning room. It’s the “This Is Fine” style of American politics. Surrounded by evidence of a crisis, Trump seems content to make up promises about a fictionalized economy rather than take action to fix the real thing.

Meanwhile, the people around Trump aren’t urging him to reject this faulty logic. Some of them are simply afraid of objecting to a leader with a taste for punishing his intraparty rivals. But the GOP, as a group, has also convinced itself that more stimulus is unnecessary. Republicans are more dubious about Keynesianism than Democrats, even though they stood by quietly as deficits mounted under Trump before the plague hit. The GOP largely prefers targeted social insurance over the broad-based stimulus of mailing checks to hundreds of millions of American households. They don’t believe that states and local governments need a huge bailout. They’re reluctant to top off unemployment-insurance checks with hundreds of dollars in pandemic bonuses.

The generous interpretation is that Republicans believe the economy will rebound without federal assistance; the critical one is that, just as Trump is delusional about economic realities, the GOP is delusional about economic policy. The Great Recession demonstrated clearly that without emergency support after sharp recessions, state and local governments lay off workers, whose unemployment delays the overall recovery. But the GOP, refusing to learn from the experience of past economic conflagrations, is clasping anachronistic ideas about economics with both hands. In other words: “This Is Fine.”

It would be one thing if the tendency to ignore reality were limited to Washington. But the inability to see reality through the smudge of one’s own ideology is a national affliction. As a general rule, Americans pick sides first; the thinking comes second.

Overall, Americans’ evaluation of the economy these days has very little to do with reality. An analysis by the University of Michigan’s Richard Curtin found that partisan differences in how people perceive the state of the economy has never been higher. In other words, at any given moment, Democrats and Republicans claim to be seeing almost completely opposite countries. Take, for example, a Fox News poll from last week. Two-thirds of Republicans said the economy is “excellent” or “good,” almost the exact same share who approved of Trump’s job performance. Meanwhile, just 16 percent of Democrats said the economy was “excellent” or “good,” also close to the same share who approved of Trump’s job performance.

Meanwhile, a pandemic followed by an unprecedented fast freeze of the face-to-face economy has scarcely updated Americans’-- and, particularly, Republicans’-- views of the world. National approval for Trump’s handling of the economy is not meaningfully different than it was in the summer of 2018 or 2017, even though the economy has gone from extremely strong to severely distressed.

In the past 100 years, economic conditions have determined voters’ political preferences. But today, especially on the right, political preferences shape most voters’ attitudes about the economy. For many, it doesn’t matter if the world is freezing, on fire, or just right. “This is fine,” and it will always be fine, just as long as your team is in power.

I asked Nate McMurray, the union-backed western New York (NY-27) candidate running against billionaire reactionary Chris Jacobs (R) if the state of the economy and the stubborn, systemic Republican Party refusal to pass the pandemic relief package is impacting his own race. "For decades," he told me this morning, "my district has been plagued by out-of-touch Republicans who chase power, abandon the people in pursuit of power, and end up resigning in disgrace. Is it any wonder that NY-27 has one of the worst job markets in the country? To Chris Jacobs, Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, and any other do-nothing politician that stands in the way of working-class families putting food on the table in the middle of a global pandemic that they lied about: History, and the voting public, will not forget the death and ruin you caused by abandoning the American people. If we don't take a clear stand in support of humanity and our democracy, we will lose both of them. If I were in Congress today I'd be fighting for monthly direct payments to individuals, a free and universally available vaccine, rent, mortgage and student loan forgiveness; a full-blooded bill that actually answers the cries of families like mine that are struggling to survive in Trump's America."

Republicans Still Stalling On Pandemic Relief For Working Families

Yesterday, the U.S. reached a new, hideous-- but soon to be forgotten-- threshold in the pandemic: 6.5 million cases. There will have been a quarter million deaths-- most preventable-- before election day. The economy-- the real one, not the Wall Street one-- is a shambles. The Trump Regime response? A government shutdown in 3 weeks because they can't agree on a pandemic relief bill? Mnuchin and Pelosi say it won't happen but McConnell sure seems like he's on the way to making sure it does. He can't even get enough support in his own caucus to pass an austerity-oriented bill and refuses to allow a vote of the bill the House passed in May (since it would likely pass the Senate). The senators are back from their vacations but there's no apparent movement. "Republicans," wrote John Bresnahan, "are eager to raise the pressure on Democrats, but their latest gambit may fall short," as McConnell as his cronies scrambled to round up votes for a narrow economic stimulus package they introduced yesterday and hope to put on the floor this week so as to hammer Democrats for opposing and being unwilling to compromise. McConnell's $500 billion proposal includes $300-per-week federal unemployment payments on top of regular state benefits, another round of funding to aid small and medium-sized businesses, liability protections for businesses, schools and charities, and $105 billion for education. Meanwhile, the Democrats have been negotiating with themselves to bring the House bill down from $3.4 trillion to $2 trillion, making their own bargaining position weaker, as usual.

In fact, Bresnahan reported that Senate Republicans are privately playing up reports that Blue Dogs, New Dems and other conservatives from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party in the House "are pressing Pelosi to compromise on a relief package. They're circulating quotes from a dozen Democrats in swing House races calling for additional economic help for financially strapped Americans."

The Heroes Act passed May 15 with just one Republican vote but with 13 anti-working class worthless fake Democrats crossing the aisle to vote with the GOP. The congressional class enemies in Congress as "Dems" who voted no are constant shit-eaters Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA), Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC), Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS), Abby Finkenauer (closet Blue Dog-IA), Jared Golden (Blue Dog-ME), Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK), Conor Lamb (closet Blue Dog-PA), Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA), Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT), Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR), Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA), Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM) and Susan Wild (New Dem-PA).

"The White House and Senate Republicans have made clear that they still do not comprehend the scale of this disaster or the urgent needs of our communities and the American people," Pelosi said in a statement on Friday. "House Democrats have come to the negotiating table willing to compromise, and we will continue reaching out until we achieve a fair agreement that meets the needs of all Americans."

Senate Democrats from Schumer on down have slammed McConnell for sitting out talks on the coronavirus relief package. While the Kentucky Republican said the key is for the White House and Democratic leaders to reach a deal first, he's also faced a challenge in balancing the competing factions within his own conference.

A large bloc of Senate Republicans, concerned about the tidal wave of deficit spending this year, believes the U.S. economy will recover without additional government aid. McConnell, however, also has a number of vulnerable GOP senators up for reelection in less than two months, and they've been pressing him for action.

Senate Democrats are largely counting on the endangered GOP incumbents to help push the Republican leadership toward an agreement.

"It's still so hard for me to imagine Mitch McConnell packing up the Senate for the election home stretch having not even tried to negotiate in good faith," said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). "I've stubbornly stuck to this idea that Republican senators at the very least will be driven to get something done by their fear of backlash from voters."

After McConnell's bill started floating around, Pelosi remarked that "Republicans appear dead-set on another bill which doesn't come close to addressing the problems and is headed nowhere. If anyone doubts McConnell’s true intent is anything but political, just look at the bill. This proposal is laden with poison pills Republicans know Democrats would never support."

Bloomberg News reported that "The stumbling block is aid to state and local governments," something the Democrats insist on and the GOP is dead set against. The Trumpists characterize the aid as a reward for poorly run, mainly Democratic states. Pelosi in Tuesday’s interview that the GOP has "excuses," not real reasons for opposing the effort. She suggested that restrictions could be placed to meet any objections. San Francisco progressive state Senate candidate Jackie Fielder, told me that "the pandemic has proven what we knew all along: wealth doesn't trickle from the top down, it flows-- or is extracted-- from the bottom up. When working people lost their incomes due to COVID, our economy ground to a halt. When billionaires concentrated greater wealth than ever and major corporations like Amazon saw record growth, everyday people didn't feel the boost. Our elected officials have balanced budgets on the backs of workers rather than demanding that the richest individuals and companies pay their fair share. I'm running for State Senate to change that. We need to learn the painful lessons taught by this pandemic and resist the temptation to return to the status quo. That's why I've committed to taxing millionaires, billionaires, and the biggest corporations in order to fund comprehensive social services and ensure fair wages and protections for workers."

McConnell tried and failed for weeks to get most of the Senate’s 53 Republicans on board with the broader $1 trillion plan in the face of opposition from deficit hawks concerned about adding to this year’s $3.3 trillion budget deficit. He’s previously said that as many 20 Senate Republicans were against any additional spending.

...The looming election will create pressure points for Trump as well as for incumbents in the House and Senate. The White House is pushing for stimulus payments for individuals to go out before the Nov. 3 election.

“Nobody wants to give direct payments to American families more than President Donald Trump,” Vice President Mike Pence said on CNBC Friday.

Immediately before their August break, two Senate Republicans trailing their Democratic challengers in polls-- Susan Collins of Maine and Martha McSally of Arizona-- helped introduce a bill that has a higher unemployment benefit enhancement than the one in the scaled-down proposal.

In the House, Democrats from swing districts are poised to increase pressure on Pelosi to get a deal. The [far right, anti-working class] Blue Dog Coalition sent Pelosi a letter on Aug. 21 urging compromise, and vulnerable first-term Iowa [ultra-conservative, anti-worker New Dem] Cindy Axne followed up last week with a letter demanding action on a smaller package.

...Connecticut Democratic Representative Jim Himes said he thinks Trump ultimately will push to get a deal done later in the month if he’s still trailing Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in polls.

“The president of the United States understands one thing and perhaps one thing only, and that is what is good for him personally,” he said. “And it is good for him personally to get some kind of a deal done.”

Mondaire Jones is the progressive Democrat running for an open upstate New York seat in a swingy suburban district that includes chunks of Westchester and Rockland counties. This morning, he was blunt and went right to the point about GOP obstructionism: "To date, Republicans in Congress have only provided Americans with a meager $1,200, even as this pandemic stretches into its seventh month. They are inexplicably refusing to fund our state and local governments, forcing cuts to crucial services like public education and Medicaid. The Republican Party has the power to avert mass suffering, and it is simply choosing not to. It is unfit to govern."

Trump Is Blocking A Pandemic Relief Package To Prevent Congress From Keeping The Post Office Alive

On Wednesday, Trump, lying, tried stampeding Congress and bending it to his will by declaring there won't be a pandemic relief package. The Washington Post reported that " A new attempt to restart economic relief negotiations between the White House and Democrats ended just minutes after it began on Wednesday, with President Trump appearing to cast doubt on the whole process by announcing a deal is "not going to happen." The sociopath in the White House said "The bill’s not going to happen because they don’t even want to talk about it, because we can’t give them the kind of ridiculous things that they want that have nothing to do with the China virus."

The Reuters story made it clear what he's up to: trying to wreck the U.S. Post office in the hope of being more easily able to steal the election in November. Patricia Zengerle and David Morgan reported that on Thursday he said "his team was rejecting Democrats’ bid to include funds for the U.S. Postal Service and to shore up election infrastructure in a new coronavirus relief bill, as he vowed to block money to facilitate mail-in voting. Señor Trumpanzee: "The items are the post office and the $3.5 billion for mail-in voting. If we don’t make the deal, that means they can’t have the money, that means they can’t have universal mail-in voting. It just can’t happen." Zengerle and Morgan reminded their readers that "Roughly one in four U.S. voters cast their ballots by mail in 2016, and Trump himself has voted by mail. But Trump and his fellow Republicans have criticized state efforts to make voting by mail more widely available, saying without evidence it could lead to widespread fraud. Election exerts say mail voting is as secure as any other method."

Pelosi said any coronavirus relief bill should include billions of dollars to protect not just Americans’ right to vote but also essential services, like mailing prescription medicines, during the pandemic.

“You would think they’d have a little sensitivity, but so obsessed are they to undermine absentee voting that this is their connection there,” Pelosi told reporters. “So the president says he’s not putting up any money for absentee voting and he’s not putting up any money for the Postal Service, undermining the health of our democracy.”

...New Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who has donated $2.7 million to Trump and his fellow Republicans since 2017, has ordered operational changes and a clampdown on overtime in a bid to fix the financially troubled Postal Service, which reported a net loss of $2.2 billion in the last quarter.

Cost-cutting measures put in place by DeJoy have led to mail delays across the country, raising concerns that they could complicate mail-based voting. State election officials have scrambled to expand mail-voting capacity as experts say the pandemic could prompt up to half of all U.S. voters to cast their ballots by mail.

The Postal Service in recent months has encouraged election officials to send their ballots using regular first-class mail, rather than the cheaper and slower bulk mail rate that many states use, to ensure ballots are delivered in a timely manner.

In the past, the Postal Service has generally treated all election and political mail as if it were first-class, the service’s internal watchdog said in a 2019 report. That has caused some Democrats to accuse DeJoy of trying to undermine mail-in voting.

GOP sleaze-bags Steven Mnuchin and Mark Meadows are leading the charge for Trump. Lisa Mascaro reported for AP that "With talks stalemated, Trump has resorted to bypassing Congress, issuing the executive actions that Meadows warned would come if the White House failed to reach a deal. The president’s orders for jobless aid and other actions are only expected provide modest relief to some 20 million Americans at risk of eviction and even more who are out of work, halving unemployment assistance to $300 a week. On a conference call with Republican senators, Meadows and Mnuchin left the impression there are no new talks scheduled with Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi."

CNN went right to the point: Trump "opposes much-needed funding for the United States Postal Service because he doesn't want to see it used for mail-in voting this November. By directly linking USPS funding to mail-in voting, Trump is fueling allegations that he is trying to manipulate the postal system for political gain. The pandemic has led to record-shattering levels of voting-by-mail, but Trump has tried to restrict the voting method because he says it will hurt his re-election and Republicans across the board."

Biden's campaign manager, Andrew Bates: "The President of the United States is sabotaging a basic service that hundreds of millions of people rely upon, cutting a critical lifeline for rural economies and for delivery of medicines, because he wants to deprive Americans of their fundamental right to vote safely during the most catastrophic public health crisis in over 100 years."

This is a highly unpopular stance by Trump and Democratic congressional candidates are increasingly using it to beat up on the Trump enablers they're running against. Few members have been more slavishly devoted to Trump than Omaha's Donald Bacon and progressive Democrat Kara Eastman took him to task yesterday for his refusal to denounce Trump's efforts at sabotaging the post office (and the election). She noted that The US Postal Service employs over 600,000 Americans, including almost 100,000 veterans and that people of color comprise 40% of the USPS workforce. "Congressman Bacon, this continued attack on the Postal Service is undermining workers and serving to promote voter suppression," Eastman said. "The US Postal Service is an American institution, protected by the Constitution. Donald Trump and Republican politicians like Don Bacon have been trying to undermine it for years and are now sabotaging it to rig the election. This attack on the USPS is an attack on American service and values. It’s time for Bacon to stand up to his party and stop these attacks on one of our most basic and fundamental institutions."

"We cannot allow this administration to sabotage the Post Office so they can cheat the election. Folks across the nine counties of the Texas 10th district need the Post Office to safely vote by mail, get prescription medications delivered, or run their small business," said Mike Siegel, a public school teacher turned civil rights attorney running in the gerrymandered central Texas district to unseat Republican corporate crony Michael McCaul, an unabashed Trumpist. "My opponent has taken over $50,000 from corporate PACs with a direct interest in gutting the post office. I am not taking a dime of corporate PAC money."


Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) sits on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, where he serves as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and is on 2 other subcommittees-- the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus and the Subcommittee on Government Operations, which is where all the action is on the Republican Party play to destroy the post office. "The GOP attack on the Post Office," he told me today, "is definitely a sinister attack on the 2020 Election itself and we must do everything we can to stop it. But it’s also more broadly an effort to kill American democracy. The Post Office has been a central crossroads and symbol of American communications, culture, and political community from the beginning of the Republic. In the name of our first postmaster Benjamin Franklin and all the other great Americans who worked for the Post Office, including Abraham Lincoln and Harry Truman, we must take down the campaign to destroy the Post Office. This is the struggle of our lifetime."

Southern California congressman and realist Ted Lieu wasn't sugar-coating the dire nature of this disaster. He told me today that "This election is too important for me to promise things to make you feel better but won’t actually happen. The stark truth is the House cannot adequately fund the Post Office without the consent of Trump. The only option is a veto override with the Republican controlled Senate. That is not going to happen. That means our only solution is to empower the voters. We need you to spread the word that if people are going to vote by mail, they need to mail their ballot at least 10 mailing days out from Nov 3, which would be Oct 22. That’s how we win."

Adam Christensen is the progressive Democrat trying to flip Ted Yoho's north-central Florida district blue. Much of that district is rural and dependent on the post office. "This attack on one of governments best run and organized agencies," he told me, "is an attack on rural America. It is an attack on small business owners and those that rely on USPS everyday for shipping. It is an attack on our towns and our neighbors who are tired of paying outrageous fees for basic services. Attempting to destroy good paying jobs in our community and replace them with corporate monopolies is what has killed our town centers for the last 30 years. The Republican party is dying but it appears that they want to finalize the destruction of the middle class on their way out."

The Behavior Of The Airlines Makes The Case For Letting Them Go Bankrupt And Forcing Them To Reorganize Under New, Less Predatory Management

There was some sympathy in Congress to let the airlines go bankrupt, but that never got off the ground. Last April the Washington Post noted that the airlines had received more than $12 billion in taxpayer funds as part of the $25 billion they were granted in the first pandemic relief package. Republicans-- including Susan Collins (ME), Steve Daines (MT), Cory Gardner (CO) and Martha McSally (AZ)-- are demanding we give them another $25 billion in the next package.

Pelosi and Schumer are perfectly happy to go along with this and there's probably nothing to stop it. Let's hope they at least use their acquiescence as a bargaining chip to get something working families actually need. As NY-27 congressional candidate Nate McMurray told me today, "We need Republican lawmakers to realize that the people that make our economy move aren't executives or corporate lobbies. Everyday people do and that's who we need to provide relief to. I've advocated for UBI. This is a conscious-shifting moment where the $600 pandemic unemployment gave people a taste of not only how UBI could work, but also that it's possible. People have been able to care for their families, do mutual aid and community work, be creative, and not feel the pressures of productivity that constantly harps on working people. We need to take this moment and fight for the supports we're owed. We need to stand strong against Republicans who would like to see us all in precarious positions." Chris Jacobs, his own opponent, a right-wing dog born into a family of billionaires, is one of those Republicans who has no problem seeing the rest of us falling into precarious positions. It helps drive down labor costs.

Airline have been, generally, terrible corporate citizens. Basically they don't care if their passengers (and employees) all die-- as long as they don't die on the planes. It's all about the stock price for the vultures who manage these companies. They're reducing flights and cramming people into planes again and many of them are being very lax about masks. Yesterday, Wall Street Journal reporter Scott McCartney wrote how that the Airlines Are Withholding Billions in Refunds-- That's Billions With a B. "Refunds delayed and denied," he began. "Vouchers worth thousands of dollars that have already expired, or are so rule-bound they’re useless. Interminable telephone holds, unanswered emails and complaints ignored. Consumers continue to battle airlines over canceled tickets. At stake are literally billions of dollars-- and likely lasting animosity toward airlines over punitive policies." Yeah, there is definitely a lot of that going around.

The U.S. Transportation Department warned that any airline operating in the U.S., foreign or domestic, had to refund tickets for flights the airline canceled and couldn’t offer an alternative without a “substantial” schedule change. But many international carriers have offered only vouchers. Some forced consumers into accepting vouchers before the airline officially removed flights from its schedule. Some have delayed paying refunds while waiting for government bailouts or new investment.

Worse, some have tried duplicitous methods to pocket expensive tickets, offering nothing in return. Italian carrier Alitalia, for example, told Ellen Schiller that her family of five were considered no-shows for a March 8 Boston-to-Rome flight and therefore ineligible for both refund and voucher. They spent more than $3,000 on the tickets.

Ms. Schiller says she called Alitalia twice before the departure to cancel the trip, but the airline suggested not canceling in hopes the flight would be canceled-- the only way they’d be eligible for a refund. She says she made it clear they were canceling because it was obvious Italy was closing down. The March 8 flight took off. On March 9 Italy imposed a national quarantine.

The Schillers appealed to their credit card company for a refund to no avail. They appealed to Alitalia, but a customer-service representative suggested they should have rebooked to a random date in late March hoping that flight would get canceled and they could get a refund.

“The runaround we got was insane,” Mrs. Schiller says. Alitalia was “intentionally evasive, difficult, and clearly trying to avoid providing a refund or a credit. I believe they were counting on my giving up hope.”

An Alitalia spokeswoman confirmed two late February calls from the Schillers but said they didn’t officially cancel. Still, the airline said even though it had previously declined to issue vouchers, it would now do so thanks to an “updated” policy.

The Alitalia example shows how airlines have essentially been making up their own rules to hold on to customer cash. Some carriers, including Colombia’s Avianca, Chile’s Latam and the United Kingdom’s Virgin Atlantic, have filed for bankruptcy reorganization in the U.S. Some, like Israel’s El Al, have suspended all operations and are looking for a rescue plan. El Al’s website states: “All flight tickets for canceled flights are currently frozen, and you will be able to use them in the future.”

The DOT has been in direct communication “with the largest U.S. and foreign airlines, and other airlines that received a large number of refund complaints, to ensure compliance with the law,” a spokeswoman says. The pressure has resulted in passengers receiving refunds after first being denied them.

DOT is “first providing airlines an opportunity to come into compliance and issue refunds. However, the department will take enforcement action against noncompliant airlines if necessary,” the spokeswoman says.

The feds did pressure United into rolling back its policy that denied refunds to likely millions of customers. Before the pandemic, United’s policy was to offer the option of a refund for canceled flights if the airline couldn’t offer alternative flights within two hours. It changed that to six hours. DOT has long held that airlines couldn’t change the terms on tickets after they sold them.

In June, United changed its policy back to two hours and said customers forced to take vouchers instead of refunds for flights the airline canceled could now get a refund. But they’d have to call—the airline wouldn’t reach out to them.

That was welcome news to Gerald Brown of Pebble Beach, California, who wanted a refund on two business-class tickets between San Francisco and London that cost him $5,354. But United denied his refund request.

On Saturday, a day after receiving questions about Mr. Brown’s case, United said it was issuing him a refund. His appeal in July had been denied “because it was interpreted as a voluntary change,” a spokesman says. “Our mistake.”

Says Mr. Brown: “Cows do fly.”

Another frustration for consumers: The terms airlines have imposed on vouchers. Though many airlines have given customers a year or more to use vouchers, it still can be tough to redeem them.

Stuart Krawll of St. Louis spent more than $10,000 on American Airlines tickets for a family trip to St. Thomas for 14 people. He paid for all the tickets. Any refund would go back to his credit card. But with vouchers, each passenger gets the credit, regardless of who paid. Only the ticketed passenger can fly on that voucher.

Mr. Krawll’s seven grandchildren-- the youngest between 3 and 7-- each have a voucher. The family trip likely won’t be rescheduled anytime soon because of the complexity of getting schedules lined up. Instead, Mr. Krawll and his wife have several overseas trips planned for 2021 and 2022 for which they’d like to use the vouchers.

“Airlines should let the voucher credits flow back to whoever paid for the tickets,” Mr. Krawll says. Flexibility in this case, he notes, “costs them nothing.”

American says it will make an exception for Mr. Krawll and give him one credit to use. American is making exceptions to its policy, trying to take care of customers in the pandemic, but stressed this was a one-time exception for Mr. Krawll because so much was tied up in tickets for minors.

Frontier has a 90-day expiration on its vouchers-- a significant gotcha, since so many are uncertain when they will start traveling again.

Cynthia Blouch learned just how costly that could be in July when she went to redeem her $4,593 Frontier credit left over from a canceled spring break family trip for five from Cleveland to Cancún. Frontier’s website said, “the credit you are trying to use has no value.”

Ms. Blouch had spent several weeks unsuccessfully trying to reach a customer service representative to book new flights before the expiration. Calls went unanswered or were disconnected. She couldn’t find an email address for Frontier customer service. “It has been very frustrating,” she says.

Frontier spokesman Zach Kramer says the airline decided to reinstate Ms. Blouch’s credit for 48 hours so she could rebook for a later date, which she did right away for next April.

Mr. Kramer noted that the airline’s schedule is open for booking through September 2021. Frontier is working with customers “to accommodate their travel wishes, within our policies,” he says.

Looks like the only way to get your money back from these crooks is to get a Wall Street Journal reporter to put your story in an article. The airlines hate bad p.r.-- especially in any way it could tank their stocks, many of which are owned by the senators who are trying to bail them out with our money.

Desperate House Republicans Are Spending Millions To Defend Vulnerable Incumbents, Money They Planned To Use To Attack Democrats

This is a Republican ad-- but who will it help and who will it harm?

The Kevin McCarthy-controlled Congressional Leadership Fund went into the 2020 cycle with some kind of delusion that they would be able to go on the offensive and win back the seats they lost in 2018 and thereby the House majority. At some point they appear to have stopped drinking the ayahuasca that Bolsonaro gave them and realized they need some paddles to get back down shit's creek before it's too late. They're not winning back any of those seats until 2024. Now there's still a massive anti-red wave and McCarthy has ordered them to start playing defense.

Politico's Ally Mutnick reported Monday morning that the PAC just dumped another $45 million into TV and digital ads in 40 districts, doubling their investment in the cycle so far-- but much of it to defend hysterical House Republicans who see their careers slipping away.

Ironically-- but not surprisingly-- virtually all of their incumbent Democratic targets are from the Republican-wing of the House Democrats, the ones who vote most frequently with the GOP on crucial votes, which makes them vulnerable to attack. Every one of their targets has an "F" score from ProgressivePunch (except Debbie Mucarsel-Powell who has a "D" instead of an "F"):

• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK-- $3.6 million) R+10
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT-- 3.1 million) R+13
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY-- $4.9 million) R+6
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM-- $4 million) R+6
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC-- $3.1 million) R+10
• Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA-- $2.8 million) R+3
• Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (New Dem-FL-- $2.7 million) D+6
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV-- $1.9 million) R+2
• Harley Rouda (New Dem-CA-- $600,000) R+4
• Jared Golden (Blue Dog-ME-- $250,000) D+2

They are also spending against New Dems Lizzie Fletcher in Houston, Colin Allred in Dallas, Abby Spanberger in Virginia and Abby Finkenauer and Cindy Axne in Iowa.

But McCarthy's SuperPAC is also spending to protect some Republican districts once thought to be safe, like Montana’s at-large district and an open GOP-held seat on Long Island.

...[M]ost of the new markets added in the second wave of reservations cover defensive targets. CLF plans to book $3.2 million in Dallas and $500,000 in deep-red Montana, where Democrats are targeting two open GOP-held seats; and $775,000 in Cincinnati where Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) faces another stiff reelection challenge after turning aside a well-funded opponent last cycle.

The group has also set aside $1.9 million to defend retiring Rep. Pete King’s (R-NY) seat on Long Island-- where the Democratic candidate has a huge cash advantage and polling shows a tightening race.

The new round of TV ad spending comes amid increasing concern among some Republicans that President Donald Trump’s sinking suburban numbers could send them deeper into the House minority. There is a contingent in the party who have urged GOP outside groups to prioritize incumbents and open seats.

...Democrats will be able to go to toe-to-toe with that kind of spending. The incumbents in those seats have massive cash-on-hand advantages over their challengers, and they will also receive help from Democratic groups. House Majority PAC, congressional Democrats’ flagship outside group, is also flush with cash and has reserved $75 million so far.

And the buys do set CLF in a position to play defense in as many as 13 seats, including those held by Chabot and Reps. Jim Hagedorn (R-MN), Mike Garcia (D-CA), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa), Rodney Davis (R-IL), Don Bacon (R-NE) and Scott Perry (R-PA), as well as five open seats in Texas, New York, Georgia and Montana.

Texas is set to host a slew of competitive House races this cycle, but CLF notably has not booked in the San Antonio market, which covers the open West Texas swing seat held by retiring GOP Rep. Will Hurd, and the central Texas seat held by Rep. Chip Roy.

The National Republican Congressional Committee has also declined to reserve air time there, and the lack of interest may suggest national Republicans are unsure of whether or not they will defend Hurd’s seat. Democrat Gina Ortiz Jones is running again after coming within 1,000 votes of ousting Hurt in 2018 and has more than $3 million banked. Meanwhile, the GOP nominee is unclear. The July primary runoff is still too close to call after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) made a last-minute foray into the race to block a win by the preferred candidate of House Republican leaders.

There is a growing consensus that Roy, who faces a well-funded challenge from Texas’s former Democratic gubernatorial nominee Wendy Davis, will need help in his reelection. But the conservative Club for Growth has signaled that it will back Roy, lessening the burden on CLF and the NRCC.

The Club is also likely to spend big for Matt Rosendale, the GOP nominee in Montana’s open seat, and for state Del. Nick Freitas, who is challenging Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA). CLF has already booked over $1.5 million in the Richmond, Va., market for Spanberger's seat.

And $6 million of CLF’s $45 million investment will go toward a GOTV program aimed at juicing up turnout as states increasingly plan to vote-by-mail. This new initiative will focus on reaching potential ticket-splitters in states that will be highly contested at the presidential level as well as low-propensity voters in states not hosting competitive presidential or Senate races.

And, as long as we're on the subject of the 2020 congressional races, I'd be remiss not to mention that Blue America has vetted and endorsed a strong slate of progressive challengers running for the U.S. House. If you click on the Act Blue thermometer on the right, you're not going to find any of the Blue Dogs or New Dems from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- just strong, verifiable progressives running on solid platforms. So... if you can, please consider contributing what you can to any-- or all-- of them. "On November 3rd, remember-- it's America or Trump."

Perhaps House Republicans and their SuperPacs and strategists should try getting down to the nitty gritty of what today's new Morning Consult poll showed in terms of who the voters trust to handle their most pressing issues (above). Asked to rate congressional Republicans on their handling of the pandemic, just 29% of voters rated them excellent or good. Congressional Dems were rated excellent or good by 38% of voters; Señor Trumpanzee by 35% of voters (the same as Pence). 61% of voters gave Fauci a good or excellent grade.

No One Can Force A Presidential Candidate-- Let Alone A President-- To Read (Or Understand) The U.S. Constitution... Trump's Executive Orders

The big news Sunday was Trump's executive orders after he sabotaged the negotiations with Congress for a pandemic relief bill. No doubt, his zombie followers will eat it up. No one else will. Jim Tankersley did an analysis for NY Times readers-- Trump’s Go-It-Alone Stimulus Won’t Do Much to Lift the Recovery. He wrote that Señor Trumpanzee's executive actions "were pitched as a unilateral jolt for an ailing economy. But there is only one group of workers that seems guaranteed to benefit from them, at least right away: lawyers." The orders include an eviction moratorium, a new benefit to supplement unemployment assistance for workers and a temporary delay in payroll taxes-- although if re-elected he's planning to make it permanent, a way to fulfill nearly 9 decades of GOP dreams to end Social Security. "They could," wrote Tankersley, "give renters a break and ease payments for some student loan borrowers. But they are likely to do little to deliver cash any time soon to Americans hit hard by the recession. Even conservative groups have warned that suspending payroll tax collections is unlikely to translate into more money for workers. An executive action seeking to essentially create a new unemployment benefit out of thin air will almost certainly be challenged in court. And as Mr. Trump’s own aides concede, the orders will not provide any aid to small businesses, state and local governments or low- and middle-income workers. If the actions signal the death of a congressional deal to provide that aid, economists warn, the economy will limp toward November without the fiscal support that hastened its recovery after its quick dive into a pandemic-induced recession."

The federal government’s aid to small businesses through the Payroll Protection Program was set to expire on Saturday. Executives, trade groups and business lobbyists had pushed hard for a second round of lending-- along with new programs to get money to the businesses and industries hit hardest in the crisis-- to be included in any congressional stimulus deal. Mr. Trump’s actions do nothing to help those companies.

Low- and middle-income families’ spending power was bolstered in the spring by direct payments of $1,200 per adult that were included in a relief bill Mr. Trump signed into law in March. Lawmakers were pushing for a second round of those checks in a legislative deal. Mr. Trump’s measures will not provide them.

The orders will not provide aid to states and local governments, whose tax revenues have plunged as a direct result of the contraction in economic activity brought on by the virus. Without more money from the federal government, states and local governments will almost certainly have to cut their budgets and lay off workers, increasing the ranks of the unemployed.

Supplemental unemployment benefits of $600 per week, which expired at the end of July, had been supporting consumer spending at a time when about 30 million Americans are unemployed. Mr. Trump’s memo seeking to repurpose other money, including federal disaster aid, to essentially create a $400-a-week bonus payment is likely to be challenged in court and is unlikely to deliver additional cash to laid-off workers any time soon. It, too, raises questions even if it is deemed legal-- for instance, whether states that are already struggling with their budgets will be able to afford the 25 percent contribution that Mr. Trump’s memo says they will need to make toward the new benefit.

...But if negotiations falter now and aid remains scarce for people and businesses, Mr. Trump will be making a political bet: that it is better to tell voters he tried to help the economy than to have actually helped it. Mr. Trump is the president, and he has happily claimed credit for the economy’s performance.

If job growth slows further, and millions of unemployed Americans struggle to make ends meet, he will need to make the case for why the symbolism of acting alone won out over the farther-reaching effects of cutting a deal.

On State of the Union yesterday, Pelosi told Dana Bash that "whether they're legal or not takes time to figure out. I associate my remarks with what the Senator Sasse who says, they're 'unconstitutional slop.' Right now we want to address the needs of the American people. As my constitutional advisers tell me, they're absurdly unconstitutional." In case anyone doesn't understand what Pelosi was saying there, Alan Grayson, a bona fide genius, explained that "The Trump executive orders are not only illegal, but they’re unconstitutional. Anyone who tries to implement them will be facing criminal charges under the Antideficiency Act, 31 USC 1341. And, obviously, this is an impeachable offense, a “high crime” that abuses the power of the office. Trump is a Constitutional pyromaniac. As to the policies in the executive orders, the emperor has no clothes, so he’s trying to steal the Democrats’ clothes. It’s pathetic to watch the orangutan scratch his belly, screetch, and pretend that he gives a damn about anyone else."

Tom Suozzi (D-NY) represents the North Shore of Long Island, from the border of AOC's district in Queens (Whitestone and Beechhurst) straight thru Nassau and into Suffolk as far as Kings Park and the Nissequogue River. The former Nassau County Executive, Suozzi is now a member of the House Ways and Means Committee. Understanding how tax dollars are raised and spent is his field of expertise. And this morning, discussing Trump's clownish executive orders, he told us that "It’s not about the merits of $400 unemployment (of which $100 is paid by the states), or a payroll tax cut (which will decimate Social Security) or any of his executive orders. It is about the fact that it’s ILLEGAL. It is why we have a Congress. The President can’t, other than in limited instances, just do what he wants, especially when it comes to spending money. It’s just more in a long list of gimmicks by a failing president trying to hold on to power."

The Washington Post assigned a team to work on figuring it out-- Jeff Stein, Erica Werner and Renae Merle. They saw it-- as did much of Congress-- through the parameters of Trump's challenge to the constitutional order. "The measures," they wrote, "would attempt to wrest away some of Congress’s most fundamental, constitutionally mandated powers-- tax and spending policy. Trump acknowledged that some of the actions could be challenged in court but indicated he would persevere. Trump bemoaned how Democrats had refused to accept his demands during the recent negotiations but attempted to brush it aside, saying four measures he signed Saturday 'will take care of pretty much this entire situation.' But there were instant questions about whether Trump’s actions were as ironclad as he made them out to be. A leading national expert on unemployment benefits said one of the actions would not increase federal unemployment benefits at all. Instead, the expert said it would instead create a new program that could take “months” to set up. And Trump’s directive to halt evictions primarily calls for federal agencies to 'consider' if they should be stopped. Trump also mischaracterized the legal stature of the measures, referring to them as 'bills.' Congress writes and votes on bills, not the White House. The documents Trump signed on Saturday were a combination of memorandums and an executive order."

McConnell cheered him on, although he didn't explain why Trump's executive actions didn't include a second $1,200/person stimulus check that Congress had already agreed to. As Forbes reported, Trump targeted a payroll tax, reduced unemployment benefits, a bogus eviction moratorium study that won't keep a single family from being evicted and some student loan relief that will do little to help anyone "as his four areas of focus for an executive order. He never mentioned including stimulus checks as part of his executive order plan."

Jack Balkin summed up the unemployment aide program part of Trump's made-for-TV ploy on his must-read blog as Inadequate, Unworkable, and Unlawful. He wrote that Trumpanzee's "effort to relieve the pressure he and Senate Republicans have been feeling over the expiration of enhanced unemployment benefits is a failure on every level. It provides too little in aid. It will miss many families in need. It will expire very soon. It likely cannot be implemented in some states. And it is transparently unlawful."





How many lies can you count? As Alan Grayson put it the day after Trump's nationally televised half hour of gaslighting, "I would advise anyone who is still under the illusion that Trump is fit for office to listen to his speech yesterday. He is a babbling fool and a Constitutional pyromaniac, with a human applause track wired in the room to feed his infinite, insatiable ego."

Jim Himes (D-CT), like every congressional Democrat I've spoken to, is not satisfied with how the GOP is handling this, not even a little. "The so-called executive orders are way too little, way too late," he told me. "Americans are suffering badly and the Republican response has been to 'hit pause,' then to ask for F-35s and full expensing of business lunches, and now to offer weak presidential action. It is time for my Republican colleagues to summon even a fraction of the passion and enthusiasm with which they cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% to actually help the American people in a historic crisis."

Republicans Still Holding Up Pandemic Relief-- Hoping To Make Political Points

Trump has a stronger hand than the Democrats do in the negotiations over the pandemic relief package. That's because he doesn't care about the impact on the American people and even the most conservative and corporatist Democrats do care-- or, at the very least, have to appear to. Trump couldn't care less if millions of people starve or are evicted-- especially if he can blame it on his political opponents.

Yesterday, The Hill reported that Pelosi and Schumer offered a split the difference deal-- the Democrats $3.4 trillion package that passed in May would meet the GOP $1 trillion plan that McConnell proposed in the middle to something between $2 billion and $2.4 billion. Trump refused. At a press conference, Pelosi said "'We'll take down a trillion, if you add a trillion in.' They said absolutely not... I will once again make the offer: We'll come down a trillion, you go up a trillion, and then we'll be within range of each other. But again, this a very different set of values across the table."

Mnuchin confirmed that by calling Pelosi's offer a "non-starter." Trump appears to want to get into a fight with the Democrats by claiming he can fix everything by executive order. He can't. He never quite understood that Congress authorizes spending not presidents or even would-be dictators.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), a senior member of both the Financial Services Committee and the Intelligence Committee has a good overview of this kind of negotiation. "Maybe you can accuse Democrats of being overcomprehensive in our initial offer," he told me yesterday, "but when people are suffering that’s no sin. What is ludicrous is the Republican idea of deductions for fancy business lunches and more fighter planes. And of course, they can’t even pass that awful idea in the Senate."

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) was as brutal in what he had to say about this ugly hostage situation as McConnell and the congressional Republicans deserve: "When Mitch McConnell called himself the Grim Reaper, like most people I assumed he was talking about killing legislation. Sadly it looks like he is taking the self-proclaimed position a bit more literally these days. With more than 1,000 Americans dying every day from COVID-19 and millions out of work, the Republican Senate’s refusal to act on an additional relief package is as heartless as it is stupid. Let’s review the facts: House Democrats passed a bill in May extending unemployment insurance, preventing evictions, funding local government etc. We asked Republicans to work with us and negotiate a compromise. They refused (the Senate Majority Leader even implied states should just go bankrupt). Then they recessed the Senate for half of July wasting more time as relief was set to expire. And now Leader McConnell is negotiating in bad faith and trying to gaslight the American people. Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, don’t be stupid, wear a mask in public!"

Hopefully California Democrat, historian Liam O'Mara will be joining Himes in Congress next year. "There are, indeed," he said, "very different values at play in discussion of pandemic relief. Ken Calvert is whining about the presence of support for cannabis banking protections in the House bill. Excuse me, Congressman?? You have farmers harassed left and right in Riverside County because federal policy is out of touch with both medical needs and reality itself. And helping to protect small farmers and provide relief to patients is a sticking point, while billions is pork to defence contractors is not?? The GOP isn't interested in helping the American people. They are interested in funnelling ever more money into the hands of their corporate overlords, and offer the most minimal relief to ordinary people only when forced. As it stands, the now-expired small business lending system we created for this emergency was extensively raided by profitable corporations, and Calvert voted against oversight for that spending. He wants welfare for the rich, and to hell with stores, restaurants, barbers, and the rest. Ken Calvert will never fight for you-- he will continue to raise your taxes, steal your wealth, and laugh all the way to the bank. It's time we stood up and said no."

Another top Democratic challenger, Mike Siegel, who is running against Trump crony Michael McCaul in central Texas, noted that "Creating a mountain of public money out of thin air to backstop Wall Street and donor interests, while refusing to do the same for working people is sadly par for the course with this corrupt administration. We need new leadership that fully funds solutions that fit the actual scale of the problems we face with the coronavirus and with our crumbling economy."

Kara Eastman, one of the 5 mostly likely Democrats to flip a red district blue, told us that "One of Trump's chief enablers in Congress, Don Bacon, seems to be in line with the Administration's approach. He voted 'no' on the HEROES Act and he's made public statements that show he cares very little about the people in Nebraska who are facing evictions and a loss of unemployment benefits. It's no surprise from a representative who has voted 95% with Trump but it's the opposite of what we need here in Nebraska's Second. If I had been in Congress I would have voted 'yes' for the HEROES Act and I would have strongly pushed for aid for more cities when the CARES act first passed, too. Bacon failed to do so and now Omaha is facing a massive budget shortfall."

State Rep. Jon Hoadley just won her primary in Michigan's 6th congressional district on Tuesday. This morning he told me that his opponent, serial Trump-enabler Fred Upton "stood with Trump against much needed funding for working people, first responders, teachers, and health care workers. Right when Southwest Michigan needs a leader to work on these issues, Upton isn't putting his 33 years in Congress to any use for us. Time for change."

 




Bernie has introduced the Make Billionaires Pay Act which is a one-top 60% tax on billionaires' profits from the pandemic to pay for Americans healthcare costs. Bernie: "The legislation I am introducing today will tax the obscene wealth gains billionaires have made during this extraordinary crisis to guarantee healthcare as a right to all for an entire year. At a time of enormous economic pain and suffering, we have a fundamental choice to make. We can continue to allow the very rich to get much richer while everyone else gets poorer and poorer. Or we can tax the winnings a handful of billionaires made during the pandemic to improve the health and well-being of tens of millions of Americans... In my view, it is time for the Senate to act on behalf of the working class who are hurting like they have never hurt before, not the billionaire class who are doing phenomenally well and have never had it so good... Instead of more tax breaks for the rich while more Americans die because they cannot afford to go to a doctor, let us expand Medicare and save lives by demanding that billionaires pay their fair share of taxes."

Sanders' legislation would cover all medical bills, including prescription drugs and coronavirus-related expenses, over the next 12 months with the tax staying in effect until January 1, 2021.

So who's he talking about? The tax would generate over $421 billion and these 5 would make up for $87.1 billion of it. The amount is how much their wealth grew between March and May

• Jeff Bezos (Amazon)- $71,299,000
• Bill Gates (Microsoft)- $14,452,000
• Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook)- $37,968,000
• Larry Ellison (Oracle)- $13,665,000
• Warren Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway)- 7,791,000

The other big losers would be Jim, Alice and Ron Walton, Steve Balmer, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Michael Bloomberg, Charles and Julia Koch, MacKenzie Scott (+$22,946,000), Phil Knight, Sheldon Adelson, Jacqueline and John Mars, Elon Musk (+$45,902,000), Michael Dell, Jim Simons, Len Blatvatnik, Laureen Powell Jobs, Stephen Schwarzman, Rupert Murdoch... Bezos would pay $42,779,000 and Gates would pay $103,780.Each Koch would pay around $2.6 million and it would only cost Bloomberg $2.7 million. If you're on this list, it's going to cost you; otherwise-- not.

Trump Isn't JUST Fiddling While Rome Burns-- He Also Wants to Further Enrich Himself

Drawing by Nancy Ohanian

Yesterday Mnuchin told reporters he and Meadows-- team Trump-- are not close to a deal with Pelosi and Schumer-- Team America. "We did try to agree to set a timeline that we're going to try to reach an overall agreement if we can get one by the end of this week, so that the legislation could be then passed next week," was all the reporters got out of him, other than blaming it on Team America for not doing exactly what Team Trump demands. He may not quite get the urgency for working Americans, folks who never who ran banks crookedly and were able to buy off the corrupt California Attorney General to avoid prison.

Progressive candidates across the country are extremely concerned that this move along faster. Earlier, Texas Democrat Mike Siegel reiterated that "We're in a moment of overlapping crises including a global pandemic, economic meltdown, climate crisis, and the fight for racial justice." He told me that in each of those cases, his opponent, Trump enabler Michael McCaul "is failing the people of the Texas 10th and the nation." As you know, at least if you've read DWT once or twice before today, Siegel is a progressive civil rights attorney squaring up against McCaul for the second time-- after he shocked the country in 2018 when he held McCaul to just 51%, cutting his normal win margin by 15 points, turning TX-10 into a national battleground race. Siegel recently penned a knock-down critique of McCaul's ineptitude on Covid-19, and he's expanded his coalition from 2018 to include major support from Bernie, Elizabeth Warren and the Sunrise Movement to finish the job this year. "McCaul is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and he's supporting cuts in vital coronavirus relief to thousands of hardworking families across our district. We need automatic stabilizers, full expanded unemployment insurance, eviction relief, isolation support, as well as bold investment in faster testing and contact tracing," said Siegel.

Yesterday, reporting for the Wall Street Journal, Kristina Peterson pointed out that the Coronavirus Stimulis Proposals Aren't Limited To Cononavirus Spending. Team Trump is attempting to shove all kinds of priorities into the bill that has nothing to do with the pandemic. Peterson referred to the non-pandemic-related proposals as "bargaining chips for another priority. For example, McConnell introduced a $1.75 billion fund to rebuild the FBI building, something no one thinks is a good idea but TRump and his family, who fear that if the FBI sticks with plans to abandon the building, it could be bought by a hotel and give Trump's own hotel across the street competition. And you know crooked Republican businessman-- no one hates competition more than they do.

The Trump administration abruptly canceled plans in 2017 to build a suburban FBI campus. Instead, it pushed to keep the agency’s current downtown location, saying officials wanted it to remain across the street from the main Justice Department building, and the White House is pushing for funds to construct a new building. Keeping the FBI downtown would prevent the redevelopment of the site, which is near the Trump International Hotel. Both Democrats and Republicans have widely criticized the inclusion of the funds in the bill. “You have to be near the Justice Department,” Mr. Trump said last week. “They had sites way out in Virginia, way out in Maryland, I said the best place is right where it is…. So we have that in the bill. It should stay.”

McConnell also asked for $377 million for renovations to the West Wing of the White House and a screening facility. Most people prefer that money be used to help rescue ordinary American families from the pandemic that Trump has made much worse, only thinking about himself.

Hardball by Nancy Ohanian

There is also $29 billion shoved in there by McConnell for the military-- and not pandemic-related. "In the GOP bill," wrote Peterson, "Senate Republicans included $29 billion for the Defense Department, including $686 million for F-35 jet fighters, $283 million for Apache AH-64 attack helicopters, $1 billion for maritime surveillance aircraft, $1.5 billion for four expeditionary medical ships and $49 million for sonar buoys that can track objects underwater. In some instances, the bill replenishes Defense Department funds that were redirected in previous years by the administration to help build the wall along the border with Mexico. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) has said that while the stimulus bill isn’t the ideal place for military spending, the military needs every opportunity possible for rebuilding."

Pelosi also put some items in the bill that aren't, strictly speaking, pandemic-related. She wants to repeal the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction for 2020 and 2021. "In their 2017 tax overhaul," explained Peterson, "Republicans placed a $10,000 cap on the amount of state and local taxes that taxpayers can deduct from federal taxable income. Governors of high-tax states such as New York and New Jersey want Congress to eliminate the cap. Doing so would help their constituents, make it easier for them to raise state and local taxes and reduce incentives for people to move to lower-taxed states. Repealing that limit would also deliver direct tax cuts to high-income households, and the top 1% of households would get 57% of the benefits, according to the Tax Policy Center. “We need to cushion the blow of this virus. The SALT cap hurts people affected by the virus,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in New York last month. “It hurts so many of the metropolitan areas like New York.”

A marijuana provision made it into the Democratic bill as well and Trump wants it removed. "The provision would protect financial institutions that serve marijuana businesses in states where the substance is legal," explained Peterson. "Federally insured depository institutions are prohibited from offering financial services to such businesses because pot is illegal under federal law, forcing the companies to deal primarily in cash. Supporters say the proposal would make it easier for legitimate marijuana businesses to conduct transactions without cash, making them safer during a pandemic. 'I don’t agree with you that cannabis is not related to this. This is a therapy that has proven successful,' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said last week when asked by reporters about the proposal."

Riverside County southeast of L.A. has been hit really hard with the virus. It has the second most confirmed cases in the state-- 38,642-- and the second highest death toll-- 738. Progressive Democrat Liam O'Mara is running for a seat in the western part of Riverside County, the only Republican part of Riverside now. "Seven months into this pandemic, and five months past the beginning of the shut-downs," Liam told me today, "Crooked Ken Calvert has finally started circulating questionnaires to see where his voters stand on relief bills. Perhaps he has noticed that I am consistently standing up for ordinary people & consumers, and for small businesses, by demanding that the federal government step up and provide direct aid. Perhaps he has begun to worry that hitching himself to the austerity wing of his party is a liability when so many have lost their jobs, and may lose their homes and much else besides. Perhaps he is concerned that going to bat for corporate welfare for defence contractors while claiming that unemployment benefits make people too lazy to work isn't going to resonate with enough people during a literal depression of the GOP's own making. After all, one of the many lessons from the Great Depression we should never have forgotten is the one about consumer spending. Our GDP shrank by 33% because spending fell so sharply-- and that was with the added 600 in unemployment insurance. Now imagine how bad it will get without direct cash relief, and when millions have lost everything and have no way of spending at all. As far as I'm concerned, if Congress cannot meet its responsibility to protect the American people during a pandemic and depression, that government has lost legitimacy and should be replaced-- and our chance to do that is coming up on 3 November."