Congress

Commentary & Community

Some Fear Unemployment Benefits Keep People from Returning to Work

With millions of Americans losing work as a result of the coronavirus epidemic, some elected officials and experts are worried that expanded unemployment benefits are making the jobless problem worse.

 

As part of the coronavirus aid package, the federal government has increased unemployment benefits by $600 a month. This has led to a situation where some workers make more money with these benefits than they do at their jobs. As Congress considers whether to extend this higher payment, some are worried that doing so will hamper an economic recovery. After all, these critics of the program say, why would someone return to work if he or she can make more money being unemployed?

 

It is unclear how many people are deciding not to return to work as a result of the higher unemployment benefits. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin this week reminded people that they could lose their benefits if they refuse to go back to work if their company can re-hire them.

 

The increased unemployment benefits end this summer. Some Democrats in Congress want to extend this program through next year. Republicans argue that the government should not make it more attractive to remain without work than it is to go to work. They say that this will slow down an economic recovery and hurt business owners who need workers to return. Democrats counter that this program is desperately needed by people who are jobless through no fault of their own.


Democrats are pushing for quick passage of a new coronavirus aid bill that could include these extension of enhanced unemployment benefits. Republicans want a slower process.

 

Do you think that paying an extra $600 in unemployment benefits per week gives people an incentive not to return to work?

Progressives Push for Military Cuts to Pay for Coronavirus Aid

Members of the House Progressive Caucus want to cut military spending as a way to pay the big price tag for coronavirus aid.

 

The House Armed Services Committee is considering the annual National Defense Authorization Act, which provides authority for the nation’s military activities. This bill also sets the funding level for military spending, which is then funded through the appropriations process.

 

Last year, the Progressive Caucus wanted the act to authorize military spending at $644 billion a year. Instead, the House approved legislation that set the level at $738 billion. As the process begins this year, the caucus’s members have said they will not support legislation that does not contain a significant spending cut.

 

The members argue that with other needs taking priority, specifically the ongoing coronavirus epidemic, it is time for Congress to trim military spending. They say the nation cannot afford to keep spending billions of dollars on pricey weapons systems and other military projects that, in the views of these members of Congress, foster conflict around the globe.

 

This stance puts these Democratic House members at odds with their colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Many moderate Democrats do not support cutting military spending, and would likely oppose any efforts to concede to the Progressive Caucus’s demands. But without the votes of the more liberal House members, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will have to rely on Republican votes to pass the defense bill this year.

 

Do you think that military spending should be cut to help pay for the trillions of dollars spent dealing with the coronavirus?

House Taking up $3 Trillion Coronavirus Bill

The House of Representatives is on the verge of passing its fifth bill related to the coronavirus epidemic. Unlike the previous legislation, however, this bill's approval is set to come along partisan lines.

 

House Democratic leadership introduced the bill earlier this week. Republicans charged that they had little time to look over the details and pointed out they had no input in its writing. Among other things, the bill includes:

  • Nearly $1 trillion in aid for state and local governments
  • $200 billion to provide hazard pay for front-line workers
  • Another round of direct payments to households
  • $175 billion in housing aid$75 billion for more testing

 

Democrats say these things are necessary to provide aid to an economy that is suffering in the wake of the coronavirus epidemic. They argue that many states and local governments will face difficult choices to cut key services without federal aid. Republicans, however, say the bill is too expensive. They also note that it contains spending on items that have little to do with the current health crisis, such as tens of millions of dollars to the National Endowment of the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Republicans also fault Democrats for putting provisions in the bill that would benefit organized labor.

 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has said he has no interest in bringing this bill up for consideration in the Senate. There will likely be another coronavirus aid bill, but for any bill to move through Congress and be signed by President Trump, it must be bipartisan.

 

Do you think the Senate should vote on the $3 trillion coronavirus aid bill?

Senate Falls 1 Vote Short of Curbing Government Internet Searches

This week, the Senate passed legislation that reauthorizes the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) after votes on three amendments aimed at enhancing privacy protections. One amendment, which would prevent warrantless surveillance of Internet usage, failed by only one vote.

 

On May 13, the Senate rejected an amendment offered by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Steve Daines (R-MT). Here is how VoteSpotter described that amendment:

 

To amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to end the power for government agents to access internet browser and search history without a warrant during foreign intelligence and terrorism investigations.

 

This bill failed by only one vote. It had 59 senators who supported it, and it needed 60 to overcome procedural hurdles. Four senators were absent during the vote: Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Ben Sasse (R-NE), and Patty Murray (D-WA).

 

The FISA process has drawn scrutiny from both conservatives and liberals who are concerned about what they say is a lack of checks on government power to conduct investigations. They argue that without more safeguards, the FBI has vast powers to investigate anyone it deems connected to foreign intelligence or foreign terrorism.

 

Part of this investigative authority includes demanding that internet companies turn over information about a target’s internet browsing history and search terms. Since this information is held by a third party, not an individual directly, courts have ruled that the government can obtain them without a warrant in some circumstances. The Wyden-Daines amendment would have prohibited this.

 

President Trump has expressed his anger over the FISA process many times in the past due to it being used to investigate his 2016 campaign.

 

Do you think that, in the course of a terrorism investigation, the FBI should be able to access someone’s internet browsing history without a warrant?

Democrats Unveil Their Plan for More Coronavirus Aid

House Democratic leaders have introduced their version of the next phase of coronavirus relief. Its price tag is $3 trillion.

 

Among other things, this package contains:

  • Nearly $1 trillion in aid for state and local governments
  • $200 billion to provide hazard pay for front-line workers
  • Another round of direct payments to households
  • $175 billion in housing aid
  • $75 billion for more testing

 

Under this bill, a family could receive up to $6,000 directly from the federal government. The weekly $600 increase in unemployment benefits would last through January.  

 

Unlike other coronavirus bills, this one was not put together with input from Republicans. It represents a Democratic vision of what aid should contain, and is unlikely to garner much Republican support. The House leadership says these measures are necessary to help people sustain themselves in wake of the economic problems caused by the coronavirus epidemic. Republicans counter that this is a liberal wish-list that is far too expensive.

 

There are likely enough votes in the House of Representatives to pass this legislation. However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has said he is not interested in moving quickly on another coronavirus aid bill. In addition, any future aid bill in that chamber will have to have support from both Republicans and Democrats to pass.

 

The House is expected to vote on this bill Friday. If enacted, this would be the fifth bill to provide federal aid to deal with the fallout from the coronavirus.

 

Do you support the $3 trillion coronavirus aid bill put forward by House Democrats?

Senate Considers FISA Surveillance Reauthorization

This week, senators are taking up legislation to reauthorize and change some of the procedures for the  Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court.

 

The process for obtaining intelligence under FISA has been under scrutiny by allies of President Trump. The FBI used this process to obtain warrants to monitor members of the Trump campaign, and a recent report has illustrated numerous problems with that warrant.

 

HB 6172 reauthorizes the FISA court through 2023. Here is how VoteSpotter describes the bill:

 

To renew provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that permit the federal government to collect business records and other information during national security investigations without a warrant. The FISA law allows a federal judge to approve such collections without notifying the target or hearing opposing arguments. The bill would also to expand the circumstances that require FISA judges to hear from a government-appointed critic of such requests, and increasing the number of FISA courts.

 

The changes contained in this legislation do not go far enough for some senators, though. They argue that the process for the FISA courts tilts too heavily towards the government, and that abuses would still be too easy to commit. This bipartisan group plans on offering amendments that would limit the collection of Internet usage history as well as strengthen the role of outside experts to challenge requests for surveillance.

 

The bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 278-136 in March.

 

Do you think the federal government has too much power to conduct surveillance and collect information under the FISA process?

Senate Fails to Override Trump Veto on Iran Military Action

A majority of senators disapprove of U.S. military involvement in Iran, but they could not garner enough support to override a presidential veto of a resolution to end such action.

 

This week the Senate failed to override President Trump’s veto of Senate Joint Resolution 68. Although the vote was 49-44 in favor of a veto override, this type of vote requires two-thirds of the senators present to approve in order to pass.

 

The resolution states:

 

The United States Armed Forces have been introduced into hostilities, as defined by the War Powers Resolution, against Iran.

 

The question of whether United States forces should be engaged in hostilities against Iran should be answered following a full briefing to Congress and the American public of the issues at stake, a public debate in Congress, and a congressional vote as contemplated by the Constitution.

 

It then goes on to say:

 

Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.

 

The Senate initially passed the resolution in February, with the House following in March. This action was prompted by President Trump’s drone strike, which killed a top Iranian general. Many members of Congress have said this action will likely lead to war with Iran. They point out that the Constitution requires that Congress declare war. President Trump pushed back, saying that what he did was allowed because he is commander-in-chief. He said that the drone strike saved American lives and stopped an imminent threat.

 

The War Powers Act, invoked by this resolution, requires that presidents consult with Congress before military actions and seek congressional approval for longer-term military deployments. Enacted in the 1970s in the wake of the Vietnam War, presidents have routinely claimed that the law is an unconstitutional violation of their powers as commander-in-chief.

 

President Trump vetoed SJ Res 68 on May 6.

 

Do you think that U.S. military actions against Iran should be ended?

Trump Still Pushing for Payroll Tax Cut

Congress has passed four bills dealing with the coronavirus epidemic, and is now working on a fifth. President Trump wants that bill to include a payroll tax cut.

 

This is not the first time that the president has suggested such a tax cut. When the initial economic effects of the coronavirus began to become apparent in March, he suggested the same thing. Congress has been reluctant to enact it, however.

 

Payroll taxes are levied on income to pay for Medicare and Social Security. Cutting these taxes would affect every worker, especially those with lower incomes. An income tax cut mainly benefits higher-income workers, since lower incomes are not subject to the tax. Payroll taxes, on the other hand, are levied on the first dollar of income, and are capped for higher-income workers.

 

Since 2009, there have been other payroll tax cuts that have been aimed at stimulating the economy. Some economists argue that since they affect lower-income workers, they provide money to go back into the economy more quickly.

 

The president’s support for such a tax cut is not shared by many in Congress. Democratic members argue that such a tax cut would not provide relief to those who lost jobs or who are in the gig economy. Republicans are worried about its price tag (which could reach as high as $1 trillion a year) and its effect on the Social Security Trust Fund.

 

It remains to be seen what type of tax relief, if any, members of Congress will support in their latest coronavirus relief bill.

 

Do you support cutting payroll taxes as a way to stimulate the economy?

Lawyers Argue that Trump’s Name on Stimulus Checks is Illegal

Stimulus checks going out to millions of Americans contain the name of President Donald Trump in the memo line. A bipartisan group of lawyers is arguing that this is a violation of federal law.

 

Congress passed legislation authorizing stimulus payments to tens of millions of Americans due to the economic effects of the coronavirus epidemic. Many of those payments were made by direct deposit. Some people, however, are receiving paper checks.

 

There were reports that President Trump wanted his signature to appear on the line authorizing the checks. Generally, the signature of the Secretary of the Treasury appears on government checks. Due to legal reasons, this idea could not be realized. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that he had the idea to place the president’s name in the memo line of the check, something that has never been done before.

 

A group of lawyers who have worked in both Republican and Democratic administrations argues that this move was intended to boost the president’s re-election campaign. As such, they say, it violates a federal law that prohibits the use of federal employees and property for campaign purposes. They sent a letter to Attorney General William Barr urging him to appoint a special counsel to investigate this situation.

 

Legal observers note that no one has been prosecuted under the section of the federal code that these lawyers cite.

 

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has introduced legislation to prohibit the federal government from using the president or vice=president’s name or image in promotional material.

 

Do you think it was appropriate to put President Trump’s name on stimulus checks?

Democrats Want Federal Funding for Faster Internet

At a time when tens of millions of Americans are working from home or going to school from home, the Internet is proving critical to connecting people. Now some Democratic members of Congress want federal funding to boost high-speed Internet.

 

Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Ed Markey (D-MA) have joined with Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) to advocate for a federal grant program for improved broadband access as part of the next coronavirus aid bill. They argue that this epidemic has shown the importance of high-speed Internet, and that some people are at a disadvantage because they don’t have this type of service.

 

Opponents of this idea say that Internet access is better left to the private sector, not the government. They argue that the government can distort the market and harm efforts to roll out broadband. They note the large increase in high-speed Internet access over the past decade that private businesses, not the government, accomplished.

 

There is ongoing discussion about what the next coronavirus aid bill should contain and when Congress should act on it. Democrats are pushing for a big aid package for state and local governments. Republicans are cool to this idea, but have not rejected it. This is the main sticking point in negotiations, and it is unclear when it will be resolved.

 

Do you think the federal government should take steps to improve high-speed Internet access?

McConnell Pushes to Limit the Coronavirus Liability of Business Owners

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) wants to take steps to limit what he says will be a “lawsuit pandemic” in the wake of the coronavirus crisis.

 

With businesses set to begin reopening around the nation, some people fear that there will be lawsuits from customers if they contract coronavirus in these places. Many business owners cite their concern over these potential lawsuits as one of the reasons they are hesitant to resume operation.

 

Sen. McConnell has said he will insist that any future bill to provide more aid related to the coronavirus must also contain a limitation on the liability for business owners and health care workers. He argues that this is a key way to begin restarting the economy.

 

Democrats in Congress have been pushing for a new coronavirus bill that will provide aid to local and state governments. Sen. McConnell has been cool to this idea, noting that many of these governments were facing budget issues prior to the coronavirus. He has said that the federal government should not be bailing out states that spent irresponsibly. However, he has said he would be open to considering carefully-crafted aid if it also contains a liability limit.

 

The Senate will likely meet next week. The House was supposed to reconvene, too, but Majority Leader Steny Hoyer now says that members will not be returning to Washington in early May.

 

Do you support giving business owners and health care workers protection from lawsuits over the coronavirus?

House Passes Another Coronavirus Aid Bill

This week, Congress passed a fifth bill to fund federal response to the coronavirus epidemic. The House met in a nearly-full session on Thursday to debate and then overwhelmingly vote in favor of this $484 billion legislation.

 

This bill contains funding for a number of items, including:

  • $310 billion for the Paycheck Protection Program, which provides forgivable loans to small businesses affected by the epidemic
  • $75 billion for hospital aid
  • $25 billion for coronavirus testing
  • $60 billion for disaster loans and grants

 

The most-anticipated portion of this bill dealt with the Paycheck Protection Program, which ran out of money last week while Congress was in the midst of partisan disagreements over how to replenish it. Republicans were pushing for legislation that only contained $250 billion in new money for that program. Democrats wanted a larger bill that also gave money to hospitals as well as state and local governments.

 

While the Senate passed this bill by voice vote, the House of Representatives reconvened to vote on it. After some debate, the vote in favor was 388-5. One member, Rep. Justin Amash (I-MI), voted “present,” while 35 members were absent.

 

There is already talk about another coronavirus aid bill. Democrats are suggesting that such a bill have money in it for state and local governments which are having budget problems. Republicans are cool to that idea.

 

What do you think Congress should be doing to respond to the coronavirus epidemic?

McConnell Suggests Bankruptcy, Not Aid, for States

With some states facing budget problems, congressional Democrats are seeking billions of dollars in aid as part of the next coronavirus legislation. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has another suggestion for states in budget trouble: bankruptcy.

 

Officials in some states say they are facing dire budget situations due to the coronavirus. They argue that the economic slowdown will reduce tax revenue and lead to an increased demand for government services. These officials say that they will be forced to fire public safety employees and stop vital government programs unless Congress provides them with money.

 

Sen. McConnell, however, contends that many states have a long history of irresponsible spending. He has said that he does not want coronavirus aid bills to rescue states from what he calls bad decisions of the past. He specifically points to generous pension programs that some states provide without putting away enough money to cover these obligations.

 

Congressional Democrats wanted the latest bill related to the coronavirus to contain billions of dollars in aid for state and local governments. Sen. McConnell prevented this from being included in the package. Instead, he says it may be a good idea for states to explore bankruptcy to restructure their long-term spending.

 

Should the federal government provide aid to states and local governments that are struggling with budget issues? Or should these governments look at declaring bankruptcy to restructure their spending?

New Coronavirus Aid Bill Passes Senate

This week the Senate passed a fifth bill to fund federal response to the coronavirus epidemic. This new legislation has a price tag of $484 billion, and some members of Congress want to begin work on a sixth aid bill.

 

The legislation contains funding for a number of items, including:

  • $310 billion for the Paycheck Protection Program, which provides forgivable loans to small businesses affected by the epidemic
  • $75 billion for hospital aid
  • $25 billion for coronavirus testing
  • $60 billion for disaster loans and grants

 

The Paycheck Protection Program ran out of money last week while Congress was in the midst of partisan disagreements over how to replenish it. Republicans were pushing for legislation that only contained $250 billion in new money for that program. Democrats wanted a larger bill that also gave money to hospitals as well as state and local governments.

 

The two sides finally settled on this compromise legislation, and the Senate passed it via a voice vote. This procedure does not require that members of the Senate return to the Capitol building for a vote.

 

The House of Representatives will now consider this bill, and is expected to pass it this week.

 

Do you support the new $484 billion coronavirus aid bill?

Small Business Fund Runs out of Money

 

The federal government’s program offering forgivable loans to small businesses affected by coronavirus ran out of money today. Senators are making little progress in resolving differences over legislation that would replenish this fund.

 

The third coronavirus relief bill contained $350 billion for the Paycheck Protection Plan (PPP). The PPP provided forgivable loans to small businesses as long as they kept paying employees and met other conditions. There was such a strong response to this program that the initial $350 billion soon proved inadequate. There were signs soon after its implementation that the program would run out of money in mid-April.

 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) attempted to pass legislation to provide another $250 billion. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) objected, meaning that the Democrats would filibuster the attempt. He desired more money for hospitals and state and local governments added to the small business aid. The two sides have been negotiating since last week in an attempt to overcome their differences.

 

The House of Representatives is likely to follow the lead of the Senate on this issue. Democrats in that body are also supporting the same aid demands as the Senate. However, if the Senate passes a small business aid bill without the additional funding, the House is unlikely to stop it.

 

There will likely be legislation to provide this small business aid next week. What is unclear at this time is whether it will contain any funding for Democratic priorities.

 

Do you think that legislation to provide funds for small business loans should also contain money for hospitals and state governments?

Senate to Consider Small Business Aid on Thursday

Senators today put off consideration until Thursday of new money for a federal aid fund for small businesses affected by the coronavirus. Partisan differences are standing in the way of quick consideration of a new infusion of federal cash.

 

The Senate met in a brief session today but conducted no business. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has set Thursday as the day the body will consider an additional $250 billion in funding for the small business loan program. Congress established these loans in the last coronavirus aid bill. This will provide forgivable loans for small businesses that continue to pay employees through June. If these businesses do this, they will not have to repay their loans.

 

Trump Administration officials warn that the initial $350 billion provided to this loan program will be depleted soon. Some say this could occur as soon as the end of the week.

 

Sen. McConnell is pushing for a fourth aid bill that would provide another $250 billion for this program and nothing else. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) supports this additional money, but also wants the bill to include funding for hospitals and state and local governments. Sen. McConnell has said these additional priorities should be discussed in a separate bill.

 

Neither side is backing down from its demands. With no easy path to enact this bill, Sen. McConnell said that the Senate will reconvene on Thursday to consider the bill. It remains to be seen if it can be passed if Democrats object.

 

Do you think the Senate should wait until Thursday to provide more funding for loans to small businesses affected by the coronavirus?

Rep. Schiff Wants Commission to Look into Coronavirus Response

The federal government is in the midst of dealing with the coronavirus epidemic. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) wants a commission to look into how well the government prepared for the epidemic and how well it is performing in its response.

 

Under Rep. Schiff’s legislation, Congress would create bipartisan commission to examine the federal government’s preparedness and response to the coronavirus epidemic. This commission would examine the strengths and weaknesses of these efforts, and make recommendations for future preparedness.

 

Rep. Schiff says that such a commission is common after major events such as the terrorist attacks on September 11th and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. He notes that commissions like this can help prepare the federal government to respond to future incidents. Critics, however, see this as a commission that would be used to embarrass the Trump Administration for political reasons.

 

Under this proposal, the commission would have a bipartisan mix of experts, including those with a medical background. It would hold hearings and have subpoena power. At its conclusion, it would issue recommendations on how to improve the federal response to future epidemics. This report would not be released until February 2021.

 

Senators Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris, both Democrats of California, are planning on introducing similar legislation in the Senate.

 

Do you think Congress should establish a commission to examine the federal response to the coronavirus epidemic?

Senators Can’t Agree on More Coronavirus Aid

Rival plans for coronavirus aid failed to advance in the Senate this week.

 

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell attempted to advance the Republicans’ version of a fourth coronavirus relief bill. That legislation contained $250 billion in new spending for loans to small businesses affected by the epidemic. These loans would be forgiven if small businesses met certain qualifications, such as keeping their employees hired. The third coronavirus aid bill set up this loan program with $350 billion in funding, but it is in danger of being exhausted by applicants.

 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer objected to the consideration of legislation to provide this new money. Instead, he proposed adding new spending for other areas in this bill. Some of the things that Senate Democrats want included are a $100 billion aid program for hospitals, $150 billion in funding for state and local governments, and a more generous food stamp program.

 

There is some disagreement about members of Congress and Trump Administration officials about what the federal government should do next to respond to the economic fallout from the coronavirus epidemic. Sen. McConnell and the White House are pressing for a quick infusion of cash to the small business loan program, then putting off a larger aid bill for future discussion.

 

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has said he is not opposed to some of the ideas proposed by Democrats, but does not support enacting them right now. Sen. Schumer says that Congress should not wait to provide money that he says is desperately needed right now.

 

Do you support including funding for hospitals, state and local governments, and food stamps in a bill that includes more aid for small businesses affected by the coronavirus?

Congress Looks at More Small Business Aid

Congressional leaders are looking to advance legislation this week that contains more funding to help small businesses affected by the coronavirus epidemic.

 

Under the plan being pushed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Congress would appropriate an additional $250 billion for forgivable small business loans. This would not create a new program, but would provide money for the small business aid contained in the previous coronavirus aid legislation. That bill set aside $350 billion for these loans. Many fear this money will quickly run out, however.

 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wants to include other items in this bill, such as funding for hospitals and a federal bonus for front-line workers. Other Democrats are also supporting the inclusion of other relief items. Sen. McConnell is remaining firm that the only thing the bill should focus on is small business aid.

 

If there is agreement on this new round of funding, the Senate could pass the bill on Thursday and the House could pass it on Friday. If no member objects, both bodies could pass it by unanimous consent. However, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) is indicating he will object to passing the bill in this way, necessitating a return of at least 218 House members to the capitol building.

 

Do you support Congress providing another $250 billion in forgivable loans for small businesses?

Senate Democrats Want Hazard Pay for Front-Line Workers

Discussions over what should be in a fourth coronavirus aid bill are occurring in both houses of Congress. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) today proposed that such legislation should contain a fund to give front-line workers a bonus for their service during the pandemic.

 

Under Sen. Schumer’s plan, workers deemed “essential” would qualify for a bonus that could be up to $25,000. These workers include doctors, nurses, grocery store employees, truck drivers, and pharmacists. For those workers who are paid under $200,000 a year, their federal bonus could be no more than $25,000. For workers who are paid more than $200,000 a year, their bonus would be capped at $5,000.

 

Sen. Schumer labeled his idea the “Heroes Fund.”

 

Congressional leaders and White House staff have been in discussions about whether there should be another coronavirus aid bill and what should be in this legislation. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has indicated that the Senate may work this week on relief legislation. His preference is that the bill contain more aid for small businesses.

 

There have already been three coronavirus aid bills that have passed Congress and been signed into law by President Trump.

 

Do you think the federal government should give $25,000 payments to essential workers such as doctors, grocery store clerks, and truck drivers?

Copyright © 2018 Votespotter Inc. All rights reserved.