tv Washington Journal 12292020 CSPAN December 29, 2020 7:00am-10:01am EST
dollars government spending bill. anthony on howce the response to coronavirus has affected city budgets. >> the yeah -- the yeas are 275. two thirds being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. ♪ 44 republicans join 231 democrats to vote to approve checks to americans to the tune of $2000. now, all eyes turned to the senate. we want to get your take on the debate. .epublicans, (202) 748-8001
democrats, (202) 748-8000. , (202) 748-8002. text us at (202) 748-8003. include your first name, city and state. twitteralso go to @cspanwj. following the house action, chuck schumer of new york, promising as he did sunday to push the effort in the senate for $2000 checks to americans in response to coronavirus. here is what he wrote last night, "following the bipartisan vote, i will move tomorrow to pass legislation in the senate to deliver americans to thousand dollar checks. is forenate democrat this much needed financial relief which can be approved tomorrow if no republicans block
it. later mcconnell lot to make sure senate republicans do not stand in the way of meeting the needs of american families who are crying out for help." mitch mcconnell has not indicated whether or not he supports these $2000 checks, or will bring it up for a vote. politico notes this morning chuck schumer will try to pass the bill by unanimous consent today. republicans are expected to object. many gop senators have previously resisted higher stimulus checks. unless there is cooperation from all 100 senators, it would take several days to set up a roll call vote. it would need to garner 60 votes. that is a steep path towards approval and it is all occurring during what should be a holiday break for congress. and, the dwindling days left of this congress. the senate will convene today.
you can watch the floor over on c-span2. reports, nospaper republican senator has yet said they will object to schumer's efforts to pass the bill through the senate. leader is expected to fall short after ron johnson from wisconsin blocked two attempts this month to pass a second round of $1200 checks. we turn to you this morning. what is your take? isaac in springfield gardens, new york. democratic caller. good morning. caller: i just want to make the country aware of how the republican party is doing the yet people of this country, there is a majority that still votes for the republican party. they are the ones that are making the poor suffer.
please, america. wise up. opposed0 republicans what is called the cash act, direct payments to americans. here is the speaker on the floor yesterday arguing for the legislation. [video clip] >> it is a simple vote, more money. our goal has been to crush the virus. honor our heroes who help us crush the virus and put money in the pockets of the people. today, we will be doing that. legislation will be a lifeline for millions of americans. previously on the passed relief bill by including dependence, ensuring families with children in college, adults living with elderly family members can also receive relief. republicans have a choice. legislation, or
vote to deny the american people the paychecks they need. to reject this would be in denial of the economic challenges people are facing and it would deny them the relief they need. host: we go to been in state college, pennsylvania. republican. support or oppose the payments? caller: i am somewhere in the middle. i am going to put the speaker of the house when she said republicans need to do this, republicans need to do that. the sitting republican president is the one who truly wanted to get these payments out as soon as possible, as large as possible. for some reason they wanted to wait until after the election. strugglingt helping folk in this country? of course. i have multiple concerns about where all this money is going to come from. checks to every
american just does not seem fiscally feasible. host: that is the argument republicans made about not having this covid relief package over $1 trillion. ton you increased the checks $2000, you go over the $1 trillion mark. according to reports today, the congressional -- one of the congressional outlets that look at this, the $2000 checks will billion, up from roughly 160 billion right now. from congress itself. when you hear that, what do you think? caller: from my personal experience, i was laid off in march of 2020. . live in pennsylvania i received the pennsylvania
state unemployment insurance, which is next to nothing, plus $600. that was plenty to get by. i was making more on unemployment than i was working. that is a republican argument that we can't have people making more on unemployment, but that being said going back to the office of budget management, it is just not possible. $2000 is too much. i don't want to sound like i don't have -- i don't want to help others but it is too much. i think 600 was a reasonable amount. host: you support the president? caller: absolutely. i am an ardent president trump supporter. host: but disagree with the president on this. the president advocating for more money. take a look at fox's pole.
74% of those polled say coronavirus relief is more important than the national debt. 21% said the debt was more important. a large majority of republicans agreed the relief was more important than the national debt. republicanin brady, of texas, who led the opposition on the floor yesterday to the cash act. [video clip] half trillion dollars could more than doubled the number of small businesses and midsize businesses getting ppp forgivable loans to hire workers and stay alive through the recovery. it could make sure airline workers have secure jobs for more than just a few months. it could do more to replenish frontline health care workers. we should be focused on families theing most, none more than 8 million americans who lost
their jobs due to covid. our top priority, in addition to the feet -- in addition to defeating the virus, should be getting them back to work. approvedhas already dollars directly to a family of four with one parent out of work. that is on top of the state unemployment benefits. if we want to do even more for the jobless, this huge amount of money today could give every unemployed worker from covid a $50,000 incentive to return to work. money,is huge amount of you could give the bottom 90% of forers an income tax free 2021. a full year where you go to work each day for yourself, rather than for washington. taxyou imagine what a no 2021 would do for low and middle income families, workers, and
the local economy? or, we can simply hold this money back. not hastily spend another half trillion dollars we don't have while we assess the impact vaccinations are having on consumer confidence and unlocking the economy. there are a lot of ways to spend money, if that is the goal. in my view, let's be smart. let's target assistance to those who need it most. kevin brady, republican from texas arguing against $2000 checks to americans. reg in virginia, independent. caller: i oppose this. i agree with congressman brady. it is basic economics. we need to inject trillions into the economy, inflation is going to have to happen somewhere unless the fed tightens the money supply.
in the long run, this is going to end up hurting everyone. our economyto hurt because inflation has to happen. this is basic economics. when you get a check for $2000, it has got to come from somewhere. the government does not create wealth, that money is going to be redistributed. people are not going to reject $2000, but they are not understanding we are going to have to pay for this down the line, whether it be our children , our grandchildren, somebody has to pay for it. now, you are getting $2000 down the line you may end up paying for it in a bigger way. host: what is your reaction to this headline, "u.s. stocks finish at a wreckers after stimulus bill passage." fiscalors bet new spending will help consumers and small businesses."
caller: well, the stock market fluctuates. we will see how the stock market does when those trillions of dollars start flowing through the economy and the value of the dollar goes down and we end up getting hit with inflation. bob in utah.ht did democrat. caller: i would like to see $2000 koehl. --ple brighten now [indiscernible] i have heard this story of people being in debt for the last 50 years and it keeps going up, but the rich keep getting richer. this will just make them a little richer.
we've got to keep our country going. host: let me read the criteria to you and others for these checks. this also addresses whether or not you will get a check. if you got the check in mark -- in march, you may not get this one. if your 2019 reported income was $75,000 or less, you would be eligible to receive the full $600 one time payment. strikes $600 and inserts $2000. adjusted gross income up to $150,000 would receive $4000. if you reported making more than 75,000, you would receive partial payments dropping by five dollars for every $100 above the limit. earned 86,900who dollars would get five fellers
-- five dollars. heads of household making under $124,000 would also not get a stimulus check. michiganakland county, , he is for it if the threshold is lowered significantly. we just read with the threshold is, not sure if that is significant or not. william and washington courthouse, ohio. republican. morning. there is one thing i am not understanding. the $2000.ut ok? one thing i am not agreeing on is, we are sending billions and billions of dollars to other sendings instead of billions to other countries, why don't we just take care of our country first? americant what every
is trying to tell congress? out -- whatutting is it, $40 million or something? two businesses who aren't even open. -- to businesses who aren't even open, it does not make sense. host: are you in support of these $2000 checks if they cut spending in other places? caller: yes. instead of sending billions of dollars to other countries, put billions into the american people's pockets. host: did you hear yesterday there was a washington post article about how the president's opposition to the government funding portion of this package he signed sunday, the line items he is opposed to
our amounts he himself requested of congress to spend. some things get spent. i understand. we are talking about coronavirus relief. if this is all about turnavirus, how does that around and send billions of dollars to other countries? host: that is where i think you are confused. what the president signed was a package that included two different bills. one bill was to keep the government running, the spending for federal agencies. that is where the foreign aid money was. it also included $900 billion for coronavirus relief. understand that we send money to other countries. i understand that.
instead of sending billions to these countries, why not cut that in half? host: got it. let me show you what the $900 billion is for when it comes to the pandemic. here are details. per adult, that could change to $2000 if the cash act is approved by the senate this week. unemployment benefits for self to 11 weeks. emergency unemployment converse -- compensation extended. $284 billion for the paycheck protection program. schools and colleges will receive $82 billion. it extends the infection martha -- it extends the eviction moratorium. grants for small businesses. entertainment venues will receive $15 billion. $9 billion to programs that cater to low income and underserved communities. ,here is also money for testing
vaccine purchasing and distribution. $20 billion to purchase the vaccine and 80 billion for states to distribute the vaccine, and another $20 billion for state testing. let's go to victor in windermere, florida. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. to get it is a good plan as much money in the hands of people who need it. so they are not affected -- evicted, not without food and can pay their bills. if we can do that, we stop human suffering. that is the purpose of government, to help people. out, i like what mr. brainy said. they also need to raise taxes on the top 1%. you could raise a lot of money and not raise the deficit. warren buffett said they could
raise taxes on the top 1% of the top 1%. we could also have prisoners do food. let them grow food for the food banks. we've got these long lines all over the place. this is mismanagement of resources in many ways. they think they got cobb line by how bad this is. chairmanal reserve said we should air on the side of spending more money. backed by thenot gold standard anymore, they just printed. it is fiat money. are in debt $30 trillion, the interest rates are so low it does not affect this metric -- does not affect us much. when interest rates go up, you do have a problem. historians note, we were $5.4 trillion when bush took office.
paul put up a bill to balance the budget. we wouldn't have a debt, but they wouldn't pass that. we have a lot of mismanagement. we have a lot of people in government who don't know anything about government. they know the short-term effects, but the long-term effects. they don't take enough economics classes or civics classes. like --ult, it is just they say dr. fauci doesn't know all this stuff, well who would you rather have make the scientific things? a doctor with experience, or a plumber? that's the problem. they're listening to fox news and getting a lot of misinformation. host: victor in florida. house also took action
yesterday to override the president veto of the national defense authorization act. withbill has passed overwhelming bipartisan support for decades. here's the headline in the washington times, house votes to override trump veto. "over 100 presidents box the president -- back the president. buck the president. he also said, here are the 16 democrats who switched their vote to oppose the president's veto and the 16 democrats -- excuse me, that is the same tweet. if you follow leo shane want to learn more about how all that went down yesterday. the senate is expected to take up that veto override as well.
act our conversation about these 2 -- these $2000 stimulus checks. antonio in grand rapids, michigan. the $2000agree with because i am a single male trying to find an apartment for $700 and i can't find that. if you just send a $600, what is that going to take care of? host: did you get the first round of stimulus checks? caller: yes i did. host: what did you do with it? caller: i paid bills. that's per to match it. that's that is pretty much it. host: how far did it go? caller: not much. $2000 can help pay someone's , and that is pretty much it. leo in atlanta, georgia. independent.
caller: can you hear me? host: we can. caller: i am in favor of the $2000 checks. there has been a lot of talk about the deficit. especially from republicans. if you wind back the clock to 2000, we were running a surplus when bush took office. by the end of his presidency, we were running a $500 billion debt. when you get into a financial crisis, that is not when government spending needs to stop, that is when you need to spend the most money to stimulate the economy in order to help those in need. at the end of the trump presidency, we started running $1 trillion deficit again. back to the levels where it was 2011.9 through any money we get into the hands
of the poorest people in the country today is going to be better for us down the road 20 years from now. the time to tackle the deficit is not in the middle of one of the worst crises in a century, it is when we are doing well and things have normalized. historically at tax rates, the top marginal rate on income adjusted -- now this is adjusted for inflation -- underage dwight d. eisenhower, a overlican, 90% on income $200,000 in the 1950's. people don't really realize historically how much higher rates were on the top one third of earners in this country. all that has really happened since 1980 under reagan, bush and trump with the tax cuts they implemented is a shift in wealth to the top 1/10 of 1%.
those vendors to do not typically reinvest that money. what we have now is a market of consumers who are consistently , wages arepoorer stagnant. when we get into a crisis, we become exposed. that is what you are seeing now. not an equitable tax system for the american people. host: who did you vote for? caller: joe biden. it wasn't an inspiring vote. host: how do you plan to vote in the runoff in georgia? caller: i have already voted for ossoff. perdue not vote for simply because their messaging. not just their entire history of things i oppose, but just look
at what they have done since the election. they have denied the outcomes we all know is plainly true just so that they can kiss up to the president. it all seems so much about them advancing themselves politically and they really have no ideology work for loss -- ideology or philosophy. if donald trump likes it, they are for it. the new york times -- host: are you seeing that on the ground? caller: 100%. i've lived in georgia my entire life. it is interesting to say -- see how the political climate has changed in the northern suburbs. forsyth county, there was a racial expulsion there. or 1913, at the turn-of-the-century there were 87 black people in the county
with a population of 90,000. with the growth of atlanta and expansion into the suburbs, places that used to go 9:1 read are now going 65-35. gwinnett county flipped. you're starting to see out the -- you are starting to see atlanta outweigh the rural areas. host: take a look at what david producing tout yesterday. outavid produce sent yesterday about the coronavirus relief package. democrats made it harder than it needed to be, but we never stop fighting for what is best for family and business." that is the senator for reelection. his opponent jon ossoff sent "senatort to him, purdue must reverse his
opposition to $2000 checks and join democrats and president trump in supporting $2000 relief checks for his constituents." it is unclear whether republicans will block chuck schumer from bringing up this cash act that just passed in the house yesterday. senatorsneed all 100 to be in support of bringing it to the floor. it is unclear what republicans world -- republicans will do. there is indication there will be some gop support. marco rubio saying, "i agree with the president. are in direilies need of relief, which is why a support $2000 in direct payments." for months, republicans tried to pass -- for businesses and families only to be rejected by democrats.
months ago, speaker pelosi and democrats rejected the administration's previous office -- offer, she has stopped holding american families hostage. that is senator rubio from yesterday. ,nd then there is this headline senator bernie sanders plans to override the ndaa veto in a bid to get a vote on the $2000 check proposal. says -- which wants to on thee trump veto spending bill, then head home. i'm going to a chapter -- i am going to object until we get a vote on direct payments to the working class. the senate convenes today. you can watch our coverage on c-span two. the moment that chuck schumer comes to the floor to offer a
vote, or to bring forward a vote on these $2000 payments. river, maryland. caller: i think they should send out to thousand dollar payments. it is long overdue. other countries that are similar to us have been paying out their residence for the entire duration of the pandemic. residence been giving almost $2000 a month this whole time. our senators have been arguing ?hether to give a $600 it is asinine. how they arerstand able to make a hundred $50 -- hundred $50,000 and argue whether americans who pay their salaries can have relief.
i do not understand how someone can support that. people like me work on a covid unit and had a second job, lost my second job, can't collect unemployment but my first job does not cover enough, so that leaves me in limbo. host: did you get the first stimulus check in march? caller: yes. host: do you have dependents? caller: yes. host: what did you do with the money? caller: pay bills. host: how many bills were you able to pay? caller: i was able to put some on my rent and some on my car insurance, gas and electric. my rent is $1100. jober: does your first cover your rent? host: it will -- host: does your first job cover
your rent? caller: it will. but then we have food, gas, insurance, the regular stuff. i have a teenage kid and his senior year, so we have all of his stuff as well. host: right. [indiscernible] caller: meanwhile, my senators are comfortable and have no problem taking recesses and going on holiday, and i'm worried about what to buy my son for christmas. myselfg to be killing working overtime to be able to make it through? how quickly could you use this check? caller: about six months ago. robert in moss point, mississippi. republican. say i am would like to
for the $2000 checks. there is blame on both sides of the aisle. theink they needed to cut foreign spending out and concentrate on the united states. i just don't understand how you can spend millions of dollars overseas, when they were in there talking about it and not thinking about the american people. on both sides. host: robert in mississippi. "i hope twitter says, the $2000 goes out to people to pay for rent and food. it will also give people hope. people are mentally devastated and scared." the washington post reports that the set -- the schedule for
sending out checks corresponds with minutia and's earlier promise -- steve mnuchin's promise. the plan was thrown into turmoil after president trump threatened to refuse to sign. trumps said changes need to -- needed to be made, but his own party did not support some of his demands. he relented sunday and past this legislation. washington post this morning also has the back story on who and how convinced the president he should sign this legislation. according to the washington post, with other key republicans waylaid, it fell to lindsey graham to talk the president down. grandma raced to the president's golf club and worked the problem. what possible solution could assuage trump without brief -- without forcing congress to reopen negotiations?
hit a shot, make a phone call. hit a shot, talk about a deal. it was an intense christmas day on the golf course between those two men. thents before trump posted december 22 video threatening to torpedo the bill, he was on the phone with kevin mccarthy who was in a clinic in bakersfield, california, minutes away from undergoing surgery on an injured elbow. mccarthy spent the rest of the week at home with his arm in a cast, reminding trump of the political win he secured in the bill and searching for a way to address the president's remaining concern. an idea by rob portman, republican from ohio, who proposed an elegant solution. a -- package that would let trump ask congress to cut back spending while lawmakers --. the president could impound the
money for up to 45 days, meaning it could not be spent until after he left office. you can read more from the washington post. rural in florida -- earl in florida, where you come down on this issue? caller: i think they should allow it. remember, this is a one-time payment. congressman who see anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000 a month. here they are complaining about payment making a $2000 just one time. think people earning under $75,000 is going to do? they are not going to save it.
republicans are oyster talking about climbing the system, well, business and take money when people spend money. america's gnb -- i don't know what reasoning. one fella said earlier they must not have taken economic classes, just doing what feels good or what looks good. they don't think for the future. the money that people get, they are not saving it. it is going right back into the system. priming the pump. i don't know what reason they have for say no. host: william in clearwater, florida. support or oppose these checks? caller: i differently support them. matter of fact, i think it is not enough. those are hard earned tax dollars they are sending to other countries. wantu read the bill, they
to give money to insects. they spend tens of millions of dollars investigating the president over nonsense. though senators make $184,000 a year. those are our tax dollars. they can't give us back some of our tax money? that is ridiculous. people are suffering. -- let's givese those senator $600 and see how they live on that. each one of them own two houses. people are getting tired of that. they want to eat. look at the food lines. give all of this money to sportscenter's, what a second round for the kennedy center? $1 billion to the smithsonian? that stuff is just sitting in a building.
these are people that are living. they need food, they need to pay the rent. host: will you watch the senate today when they convene at noon and vote? minority leader from bringing up the cash act? caller: i would advise everyone of them to pass that, or they will be looking at their career going down the drain. americans are tired of this. host: noon eastern. for those of you who want to watch. noon eastern on c-span2. you will be able to see when the senate comes in, what happens on the floor. minority leader chuck schumer promising to bring the house bill that passed yesterday with 44 republicans and democratic support. only two democrats voted against. he is promising to push a vote on the senate floor.
he needs all 100 senators to approve that to bring into the floor for a vote. you can watch it on c-span2. donald and omaha, nebraska. independent. caller: yes, ma'am. i am for the $2000. people need it. i don't. got, i give iti to a couple of guys at work. all they have to do is audit the last one. sieber all that wind. went into politicians pockets but nobody says nothing about that. up next on washington journal, we are going to talk with the organization that watches spending on capitol hill. stephen ellis, president of the taxpayers for common sense. we are going to talk to him about this covid relief package
signed by the president sunday. insightybe get some into what happened in march with the cares act, how that money was spent. we will see if he's got details you may find interesting. the frontews today, pages of many of the newspapers, the headline that president-elect biden is saying the administration -- the current administration is blocking the transition. [video clip] is our nation is in transition, we need to make sure nothing is lost in the handoff between administrations. my team needs a clear picture of our force posture around the world, and operations to deter enemies. into theull visibility budget planning underway at the defense department. oforder to avoid any window
confusion that our adversaries may try to exploit. as i said from the beginning, we fromencountered roadblocks the political leadership at dod and office of management and budget. we are not getting all of the information we need from the outgoing administration in key national security areas. it is nothing short of irresponsibility. host: the president-elect yesterday. voting toyesterday 75-134, to approve $2000 checks to americans. your take. crystal in west palm beach, florida. democrat. caller: good. -- good morning. i just love c-span. i want to reiterate the first caller who talked about our neighbors, canada, and how those people have been receiving $2000
a month since the pandemic began. i think $600 is a joke. we are so busy fighting like a bunch of bumpkins, it is ridiculous. we do not have our own self interests as a priority. we would rather fight. host: would you get this check if it passes? caller: yes. host: what will he do with the money? hospitalized and i have a huge hospital bill. most people will pay the most basic fundamental bills. rent.ies, it is not like we are going to take the money and go on vacation. we are suffering as a people.
there is so much conflict and areas such asrong politics. we have lost our bumpkin minds and it is hilarious. host: crystal in florida. david in alabama sends us this for, "refund income taxes those workers making $75,000 and under. portion also gets refunded to the businesses." susan in columbia, maryland. caller: thank you for allowing me to call in. i am a registered independent. i called on the republican line because my comments will fall in line with the republicans. i am an independent because i cannot be a kennedy democrat. they have changed the party
platform. the $2000much for stimulus. people that feel offended by the computer fraud to take 10% of whatever you get and throw it into this defense against this fraud. -- it it is not at top it is not a popular topic to bring up, but germany handed over the servers after the election and have the ephemeral data. host: craig kaplan, capitol hill producer, treating this morning that vice president-elect kamala harris will be administered the covid-19 vaccine at united medical center in bc -- d.c. she will do it on camera, get the vaccination. morning on that this c-span. are.
kurt. oligo thanks for take -- caller: thanks for taking my call. one thing i do not understand is, i am in agreement with $2000 payments to the people who really need it. however, there is a large number of people already on government assistance, such as myself. there are people on disability, people on welfare, people getting government checks, which is guaranteed income every month. why can't the people on those payments, their payments be reduced? wife andt my $600, my myself, we saved most of it. we areet this $2000, going to save three quarters of that because we are not in need of the money. there are people in great need of that money. $600 initial payment we
received months ago was rather in the make to people who needed it. $2000 is great for people that really needed it. i don't understand why people that are already on the goal -- dole, such as myself on social security and other programs, are entitled to get that $2000 they don't need. host: how do you respond to folks who say, i have been on social security and have not seen a cost-of-living adjustment on social security and expenses keep rising. expenses cover the expenses that are not covered by medicare, etc. of course it would help them, but i propose they get a reduced amount, not the full $2000. if they got half of that to help, that is fine. the majority of people on these
guaranteed incomes are not actually in dire need of the extra funds. there are other people who have been thrown out of work, their businesses have closed, they have kids at home, those of the people that are in need of this money. $2000 is great, but in the scheme of things, what is $2000 going to do over six months? it is not that big of a help. it is a help, but it is not going to cure anything. host: kurt in south carolina. listen to new york democratic congressman on why he supported passage of the cash act. [video clip] >> the effects of this pandemic have been cruelly uneven. unscathed, working remotely and still healthy. millions of others are awash in misery, unable to return to work or pay bills, even funeral bills
for lost loved ones. while the stock market has hit a new record, there are still bodies stored in refrigerator trucks. online retail and grocery stores broadway,g, airline, mom-and-pop store employees have been laid off, and life savings have been wiped out. ploy toident's cynical threaten the covid relief package to of secure his dark of night pardons has resulted in a fighters chance that we can pass this $2000 check legislation if we could only get mitch mcconnell to show empathy. , thenpass this bill immediately worked to send the billions necessary to save state and local governments before they fire police officers, teachers and frontline workers, which will result in more and employment checks from us and
financial ruin to those families. let's put americans back to work and build back better. we can do this if we remember why we are here. democrats and republicans recognize that outside of this beltway fantasyland, millions of americans are desperately pleading for our help. democrat fromzi, new york, part of the problem solvers caucus, which is typically moderate republicans and democrats that try to come together to compromise on these problems. listen to kurt schrader, democratic congressman, also a member of the problem solvers caucus, who spoke against the cached -- cash act. [video clip] >> this is an ineffective approach to aiding americans. it is a last-minute political maneuver by the president and extremists on both sides who
have been largely absent during months of hard negotiations. theirave chosen to tweet opinions instead of coming to the table to get aid into the hands of small businesses. in the last few weeks as holidays loomed and covid cases skyrocketed, my problem solvers caucus worked with both sides of the aisle to craft legislation that includes fetid programs like ppp and unemployment compensation that have been approved since the start of the pendant. -- start of the pandemic. i feel for those suffering hardship and look forward to working with my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to find ways to help provide relief. people who are making six-figure incomes have not been impacted by covid-19, do not need checks. we have had nine months to work on this. let's target those in need. host: kurt schrader, democrat,
one of two who voted against the cash act. dan lipinski of illinois also voted against it. republicans were also nays. some republicans joined democrats to approve. the senate, when they convene at noon, you can watch it on c-span2, they are expecting onck schumer to force a vote this $2000 check. louise in oklahoma. democratic caller. tell washington what you want them to do on this. that theseant to say people that -- [indiscernible] security be reduced, i
beg your pardon. i would like to see them out there live under $16,000 a year. if you reduce it, we won't have money. we get by just barely now and we for my car, it was down for over a year because i could not afford to repair it. i just got going. i need it for the doctors. host: ok. all right. jake sherman with politico this out thats tweeting senate leadership has shown little insured -- little interest in the $2000 check will. it is not entirely clear whether the bill will get the requisite 60 votes it needs to get to the chamber. 12 republicans would need to join with all the democrats.
marco rubio endorsed the bill, josh hawley, and ron johnson of wisconsin i am sure. senior republicans were skeptical they would garner 12 members with such a paltry vote in the house. make no mistake, this is a tough vote. for into c-span2 at noon action on the senate floor. joy in marysville, kansas. caller: good morning. opposing the $2000 checks these people, the more you give come the more they want. what'd they do with the last money they got? month --2400 a we get it now, complain later. it is a continuous thing.
it and don't go spend it on things you need. makee on $12,000 a year, i it. i am on social security. i think it is stupid. we are spending all this money and people are just going to continue to cry and the bone. -- cry and moan. it is a bunch of crab. --t: john in baltimore texas texts to say this is stupid. who wouldn't like $2000 to drop out of the sky? mike in miami. caller: i support the release. how're giving i don't know many billions of dollars to everybody else in the other building did. it seems we are always last on the totem pole. they can find money for everyone
else in the world except the people in this country. i think they should give us $2000 a month for the next 10 months. that way we can all bios a $20,000 refrigerator and fill it with ice cream. vote the aristocracy out. never reelect another person that has run for office. host: mike, will you get a check? caller: i don't know. i would like to see a bill go through congress that is just one thing on the bill. how come it is always 5000 pages of what is supposed to be a relief package? it is bs. i am tired of it. change the system or burn it down. host: jj. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call.
the $2000. i think we are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. we should get $2000 a month for six months. people are hurting. some people don't have any food. they can't pay their bills. businesses are shutting down. this is ridiculous. if these politicians in washington -- they are playing games with us. it is time that stopped and they start looking at the real issues. you don't have time to distinguish who needs it and who doesn't. the best thing to do for the next six months is give everyone $2000. we are going to pay it back in taxes. this is a crisis and it is time we get straight and stop the bickering in washington. business,ng care of take care of the people.
don't worry about the other countries. let them solve they own problems. it is time we take care of ourselves. you're doing a terrific job. host: will you get a check? caller: yes. i need it. host: what will you do with it? caller: pay bills. gas, light, all of this going up because of the cold months. is really that, this going to help. host: susan in texas. republican. do you support or oppose the checks? caller: i support the $2000 checks to americans. all of us need that. i also want to respond to the yo-yo that called in saying social security was a government assistance program. that is our money. ouraid in, along with employer, and that is what we
get back now. that isn't government assistance , then just being nice to us. it is offensive you would even think that. deserves, everybody $2000 right now, or we would not have food banks giving out food people who are in desperate need to eat. if you give us the money, we will put it back into the economy by buying our own food instead of going to a food bank. a food bank. it is ludicrous that the rich are not looking down, giving the poor people something. there are other countries -- other countries do not deserve the money. host: have you had to go to a food bank? caller: not myself, but i do know people who have. it is sad. it is just sad that we don't have money to go to the grocery
store ourselves. it would generate money into the economy if we were given our money for the food they need, right through their own grocery stores. it is common sense. host: we are going to return to this conversation in our last half an hour. will take axt, we closer look at what is in the $2.3 trillion spending package congress passed last weekend the president signed on sunday. that conversation with steve ellis from the group for taxpayers for common sense. later, the national league of cities executive director clarence anthony joins us to talk about how the coronavirus pandemic impacted u.s. cities and their budgets. ♪
>> stay with c-span, for our continuing coverage of the transition of power as president-elect joe biden moves closer to the presidency. with the electoral college votes cast from states across the country, join us on january 6, live, at 1:00 p.m. eastern for the joint session of congress to count the votes -- the votes and clear the winner. finally at noon, january 20, the inauguration of the 46th president of the united states. our live coverage begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern from the statehouse , to congress, to the white house. watch it all live on c-span, on the go at c-span.org, or listen using the free c-span radio app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us this morning is steve ellis, the president of taxpayers for common sense, to talk about the coronavirus
relief aid and the government spending bill the president signed a sunday night. mr. ellis, the headline for you of the president signing that package of bills? guest: overdue. it was a huge package bill that i heard somebody earlier in your program complaining about how so many things were jammed into it, but you have more than $900 billion in covid-19 relief, $1.4 trillion in government spending for funding government through the rest of the fiscal year, then you had a whole bunch of other pieces of legislation to count to the package. it was finally both because the fiscal year started on october 1 when congress had not gotten their job done, and secondly, the last major covid really package was march and april, and people are hurting, and we need to do this to help roost our economy and provide a lifeline to businesses.
host: what is an omnibus? guest: there are 12 separate spending bills that fund government. for the fiscal year. everything from agriculture to state and foreign operations, defense, homeland security, labor, health and human services, these variety of packages. they are supposed to be passed individually by each chamber and hammered out the differences, then passed to the president to get signed into law. what has been happening is, instead of doing these individually and on time, they jam them together at the end of the year, or in this case, at the end of the calendar year or a whole quarter year into this clear 2021. that is an omnibus. sometimes, you would get smaller packaged bills, called minibuses. this is 12 spending bills funding the government jammed into this package along with the
covid relief funding. host: what in the omnibus package that the president signed do you support? guest: we have concerns about certain parts of the omnibus. certainly, when you look at the funding for government, they have added more f-35 fighter jets to the defense department's budget, they continue to use the overseas contingency operations that avoids budget caps. we have concerns about some of the way the agricultural spending is designed. a variety of various things on the omnibus portion. as far as the covid-19 relief portion, we are supportive and recognize there is a need here. it is an interesting place to be a budget watchdog and talking about trillions of dollars out the door, but we are also in a very unique situation amid this pandemic. host: you are the president say i was on this but i'm sending a rescission package to congress.
explain what that is and how it works. guest: sure. 1974 budget control act, that really sets the budget process, one of the things a president can do is submit rescissions, line items that were in the spending bills that he would like to have rescinded, and basically removed, cut the funding. presidents have done this in the past. congress can ignore the package, which is what they have often done in the past, not that no rescission has ever gotten through, but it is not something very common or going to result in much in the way of savings. host: what is your take on the president's opposition some of the spending? do you agree with him? guest: i'm sure there are certain areas we would agree. i would have to see where his redlines are. one of the issues here, that so
much has been completed that you have two separate packages, this covid really package and a regular, annual spending bill. there's this whole talk about aid going to egypt or israel. yes, that was in the president's budget request. what he submitted to congress at the start of this whole process had a lot of this foreign aid, which is something we do as a nation, either through humanitarian reasons, human trafficking issues, counter narcotics, or in some cases, foreign military assistance. the governments does that has some sort of international interest for the united states, that we will get something back in our relationship with these countries or prevent issues like human trafficking and narcotics coming into our borders. is the problem with
having a package that has so much stuff jammed in, everything from things talking about tibet and water projects, energy legislation, tax breaks all crammed in along with the covid really funding. they should have been dealt with individually. host: can the country afford to thousand dollar checks to millions of americans? -- $2000 checks to millions of americans? guest: the recent score i saw -- $46462 $4 billion billion. we have to figure out how that's money will be allocated. they are testing for the $600 in the bill right now. we could afford $2000 checks if they were targeted appropriately, but it is something where we have to make sure we -- it is getting to the people who need it and will be spent and used in the economy and not something that a person saves.
not that i am against saving, but not when it is a handout from the government. wvir breaks down the --eshold saying you would be able to eligible that she would be eligible to receive the $600 payment. adjusted gross income up to $150,000 would receive $1200 or, if again, this cash act passed by the house is approved by the senate, $4000. they lower the threshold or increased the threshold i should say for these checks, do you think that makes sense? itst: we want to make sure is getting into the hands of the people that need it the most and are struggling. so certainly, as you move toward upper incomes, you want to phase it out. that is what the bill does, it gradually fades out as you increase your adjusted gross income.
if you are making $160,000 per year, depending on whether you have kids, where you live, that may well be important, but it also could be you would get it a little less than that. we have to keep it in context that it is $464 billion, estimated by the committee on taxation, the nonpartisan scorekeeper. that is something you have to be cognizant of, but not to play both sides, but i also think we have to have an economy for when the vaccines come through and we are able to fully open up. that is why we provide these lifelines to businesses and individuals. host: barbara in massachusetts sends us this text, i think it is disgusting anyone would save the stimulus money. into stimulus money. if you do not need it, donate to food banks. donate to small local charities. let's go to joe in ash, north carolina, independent.
you are on the air with steve ellis. caller: good morning. this is about taxpayer. i like the -- i would like a yes or no answer on this one and then i would go on, one more question. do they have a law on the books that takes all of the residual money left in the social security, old age fund, and all of the other medicaid, medicare, and other funds and put it in the treasury department or go ahead and put a special bond, that they put it back on the trust fund folks and do not pay it back, and it is on a balloon note they put 1% interest? yes or no? guest: no. i do not believe that is the case. there is the issue that we have a unified budget, so when you have surpluses in social security and medicare, that masks the budget deficit we are running this year, talking about
$3 trillion. that has been happening for years. all of that money is owed, and when you'd see people talking about net interest, that is the interest we pay to the public that owns the debt or other countries, or other people, but there is growth interest. growth interest includes the interest we are paying to the trust funds. in arlington, vermont. democratic caller. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. $2000: i support the checks people should get. host: ok? they should be -- you know, maybe -- i mean congress and senate should -- i've been hearing like they should raise it to $6,000. i think they should raise them. $2000 seems to little to me --
too little to me. guest: well right now, it is $600. as i said, doing the $2000, you are looking at $464 billion. you triple that, you are looking at $1.2 trillion. kneed out you want to the assistance. that is why it is such a tragedy the administration and congress rated until december to get something done, when something should have been done in the summer, and we could have needed the -- and it could be done appropriately. that is not what we are getting now. host: what are earmarks? guest: earmarks are narrow provisions lawmakers insert into legislation to fund particular projects. everything from the infamous bridge to nowhere to funding for
a science project in a specific area, road, museum. there are basically narrow interest items lawmakers a tribute to spending legislation. host: are there earmarks in the package the president signed sunday? whether it is the spending bills or coronavirus relief package. congresseta, in 2010, opted a moratorium on earmarks, and they basically, in the three years before that, they allowed earmarks, but then the sponsor of the earmark, the name had to be attached. so we knew who was asking for what. that moratorium was on the same batch of projects or using the same definition, so by congress's own definition, there are technically not earmarks in here. does that mean there are places
where lawmakers know where funding is going because they are getting money in the department of defense for their weapon system or getting it for a particular research item? yeah, i think there are things that have slipped in here, but not by the technical definition of what congress established as an earmark. host: new york times editorial board wrote that members in both chambers should facilitate bringing back earmarks, working to ensure the new system has maximum transparency and sufficient oversight. earmarks are not a magic cure for today'scure all hyper-polarized politics. there are likely, for instance, to convince -- members of the taxporate squad to back breaks. compromise could provide counterbalance to the partisan forces fueling rigidity and gridlock. your response? guest: i had a response britain
in the new york times. i wrote a letter to the editor that got printed. people are looking back with rose-colored glasses at some of the reforms in place, but in reality, there were not online social databases to understand who was getting what. we created that's. we used the documents congress did and created a database so people could understand that, for instance, the congressional quarterly, we used our database and award-winning story to find that the average black lawmaker and hispanic lawmaker got half democrats the average of rank-and-file member did -- or rank-and-file lawmaker did and even more than the average of public, even though they were in the majority party. less than half of what the other democrats got. i think you can look at this data and figure out why is this
the case. secondly, we should not have earmarks in programs established -- that actually have a merit-based system or formula system. those are people's projects, powerful lawmaker's projects cutting the line and getting ahead. when you also look at it, you can see the powerful lawmakers, the ones on the appropriation committee writing the spending bills, are getting the lion's share of the loot. you want to make sure you have a system in place that takes care of the needs of all lawmakers. you should not have earmarks to private companies. that has issues there. we saw lawmakers that traded their thin stripes for prison stripes. we saw the bridge to nowhere. you need to have some of these criteria and place. we also thought -- saw the government accountability office should evaluate 5% to
10% of earmarks each year to kiev they are returning -- to see if they are returning or performing as intended. there were 9000 disclosed earmarks for fiscal year 2010. it's not like they were not -- that huge amount that went up in the early 90's from three thousand, according to congressional research service. 3000,need to get -- according to congressional research service. we need to get controls in place if we return to the earmark era. i'm -- i'm not advocating for it, but there are problems that need to be addressed. lastly, it's important to recognize that as the editorial notes, earmarks are not magic pixie dust that makes everything go. since the 1974 budget system was created, the bill i mentioned before, all of the spending bills have been done on time, before the start of the fiscal year, four times. years,been more than 40
and only happened four times, so clearly there are other problems. in the interim of the moratorium, we have had bills passed, transportation bills, water project bills, and i don't know if earmarks would get the 2021 package done faster. the senate never passed a bill. that does not have anything to do with earmarks. host: edna in ohio. a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. guest: good morning, edna. caller: good morning. hi. i am about the relief package because there are people that are still trying to work. by workingg to get paycheck-to-paycheck, but there is the business that they work out also cuts ours as well. so cutting hours and cutting the employee's paychecks, it is hard to keep up with rent or anything. , ande five kids of my own
it is superhard. but i am making it through. but there are so many people out there so much worse off than me that it makes me upset to know that they are worried about paying money to overseas when they need to worry about the americans around here. and open their big eyes and realize and see the people on the streets, or with me, i'm barely holding on. it's not just handing out free money to everyone. everyone is not like that. everyone is trying to get through the best they can with what they have. edna.go ahead, caller: i just wish they would open their eyes and realize it freet everyone getting a
handout. not everyone is expecting that, but not everyone, it is not their fault this happened. i feel like toronto should pay us because it started from toronto in the first place. host: mr. ellis? guest: thanks, edna. i'm sorry things are tough on you, and i know things are tough on many of my fellow americans. this is a very difficult situation. congress is trying to act and trying to provide assistance through not just a lot of directon put on to the assistance, the $600, or the $360, but there is also billion in there for programs like the paycheck protection program, which are to small businesses to help keep people employed, keep them on the payroll. loansis economic injury in there, billions of dollars for that.
is also hundreds of billions of dollars -- there is also hundreds of billions of dollars for the unemployment insurance as well and an increased benefit in that area. tryingre ways they are to help people and provide a lifeline to get through this pandemic, to get to the other side, where we have an economy that can charge forward and can handle this. i think it is important to also look at scales and the difference in parts of government. i'm tackling that foreign aid issue, head-on, but we are talking about single digits, billions of dollars. we are not talking about hundreds of billions of dollars you see for the economic assistance, which again, i think it is critical. i appreciate your call and real emotion there, and concerned about fellow americans. in georgia, a republican. caller: good morning.
i'm so glad we mentioned earmarks. i am of the mindset earmarks should be a thing of the past. whether it is a democrat or republican earmarks. i wanted to mention, i saw on the news, i live in south georgia not far from tallahassee, florida. there are two universities down there. one is su and one is penn university. on the news special, they were reporting that penn you had been awarded $100 million. i would have the same reaction with fsu. this is not a minority thing. these schools, all you have to go back to wherever you went to school and i can tell you they have overbilled, overstaffed, ade things -- spent significant amount of money making things nice, and then you have $111 million go to a
school. that is too much money. i saw the dean on the school saying they would use it to refinance debt they already had. when you refinance, that means you did not have money to pay for something. i'm old school. i think you should pay more as you go and be prepared for bad things. down here, covid did not hit us until june or july. that is when it was really bad. there is no way they put $111 million in. if they did, why did we not give them some? i think that is not a good thing. thank you. guest: thanks, scott. i graduate from the united states coast guard academy, so i don't think we were overstaffed or overbilled. but i could take your point. know the specifics of this particular instance, but there is money in the bill
generally on education, including k-12 and not just universities. you have to look at the significance. host: i will let you continue but i will note for our viewers, $82 billion for schools and colleges. guest: great. so yeah, i think these are institutions that have been hit as well, though through , students notion attending because -- are attending online so they're not staying in dormitories but they still have faculty and costs. it depends on how the money is being allocated, how it is being used. areeges and universities facing this extraordinary pandemic as well and have real challenges. in this case, one of the points by edna, she was talking about how it is not these people's fault. in some cases, we are asking universities and colleges, and businesses, to close their doors
and turn away business because it is a public other emergency. that is part of the reason government is in gauging it -- in gauging in it. it's not necessarily the fault of these individuals, colleges, universities, or businesses. that put government into tier four, to provide assistance. host: the color brings up the pay-as-you-go philosophy. what is that, when it comes to congress, and does that apply to either this omnibus spending bill or the coronavirus relief package? , or pay-as-you-go, was basically where it's meant the funding had to be offset by other cuts. basically, you are trying to make sure everything was paid for as you went forward. that paygo, went by the -- paygo went by the wayside around 2010, but there is paygo that deals with mandatory spending.
i mentioned funding for all of government is $1.4 trillion. that is just the discretionary side of the ledger. that is just a side congress decides how much the state department or department a vegan she -- department of energy, or other department get each year. then there is the mandatory side, which deals with medicare and social security most notably, and that is $3 trillion. that is where you also have paygo implications. as far as this package, they exempt both of them from any budget rules, and generally appropriation bills because congress is making the decision to spend the money. host: andrew in oklahoma city, democratic color. caller: i wanted to bring a list -- caller. caller: i wanted to bring a little reality to the show. for all the republicans calling in that are against the additional money, what would jesus do? this is -- our country has been
an embarrassment to the world on the handling of covid. we had a president who lied to us that has gotten hundreds of thousands of people dead that did not necessarily need to die because we were on a -- instead of this viewing like we had a war in the country against the virus, it was all 50 states, do your own thing. in oklahoma, we still do not have a mask mandate because we have a republican running the show. as to the paygo and all of that stuff and educational point your guy left out, the democrats help thee paygo act to fiscal -- help with fiscal responsibilities. mitch mcconnell got rid of it so he could pass a multi trillion dollar tax cut that everybody in the middle class got anywhere year,500 to $1000 per while people in trump's tax bracket got $1 billion. people like this guy, he is
about watching the pennies until it comes to enriching the filthy rich. if you look at the numbers, the billionaire class has cleaned up during this pandemic. you have people that are homeless, children that are hours areand billion making out like bandits. -- billionaires are making out like bandits. if you want to be smart, in georgia, vote the republicans out. they do not have your back. mitch mcconnell passed the tax reform in six weeks, and a major tax overhaul is six weeks that left the middle class out. that is not what trump ran on, but he is a liar. thank you. host: mr. ellis, your response? guest: sure, andrew. we opposed the 2017 tax cut because we felt we were promised copperheads of tax reform we had not seen in 30 years and we wanted to make sure we had real tax reform and we were
originally promised a deficit neutral tax reform. the caller is right that the republicans did get rid of some of the paygo rules, but that was well before the 2017 tax cut. but it is absolutely correct that that was the party that got rid of that. int: we will go to david west virginia, an independent color. good morning to you. caller: good morning -- independent caller. good morning to you. caller: good morning. hundreds of billions of dollars in assistance, isn't the best way to give the assistance to $2000 for each individual? that's can be taxed anywhere from 30% to 50% that goes back and your state and local governments. that is the way to give them relief without giving it to the states.
also, people keep saying, we have to pass this debt, this 27 cholla dollar debt to our children and so on. $27e it is hocus-pocus -- trillion to our children and so on. while it is hocus-pocus. it will go up every year trillions of dollars. that will never be paid off. we will not pass it on to our children, we will reach a point where we will have to default. plain and simple. i appreciate your comment. guest: thank you, david. i certainly hope that is not the case, that we end up ever defaulting on our debts, because the full faith and credit of the u.s. treasury is why we are able to run these deficits, because we have such low interest rates and we are the reserve currency for the world. also, it is important to notice it is not necessarily about paying back 27 trying dollars at one point, it'd -- $27 trillion
at one point, it is about the debt we are paying on it. last year, we pay 364 billion dollars in interest payments -- $364 billion in interest payments. that is expected to go over to $600 -- $600 billion. that is a huge amount of money dedicated to servicing our debt. that is one of the reasons why you want to get in more control with a debt to gdp ratio. as far as a to the states, there is aid to the states in the package, but it is more targeted . so it is for vaccine distribution, for purchasing the vaccine, some infrastructure funds and things along those lines, billions of dollars, but it is not necessarily, and you can say this is triple up --
trickle up economics to the state. goes to thed and state. that is not an efficient way of distributing the money especially when you have needs and you are making sure it is targeted effectively. host: a democratic color. caller: i have one comment -- caller. caller: i have one quick comment. i want to echo the gentleman from oklahoma. he is right. unfortunately, the spending and stimulus bill was politicized in the summer. i work in the hospital it -- hospitality and tourism industry. hotels that did not close are left open. people did not come into the door and fly. it was not their fault. all of these people laid off, everyone who worked rent-a-car door hotels, the hotels are open but people are not traveling. so it's not their fault and should be compensated. you spoke about those lawmakers that are black and -- represent
black and latino communities. with thethat balance states that mcconnell and some of those in the south that do not pay as much into the federal budget have -- budget, how does that play into affect, and how is mcconnell able to have earmarks in his state where he does not contribute. lastly, what is the relationship between china and the united states? are we borrowing money for them, are they financing the united states, just so there is clarity? guest: sure. you packed a lot in there. when i mentioned it was lawmakers themselves who were people black -- either black or latino, it was an analysis of the 2008 spending bill, and that they received less than half or in the case of black lawmakers, half of what the rank-and-file
-- the other democrats, the white democrats did. then again, less than the republicans did. some of it is that, under 60/40ks, generally, a split between the majority party and minority party, so certain lawmakers, and senator mcconnell is also on the appropriations committee where they wrote the bill, so he certainly knows how to get the funding. also, a very senior member of the appropriation committee in the house, carol rogers, also from kentucky. they were able to get a lot of the funding. lastly, to your point about bonds, thesee sell are available to anybody, so there are foreign countries that have reserves in our treasury. share ofte china's them has decreased in recent
years, at least on a year-to-year basis, but that is part of how we finance. it also has a benefit in one china is it means interested in a stable united states economy, because they don't want to see their resources or holdings diminish as well. host: pat in new jersey, republican. caller: hi. i'm not opposed to any of the coronavirus spending, but given the money we have to pay out for this omnibus is a perfect illustration. wehad to spend money -- do have to spend money in this year's budget for the smithsonian or foreign aid programs? why can't they say there's emergency spending to deal with, this has to wait a year. thank you. guest: budgets are about choices and priorities. issues, thatf the
taxpayers for common sense flagged, it is about where you flag -- basically, they build off of what was there before, year-over-year, so there is not a lot of ability to shift gears. also flagged, you are talking about -- and not that that is not a ton of money to me, but you are talking about $25 million to the smithsonian and hundreds of billions of dollars in the covid package. i think that is something to keep in mind as well. host: ron is in new hampshire, and independent. you are on the air with mr. ellis. if they had $900 billion in this bill, if they were to send that to the people instead of spending it on their special interests and although the people -- and all of the people whatbribed, do you know
that would be? by 200ide $900 billion million people, $4500 for the people. 4500 people. instead, we got $600. if you included the seven chilean dollars the fed put into the -- $7 trillion the fed put into the stock market, if you add that up and divided it by the people, each person would get 40 to $50,000. that is how much they spent. instead, we get $600. that is outrageous. host: mr. ellis, has there ever been, are you aware of any time in u.s. history where you have had the government in an emergency situation like this spend, on a monthly basis, or write checks on a monthly basis to americans? we have had callers mention canada, giving canadian citizens $2000 per month during this pandemic. --st: i am not aware, greta
greta, of any case where they have done any ongoing basis. obviously, there is on a point in assistance and there are food stamps, but it isn't something i'm aware of in the past. the cares act was a $2 trillion package and there was additional ppp funding that came and a $900 billion package here. that is basically almost a whole year of the federal government being spent on this pandemic. i think it is important people that the government is providing this assistance and we have to provide a balancing act. to the last callers comments, the money like this, the paycheck protection program, that is to keep people employed. that is not supposed to line the their ledger.es',
it is supposed to money going out the door to their employees, suppliers, and vendors to keep them going. there is also unemployment funding in here as well. those are all packages that take up most of the funding in here. joshua in raleigh, north carolina. democratic color. i'm so glad -- caller. caller: i'm so glad you brought up unemployment in the federal programs supposed to be helping people. for the majority of this year, you turn around and couldn't even get on the website to get on employment. there are people right now, when they turn around and try to get the unemployment, that they had to go through several hearings, which they were basically denied. how is that government assistance in that general sense? you also mentioned priorities.
we are spending trillions of dollars -- there are other ideas. there was the fair tax, which would mainly tax people who bought consumer goods like food. you would be taxed a lot less. if you bought a yacht, you would be taxed more. i would like your comments on these other ideas. plus the government turned around and spent $4 trillion in six months, and for years we heard we cannot wipe the student that, because it would be too expensive. care to comment? guest: thank you, joshua. there is $120 billion in the package for increased on then --nt insurance, which is an increase of $300 and extending that. i have heard and understand there have been problems with people getting their unemployment insurance, and that is something the government has got to fix.
to contact their public officials. we have athe tax, progressive tax that taxes income. we could have that debate. i don't think it is -- i don't think the mist of a pandemic is the time to have that debate. inhink it would have been 2017 when we talked about tax reform. that was something that was deficit neutral that you could get a better system and cleanup the code littered with all sorts of special interest provisions. that is not what we got. we got, like i said, a deficit financed tax cut that has also put us in a more difficult spot. it is the same thing with increasing the budget caps in 2021 without9, offsets, which put us in a bigger hole that when we do have to respond to something like this pandemic, there in in worse
situation. e- in a worst situation -- wors situation. we are not in a better situation to surge -- to protect a surge like this. host: it democratic color. good morning to you. caller: good morning -- caller. good morning to you. caller: good morning to my brothers and sisters in america out there. i support this bill, however i think the timing sucks. the timing they were in a go -- the fact they were negotiating this bill for months, down to the last day, and all of a sudden he is throwing in $2000. he is doing this to stick it to mitch mcconnell for acknowledging joe biden as the president-elect. that is all this is about. this is a game to donald trump. into it.kering us all
he knows good and well mitch mcconnell is not going to pass that. it's impossible. it is fiscal irresponsibility, and i am so tired of this man. why don't you guys invoke the 25th amendment? that is what we need to do. donald trump is off the chain. host: surround a is referring to the house patching -- passing the cash act late afternoon which would strike, in the covid $900 billion covid relief bill, $600 and make it $2000. what she says is she does not believe the senator mitch mcconnell, the republican leader of the senate, will allow that to come to a vote in the senate. mr. ellis, you know the house -- the senate convenes at noon, and the senate minority leader chuck schumer says he will try to force a vote on this. mr. ellis, do you have thoughts? guest: there's a lot of power in
being the senate majority leader as far as setting the agenda and what comes up on the floor. also, anything like this is probably going to require 60 votes for passage, and the democrats are far short of that. they would have to pick up republican support. even if you put it on the floor, there are a couple republicans who have already spoken in favor of that. senator rubio, senator holly believe from missouri. but that is a far cry short of 60 votes. it all depends on how senator to playl wants this. the timing is terrible in that they should have been doing smaller packages more frequently that can mete out the assistance and be more targeted in this package that got jammed onto the omnibus. and we should not have any omnibus. we should have gotten this done before the start of the fiscal
year. it hurts agencies to operate on continuing resolutions, funded at the level they were last year. they cannot make certain decisions about how to allocate funds and they get jammed. sometimes, we don't get these packages done well into the second quarter of the fiscal year. so you are creating waste there. it is something that needs to be done differently. lastly, it invites consensus about government when you see 20 additional bills tacked onto this package, including a big water projects bill, a text package of these targeted tax extenders. there is package in the bill about tibet. montana water rights, it is all sorts -- it is all over the map. i agree that this is a terrible way to run a railroad. host: for viewers that want to learn more about federal spending, go to the taxpayers for common sense website. it is taxpayers.net.
you can follow them on twitter @taxpayers and steve ellis is on xpayersellis. guest: thank you. host: up next, we talked to national league of cities director clarence anthony who joined us to talk about how the pandemic has impacted u.s. cities and their budget. ♪ >> with covid-19 relief legislation approved by congress and vaccines are ministered, use our website, c-span.org/
coronavirus, to follow the federal response to the outbreak. follow our searchable video any time on demand and track the spread with interactive maps. all at c-span.org/coronavirus. on tuesday, january 5, the balance of power in the senate will be decided by the winners of the two georgia runoffs, david perdue and kelly leffler are defending their seats in the gop's control of the chamber. democratic challengers are jon .ssoff and john were off hear from the candidates in the final candidates -- final races of 2020. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is clarence anthony the ceo of national league of cities
thisto talk about how pandemic impacted cities and their budget. how will this $900 billion relief package help u.s. cities? >> first of all ash guest: first of all, thank you for this opportunity to talk about what is happening in cities and villages across america. what we were looking for an stimulus bill was money directly to state and local governments, to be able to assist the frontline leaders, who are on the streets every day in the neighborhoods and associations and supermarkets talking about -- talking to residents about what is happening in their life. we are more than disappointed. we are just angry because there is no question those dollars going to small businesses and housing, and other programs, are
in the $82 billion going to universities and schools. we think that is important. we also know it is important to be able to get money directly to those state and local governments there every day delivering, and their police departments, ems. honestly, we did not get anything directly to help us respond even more effectively to the impact on the pandemic on local governments. we are just disappointed. host: clarence anthony is the former mayor of south bay, florida for 24 years. the former president of national league of cities, the nl c. how would you describe the budgets of u.s. cities during this pandemic? the budgets have been
devastated. we are responsible for making the pandemic response is managed in an effective manner. governmentsf local saw they were going to have a major impact on their budget. what we saw was there was not only a 21% increase on the expenditures, we also saw there was a 17% decrease in revenues. what that caused us to do was gave us a look at our budget, which we are required to balance. we are not like the federal government who prints money. we have to balance our budgets every day, every year. the 17%saw was lostditures and 21%
revenue, we so we had to cut police service, cut programs essential to the delivery of needs of our community, had to delay infrastructure investments , and when we looked at the number of jobs that are projected to be lost between 2020 and 2022, we are looking at hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost. that is not helping anybody. anyone that knows anything about economics knows that the local level, the basic things, the city and towns, and villages, involved in the economy. they will be the ones that bring us even quicker back. congress promised us i would say
a christmas miracle. what they did in every stocking of every mayor and council member in america, was they basically placed a lump of clay there, with no ability to be able to help this economy come back. money --t the host: what about the money in this $900 billion relief package? you are looking at $6,000, potentially $2000, for adults. and money if you have -- $600, potentially $2000, for adults. $284 billion for the paycheck protection program, $82 billion for schools and colleges. doesn't this help cities? guest: it does. it helps the local economy, the small business dollars and there. -- in there. it helps those trying to get started or maintain. there is no question they are
able to pay their bills and mortgages. that is important to the local economy. the local government response, though, is different. ton you think about the need keep the water running, to give the water systems running in local communities, to be able to establish programs for feeding and distribution in local communities, that is done out of the budget, the pockets of the cities. i think america needs to recognize that maybe we only see it as a local government, but it is a business. it provides a service, and that is based upon the revenues that are created and support we would expect for the work we are doing from the federal government. we don't have a partner at this point.
we are just upset and disappointed, because we found this became very political. democrat, republican, we saw where the republicans did not want to give money to the cities. because of politics. the democrats promised they would fight to the end around getting money to local governments. negotiations occurred, and we were left direct funding. there was no direct funding for governments. the basic reason why we were pushing for this is, if we are going to be responsible for the ofagement and implementation these initiatives in our community, we need resources to do that. much money were local governments asking for? guest: we were asking for, in
the original bill, $250 billion. over a two year. -- two year period. that would go to both cities and counties. we were fighting for that, because every day my phone rings or i get any email from a mayor saying we are going to have to cut jobs. we are going to have to cut programs. we need help from the local governments. from the federal government. think -- manyimes times, americans think of the big cities, chicago, new york cities. these are middle, and small sit -- middle sized and small cities impacted more than the large cities in america. the towns and villages in georgia, the towns and villages in florida where i am from, are
also hurting even more, because there is a greater increase in the small cities from the pandemic. and they are not able to really distribute and manage the resources of the community, because they do not have a federal partner who is giving funding for them to do so. host: according to brookings, state and local governments, employment represents 13% of the total u.s. employment, more than the federal government, and tax revenues represent 9% of gdp. clarence anthony? guest: yes. i think what we are looking at is we are going to see where, over the next couple years, we will see $98 billion for a budget gap in local government''
budgets. i just think that is a weponsible to knowledge that play such a major impact on the nation's economy, but yet, congress has not recognized that. lets me be clear, we will keep doing our job, because that is what the local communities expect of us. they are going to continue to call us to do our job. they will not understand the federal government did not provide direct funding. i want the american people to understand that we, as city leaders, town and village leaders all over america, need a partner in the federal government. and we did not get one. in addition, we got to recognize that we're the ones that will be the ones that have to deliver it.
america ist, if going to return its economy back to pre-covid times, it starts at the local level. and citizens expect we will do that, and i hope the federal government will do that, in the future. host: let's get to phone calls. this is how we the divide -- we divide lines, in the city, (202) 748-8000. municipal employee, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. oryou live in rural america all others, dial in at (202) 748-8002. caller: thank you very much, good morning. you bring us unfiltered news and that is priceless. mr. anthony, thank you for doing what you do.
i make a plea to the state of georgia, america needs you. up new administration coming will not be able to effectively pass the bills they need to help of rev.ut the help warnock and jon ossoff. the extentir help to that the president elect has made advertisements to promote of jonnda with the help ossoff and rev. warnock. please, georgia, show up for america. thank you. clarence, you have any thoughts on what he had to say? as the national league of
cities,. we are not democratic or republican. . cities,artisan toward that is the bottom line. the electionter and the president is sworn in they will get to work on a new stimulus bill that will provide direct funding for cities, towns, and villages. the cases are rising across the country and they are not going down. local governments are rushing to put infrastructure in place to distribute the vaccine to residents. an important part in this moment of bringing our nation back. when the election is over in georgia and they get back to , all what we are expecting citizens are expecting, they will focus on the health and safety of our nation.
again, most citizens don't look to their federal leaders to do that. them in the grocery store, they see them out exercising and they want a response now. all we are asking is pretty federal government to do their job and participate with us. host: according to the hill newspaper, disbelief package includes $20 billion for vaccine purchase, $8 billion to distribute the vaccine, and an additional $20 billion for testing. at the local level. . is that enough to cover the infrastructure you're talking about for cities? to recover from the pandemic? -- to recover from the pandemic? guest: i think all of those programs are important to get
america safe and healthy. what i think it's going to happen with those dollars is it will become political. what we are saying is that yes, those dollars going to the state level for distribution is important. they need to get down to the closest and most trusted level of government and that is cities, towns, and villages. the cares act sent money to the cities with the top population. some of it never got down to the local level. hoping that through the passing of this bill, even the distribution and coordination, there would be language saying it gets to the counties and cities which really need to be managed. i don't know yet if that will
happen in a quick fashion. that is what we would have wanted to get it down to the most local level in our government system. host: we will go to sarah in hanover, virginia. forer: thank you so much "washington journal". i am a senior caretaker. i have had more time to spend behind the tv during covid and watch something that matters. watching the legislators make laws on the floor. if people are not doing that, please take time to do that. you learned so much about how the legislation is made but also you are not getting just the media spin on it. you're actually getting your legislators on the floor speaking for you.
that is what matters. what i would like to address -- i am in virginia. money.eryone wants state -- i wouldpandemic like for you to answer me a question. how could anyone justify spending millions of dollars taking down statues? guest: i am not sure if that is a question i can respond to on behalf of cities, towns, and villages. that is a local decision and not a national decision. the community, the mayor, the city council members and officials that lead those communities make those decisions . impact ofs on the
local government and the fact that cities, towns, and villages are the ones on the forefront of sure the housing programs, the moratoriums, the distribution, all of those things are what i'm focused on. you would need to talk to your local folks in your community about statue removal. host: we will go to sam next in michigan. you work for the city, what do you do? caller: i used to work for the city of saint augustine beach in florida. they never let us forget that in the city are what made it work.
if they didn't have taxes, the city wouldn't work. beach is hotels and restaurants. businessesall detail -- they cater to tourists. if you don't have that income, the city want function. manager, without him i would not be where i am today. guest: thank you so much for that acknowledgment of what local governments do every day. sam is right. especially in tourism, our communities whether they are rural or urban communities have had to shut down. inse businesses are hurting a substantial way.
there are dollars in this stimulus program that provide relief for them. subsidies, lexington, south carolina, for example created a local funding program for small businesses. budgets and own that is what local governments have to do. we can't wait on the federal government but we deserve a partner. host: patrick is in chicago. good morning to you. caller: good morning. host: patrick, you are breaking up. i'm going to have to ask you to call in. let's go to marcus in shreveport, louisiana. caller: good morning. host: turned on your television, turn down the volume and talk and listen through your phone.
are you with us, marcus? folks, you have got to turn down the television. listen and talk to the phone. tom in florida. hi, tom. caller: my television is muted. irony.d to point out the back in the day, when the taxpayers filled out chrysler and it was a good thing to do because their back was strong. poa --ernment bailed out ..o.a. -- boa the rationale is that they were
too big to fail yet there were some republicans not wanting to give these stimulus checks to the average american family. like the average american family is small enough to fail. if the small family fails, who's going to buy from boa? host: clarence anthony? guest: i think that makes sense that as we supported the private pastr corporations in the and even through other provisions in the stimulus bill that we find ways to support the local governments. the bailout word i think is a misnomer for what we are asking for. that is not what we are asking for. we are asking for financial aid to be able to assist with the
services and needs of the local community and also to support us and what we have been doing. pnfs have been out there responding on streets and neighborhoods. our public works employees have been working to coordinate the distribution and management. our police are out there every day. what is making me nervous even more are the stories i am reading nationally about the impact of covid-19 on our fire and police departments where they are contracting the virus at 30% or 14% of their -- up -- theirpercent or 14% of workforce. have dollars for that over time and respond to the
health needs of our community. we are asking for support so we can help all of our citizens be able to get healthy again. heart to see the impact on people of color internation where they are dying three times higher than any other population in america -- then the white population in america. this is not just data, these are jobs and people who are losing their lives. the question is who is responding to it on a daily basis. it is local leaders and our employees. that is why we are asking for this, we are not asking for a bailout. you respond to tony in florida who sends this text to say "there is no money tree in washington. local governments can finance
their shortfalls through bonds." guest: i am getting a lot of calls for my friends of florida which i appreciate. let me say this, most of the time when you look at municipal bonds it is associated with products like wastewater products or infrastructure projects. distribution the or the testing or the response from police and ems. i think local governments can and will do that, no question. but when you think about the people who are hurting i day to day basis trying to pay their mortgage or put food on their table, that is not a bond issue. a bond issue is based upon the ability to pay it back on revenue that is generated by that facility whether it is a
water waste facility. those are two separate things. the only other option which i don't think is a good option is to try to raise taxes. why would we raise taxes on people who are already hurting? perspective onur that so i can clear it up. it is not a tool for helping us to address this issue. comes fromer text don who says "i am a farmer and variability is part of my life. i have drug years that don't cover my loan. i live on hope there will be better years to recover. in the meantime, i have to make adjustments for my budget limitations. maybe you need to manage for nature's ups and downs in life. your excuse this pandemic is not your fault, but it is no more an excuse that droughts are my fault." i think that is right and
i agree. i hope that you're okay and that there is no drought this year. hope we don't see another pandemic like this in our lifetime forever in our nation -- or ever in our nation. but it is here and local governments on the front lines. we will balance our budgets because we are required to do that. hope, hope is not a plan. hope is a vision. our vision is that we are hopeful that congress will recognize the role of local governments. if you get these calls like i do every day for these emails with people crying and asking where are we going to -- how are we
going to be able to continue to manage and provide support to our citizens as mayors and council members, and i don't have that answer without direct dollars from the federal government. we are going to balance our budget but it should not take us having to be able to cut all the programs that are necessary to do that. host: cory in iowa. caller: good morning. subject i want to raise is that social security member -- social security benefits is money they put in working their entire lives. it is not a government welfare program.
congress should not have dip their fingers into that program and they would not be broke. package, wemulus need to get to the lowest of income people first. a minimum wage, you have no buffer and no savings. your living hand to mouth. the stimulus package should go to the lowest income people first and go down a sliding scale. the more money you make, the less stimulus you should receive a $75,000 a year income bracket -- for anybody that makes $75,000 a year in rural iowa is making a lot of money. the maximum income you can get through our state, you have to
make less than $1200 and months. that is just over $15,000 a year. betweena big difference $15,000 a year and $75,000. host: what is your question or your point for mr. anthony? everybody is as needful as the minimum-wage people that are hurting right now. $2000imulus package is but not everybody is in need of that. host: got it. mr. anthony, your thoughts? i think that is the way the bill is written. from a local government perspective, we think it is important to try to get money in the hands of people who support their families. we need to make sure all the
residents are getting the support they need as it relates to the 600 -- $600 to $2000. i think it would be important to get money in the hands of residents as soon as possible. able tont them to be pay their bills and maintain support for their families. host: eli in florida asks this, aren't governments using the municipal loan program? put low loans that would the ownership back to the local taxpayer to pay back in the future versus having federal cross-state taxes pay for local needs?"
guest: that program is a very difficult program essentially for small cities to be able to guarantee they can infect repay those dollars which is at a low interest rate. as a matter of fact, i think there is a population requirement associated with it. don't quote me on that. cannot apply for that program. no moreve only been than 10 to seize -- 10 cities all over american -- all over america who have applied and been approved for that program. it is not one that is available to all cities throughout america. it is only available to larger cities. host: darrell in north carolina. caller: good morning, this is darrell.
concernedy, i am about the idea of not funding local government. there is a contradiction there in the contradiction is we don't want to fund local government because they are cities and states. they are "largely blue." when you say those things it is ridiculous. if you're talking about defunding the police, when you don't have local governments, when you don't have state governments, when you don't have local people, you are defunding the police. thank you for that tostion and the opportunity respond to that. at the national league of cities, we are nonpartisan.
as i said earlier, we are not democratic, we are not republican leaning. we are partisan to cities. as we look at those policies you areed about, our leaders the ones working every day to address the public service issues related to the police department. what we want to do is reimagine our police departments, not defund them. we want to be able to talk about the responsibility of the police department. the responsibility is to protect and serve all of the residents. right now, our police departments are responding to mental health issues, social service issues. sure there are dollars put into the budgets and states and federal governments to be able to do that.
there are moneys put into the budget or into the stimulus bill that relates to community relations which is important. i'm not contradicting myself. what i am saying is let's recognize who is actually doing the work and who is responding on the ground every day. that is your city leaders, that is not your federal leaders. that is not your state leaders. that is your mayors, council members, and others who work for your local government. host: sarah in virginia. you work for the city, sarah? i am a-- caller: medicaid care worker, nine dollars and $.70 per hour. $.70 --dollars and $9.70 per hour.
i am in that catch-22. much money hole too to qualify for medicaid assistance. -- i make too little to survive. i did call in earlier but i was not able to hear your response. questionike to ask my in a different form. during the pandemic, we saw amounts of writing and other things that were produced by other things that happened after the pandemic. heard that time, we cities and states say we are backing off, we are letting them go, we are not going in. weare not using our police
paid for to address the issue, get it cleaned up, stop the writing and destruction. here -- to stop the rioting and destruction. people virginia, we had breaking windows and businesses. a window cost money. cleaning something off of a building cost money. the states and local governments were putting money into all of to clean thes -- the cities backup. how can we spend so much money doing those things and in some where they were saying to the federal government to please come in and clean this up today. host: i think we know your point.
clarence anthony, do you have any thoughts about the cost of the rioting we saw the summer on budgets?ities' guest: this pandemic has exposed a lot of disparities in america. disparities economically, jobs, educational levels in america. i talked about it a little bit earlier. and hispanicsans are contracting the disease at a higher level than any other group and dying three times quicker than might -- then white americans. we saw the horrific murder of george floyd in minnesota. when you start compiling all of pandemic, thethe
acknowledgment that people of color are being killed at a high -- i'md you look at going to use the protests against those disparities. allame at a time where we as americans were trying to figure out where we are going as a nation. then you look at the cost of , as sarah talked about, the impact of the small needs.es and others' the responses were done by cities and city leaders and their budgets. that is our responsibility.
we had to respond to the protests and try to manage that protest. we could just say to send in federal leaders. i hope america will look at this as an opportunity. racism beingtemic exposed, institutional racism being exposed, what the national league of cities cease is how to reimagine -- to look at those data points and say these equity points cannot continue to exist and our municipal leaders are going to respond to those by looking at the gaps and creating initiatives that will include all americans. that every citizen that lives in that community feels they can call that place home, a place
they feel comfortable walking down the street, that they know the police are there to protect and serve. sarah, that is the role of municipal leadership and that is the role we will play in the future. host: thank you very much for the conversation. guest: thank you on behalf of the national league of cities. be safe and healthy in 2021. host: you can follow the national league of cities if you go to nlc.org. after the break, we will return to the conversation from earlier. the house voted to boost stimulus payments to $2000. do you agree or disagree with their move? starton the screen, dialing in and we will get your thoughts in a minute. ♪
watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's television cable companies in 1979. today, c-span is brought by these companies to the public as a public service. "> "washington journal continues. passed a move to boost this payments to $2000. democratscans joined to approve that legislation. senatees turned to the
where they convene today at noon. you will be able to watch the senate floor on c-span2, 12:00 p.m. eastern. you can listen with the free c-span radio app or follow on our website, c-span.org. what will the senate do? chuck schumer put out a statement after the house approved those direct payment "following the bipartisan support, tomorrow i will move to pass legislation to deliver to americans to thousand dollar emergency checks. every senate democrat is for this relief which can be approved tomorrow if no republicans block it. leader mcconnell ought to make sure republicans don't stand in the way of meeting the needs of american workers and families who are crying out for help." political reports that chuck
schumer will try to pass the bill by unanimous consent today but republicans are expected to object. gop senators have rejected higher stimulus checks unless there is cooperation from all 100 senators, it would take several days to set up a vote on the proposal. it is all occurring ring what should be a holiday break for congress." the hill reports "no republican senator have said they would reject schumer's efforts. the democratic leaders expect to fall short after ron johnson, republican of wisconsin, bought two attempts under this month to pass a second round of $1200 checks." what do you think? do you think the senate should take up these $2000 payments?
republican,ginia, you are up first. america,ood morning merry christmas. i think the u.s. government, the states and localities have been well-informed about the discomforts, the working poor, the working poor and middle class are suffering. i think they have shown their in how ineffective they are in helping people on the ground. these big bills that come down embarrasses those of us who are aware of the disparities whether it be health or education. the american worker is wounded. we are a wounded workforce. it has been self-inflicted.
job"is not an "on the accident. this was our federal government not doing what it is supposed to be doing. randy, will you get this check? caller: probably not. i did not get the first stimulus. i had to close my business down when they shut the schools down. schoold in and out of with community health programming. for-profit business. i am down found it that not for-profit businesses are having to give out federal state money to for-profit business is to continue to work. it does not make a whole lot of sense to me. host: here is the criteria for
receiving a check according to wbir's website. less you wouldor be able to receive what is now the $600 payment. if the senate passes the cash act, that could be $2000. couples who have an income of two 150 thousand dollars would $1200 now or $4000 if they pass the cash act. thanu reported making more $75,000, you would receive partial payments dropping by five dollars for every $100 above the income limits. if you are going to get this check, whether $600 or possibly $2000, call in and tell us what
you plan to do with it. if you received for first round of checks back in march, let us know how you spent that money. steve sherman reports that the gop has shown little interest in -- the 60bill and votes it needs to get through the chamber. republicans need to join with democrats. marco rubio endorsed the bill, josh harley -- josh hawley is but rongreet with it, johnson would be against it. -- with such a bill in the house. make no mistake, this is a tough vote for republicans. 44 republicans in the house checks,d these $2000
130 a post. david in los angeles, an independent. good morning. david, are you with us? caller: yep. against thefor or payments for americans? caller: no doubt, for. attempt toor your point out to the fellow who .alled in on social security social security recipients don't need -- what you pointed out is a cost limit. i am social security retired. i live in california, this is the most expensive state in the union. what i get on social security would not cover my rent.
what we have here, and you attempted to reason with that fellow, and the conversation with the lady about the rioting and you had the conversation about drought and stuff. this denotes a mentality in the land that make it -- that makes it possible for the kind of food lines, homeless people, and any assorted variety of other ills in this nation. the kind of hard heartedness of a particular segment of our society is making it possible for the fall of this nation. unity in philosophy when you don't have unity in compassion in humanity.
you lose that, what we have are the kinds of comments that if you listen to them and study what they are suggesting, it is to which callousness all of us should not be having to tell our government that the doors are propped. these are our tax dollars. these are our tax dollars and they have no problem getting that money to their paymaster. all of themtioned are responsible for the state of responsen this inept to this tragedy we are expecting. everybody that is in office today should be kicked out of office if this is their notion of how to govern our nation.
host: let's listen to the speaker of the house yesterday on the floor asking members to vote for the cash act. [video clip] >> it is a simple vote. our goals have been to crush the who helpnor our heroes us crush the virus, and put money in the pockets of the american people. today we will be doing that. legislation will be a lifeline for millions of americans to improve on the previous bill by including dependence and assuring people with families or adults with elderly family members can receive relief. votelicans have a choice, for this legislation or vote to deny the american people the bigger paychecks they need. to reject this would be in denial of the economic challenges people are facing and it would deny them the relief they need.
host: the speaker of the house on the floor yesterday. the opposition was led by kevin brady who is a republican of texas. here is the argument he made why the government should not be raising the $600 passed by congress and signed by the president to $2000. [video clip] this $500 billion could double the number of small businesses and midsize businesses getting ppp loans to hire workers and stay alive through the recovery. it could make your airline workers have secure jobs for more than just a few months and do more to replenish frontline health care workers. on theld be focused families that are hurting most, none more than 8 million americans who lost their jobs due to covid. our top priority in addition to defeating the virus is to get
them back to work. approvedongress has more than $20,800 directly to a family of four with one parent out of work. that is on top of their state unemployment benefits. if you want to do more for the jobless, this same amount of money today could give every unemployed worker from covid and employerloyee -- their a $50,000 incentive to return to work. you could even get the bottom 90% of workers in america and eight income tax-free year for 2021. to workear where you go for yourself instead of washington. no-tax 21agine what a could do for low income families, workers, and local economies? because of the whole this money back, not hastily spent
another half trillion dollars we don't have well we assess the impact vaccinations are having on consumer confidence. there are a lot of ways to spend money if that is the goal. in my view, let's be smart about it. let's target assistance to those who need it most. lawmakers debated and voted for the $2000 check. now it is your turn to tell washington what you think they should have done or should do when it comes to the senate. andrew in texas, you are a democratic caller. do you think the senate should take up this cash act and send $2000 checks to millions of americans? caller: thank you for taking my call. yes i do. my wife and i received the stimulus checks in the spring
and we put that money in our savings account. at the july deadline, we gave the money back to pay our taxes. that did mean we didn't need to dip further into savings to pay those taxes. we would look for to $600 to this checks. my wife and i -- $600 stimulus checks. my wife and i are both employed but i have a second job as a gig musician and that had been cut significantly to wear now there now there -- to where is nothing. i don't think everybody should receive a $2000 check. i hope the government could make a targeted effort. i was listening to congressman brady and it sounds like he would want the money to be kept system.the
-- going to a lower income americans who don't have a large savings account, who maybe don't own property, that have a windfall. thank you for taking my call, have a good morning. frank, he says yes to $2000. "let's make america whole again." and in dallas says "i am a senior and retired. i received the first check and donated it to the local food pantry." "how come every other country can help other people accept us? their citizensng $2000 monthly." drew in kentucky, what do you say?
about the $600, either i have neighbors who have six kids. $75,000. less than -- would get $4000 they get $4800? host: what is your question? would they get $4800 or if the other passes would they get 4000? -- $4000? host: your point is they should not get it? no i'm just saying this each kid get $600 -- does each
kid get $600 on the first that passed? host: this is according to the second round is a similar criteria at the cares act to decide which dependents are eligible. adult dependents such as college students don't qualify. those eligible for relief you have dependent children under the age of 17 will get an additional $600 per child. more per00 dollars child than the first round of relief payments. congress yesterday -- the house specifically also voted to override the president's veto of the national defense authorization bill. 322-87. leo of the washington times,
their headline this morning notes that 100 republicans bumped the president on that boat. times saidmilitary "here are the 26 republicans switched their votes to support the president's -- peter."
vito -- veto." the president said "week republican leadership will allow the bill to pass. say goodbye to your national treasures, 5g, and our great soldiers. negotiate a better bill or get
better leaders now.
the senate should not approve ndaa until fixed." the senate is expected to take that boat override of the president's veto. chuck schumer is going to try to force a vote on the $2000 checks to americans. senator sanders according to the hill newspaper plans to slow down the vote on the ndaa override in order to put pressure on the senate to take a foot on the $2000 check puzzle. he will -- check proposal. he will object to bring before the ndaa override to put pressure to cold a vote on the $2000 checks. drew in jamestown, kentucky. good morning. we are talk to you, sorry. scott in new york, independent.
caller: i belong to the human party and i am glad we are getting something from the senate. not even enough to pay for your gas bill or your rent one month. i have a solution to this. i've been following politics for a whole bunch of years and i'm sick of these politicians who say they love the humans, they are here for the humans, but the minute they can help humans they were enough. if you want to serve the people on get --imum-wage public housing taken money out of politics, get real humans ine this world, and let's try to get this road to come together. divided we fall, god bless
everybody. scott is going to wait 30 days to call and again as we ask you all to do. the reliefnt signed package that was tied to the omnibus bill and he said he was first not going to sign it because he insisted the $600 payments be made to $2000. that,pelosi said let's do let's get congressional republicans to vote with us to raise the $600 payments to $2000. this afternoon, people will be watching the senate on c-span2 to find out how the senators react to that. with the senate republicans who control the chamber allow that put to come to the floor? the back story and how the president agreed after saying he would not sign those two pieces of legislature is written in the
washington post this morning. othereport that "with republicans waylaid, it is up to lindsey graham to talk the president down. andaced to the golf club worked the problem. the two played golf, we hit a shot and made a phone call, hit a phone call. he said it was an very intense christmas day." before the president threatened to torpedo the bill, he was on the phone with kevin mccarthy who was in california minutes away from undergoing general anesthesia on an injured elbow. he spent the west -- the rest of -- searchingome for a way to address the president's remaining concerns.
a solution came from senator rob portman. an elegant solution, a resurgence package that would let trump allow congress to cut the spending. while they are likely to protect the cuts, he could him pound the money up to 45 days, meaning it cannot be spent until after he left office. the president saying he signed it but he did not like the spending in the legislation. the washington post noted earlier this month that the -- hisg he rejected he own budget. -- sent out the text saying for relief is on the way, democrats made it harder than it needed to be but we will never stop
fighting for what is best for families and our businesses. jon ossoff sent out a tweet reverse hisust opposition to 2000 dollars checks and joint democrats and trump in supporting the $2000 relief checks for his constituents." miriam in texas, a democratic caller. where you come on these $2000 stimulus payments? caller: good morning. republicans how the -- where is trump right now? that is the question i want to know. he is playing golf while people are starting -- people are starving. he is going to rally january 4 instead of rallying for the people. beuldn't he be reality just
rallying the senators to pass the bill instead of waiting for that day to rally for the people -- for the senators that are going to be against the $2000 to get to the little people? there for all the money to go to the rich people. he was there every day. he can use his power to send a signal to the republicans to pass the bill in the senate. yet, he is absent. where the hell is he? host: darrell in alabama, republican. do you support or oppose? caller: might as well support. be likeinking it should a billion -- would be like a billion dollars to everybody. it would not by much but everyone would have their money.
that is all i had to say. host: when it comes to the genet race -- to the georgia senate runoff race, the president is going to rally for senator perdue and senator kelly loeffler. tweetennett says in a "georgia has set it or not record for a runoff election with 2.3 million voters participating the absentee and early voting ahead of the january 5 election. -- election." hector, good morning. this is the second time i'm getting on. what i am calling about is that i think everyone should vote and give the $2000. i watched c-span often and there was a senator that was on a
couple of weeks back and he was talking about defending the taxpayers' money. you can look up with the senator finished.'m aat senator was charged with $1.8 billion fraud against medic. -- against medicaid. he is about defending the taxpayers'dollar. paid forh any senator their last dinner bill when it took somebody out. i'm sure it was not $600. i'm sure it was like $2000. you can tell who the senator is who defrauded dedicated -- defrauded medicaid. thank you. host: hector in florida, an independent there.
richard, you are a democrat. what do you think about this debate? hello? host: we are listening. caller: it comes down to the question, are we our brother's keeper? or two away, people will be desperate, their kids will have no way to go. here on the race deal -- inflation. about seven dollars. about seven came to dollars on the race. se.on the rai let's be human beings and treat our neighbors right. host: all right.
the senate is going to come in at noon eastern time today. tune in to c-span2 to see what happens with this debate over $2000 stimulus checks to some americans. david in west virginia, an independent. good morning to you. for 45 years i have been i am 45 years and i have been disabled the last 12 years. let's put the being back in "human." this.be truthful about this package is good but it is really welfare for the rich. we can't keep it, we have to spend it. my whole life i have tried to keep this country going and i love it. i have thought for it with my health and everything -- fought
for it with my health and everything. host: did you receive the first stimulus check in march? caller: i did but i was a corrupt. settlement that georgia $12supposed to -- he took million of the settlement and i have medical bills the past few years of my life. host: you use that money to do what? caller: to pay for my health care. host: jose in montana, republican. caller: i think mitch mcconnell should agree with the president because if he doesn't he needs to leave kentucky and leave the senate as majority leader because he is disrespectful to the chief of staff which is president -- which is the president.
if he wants to thousand dollars, that is what it needs to be. mitch mcconnell, when the senate convenes to come to the senate floor for a vote. you can watch that on c-span2 starting at noon eastern time. thank you for calling in today and sharing your thoughts. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. >>