Seeking an injunction or litigating just doubles down on their own stupidity. The Dems just need to accept that they were outplayed.
President Trump signed four executive orders Saturday aimed at delivering relief to Americans struggling with the economic fallout of the coronavirus while accusing Democrats of stonewalling greater aid efforts.
Trump announced a $400-per-week supplemental unemployment payment to out-of-work Americans -- short of the $600 weekly benefit that expired at the end of July. He unveiled an extension of student loan relief and protections from evictions for renters and homeowners.
Trump also signed a payroll tax holiday through the end of the year for Americans earning less than $100,000, while promising more relief if he wins a second term.
If youíre a Democrat politician, what do you do here? Do you seek an injunction (no doubt through a surrogate)? Do you litigate but let the order stay in place? Do you just concede?
The divided governments with Trump and Obama vs. an unfriendly Congress have really frustrated me. I majored in government, graduating college in 2000. Back then, it was widely agreed that divided government made for the most effective administrations, because it required compromise, which in turn was best for the American people. Prime examples were Reagan and Clinton.
Somewhere along the way, that got jettisoned for absolute gridlock. Now we are seeing the natural consequence of that. Congress has abdicated its responsibilities, so the executive branch is stepping into the power vacuum.
Except its really not, these steps are more or less meaningless window dressing.
The eviction "moratorium" for example is toothless, its actually a suggestion to government agencies that they consider ways to lessen evictions.
The extension of unemployment benefits puts 25% of the benefits on states, many of which don't have the money at all which could prevent any disbursement of those funds.
The payroll tax "cut" is actually a deferral, those funds are still owed at the end of the year. Its likely that as a result companies will be reluctant to actually pass that money onto their employees. And it only helps those who actually have jobs, not 30+ million jobless. And if all that is overcome its just going to end up in a social security cut down the line.
No more money for schools, none for struggling state gov's. Basically these actions are pointless window dressing.
Lets be absolutely clear what happened here, this is not a "both sides" problem. Democrats had a bill for months, republicans dragged their feet because there is significant resistance in their own party against spending more money. And now here we are.
The Democrat Bill was a bloated $3 trillion wishlist of handouts. It wasnít a serious attempt at reaching a deal.
And, Trumpís executive order is better than what Congress has passed, so Iím not sure what the objection is. Something is better than nothing.
Well putting aside the fact that I very much disagree with the characterization of the democrats bill.....
The objection is that 3 trillion dollars even if 50% of it is just literally lighting money on fire is better than a set of executive order that do literally nothing to actually help.
My main issue here is the blame is not evenly distributed across "congress." The title of the thread should be "Republican senators are terrible at their jobs." I maybe crazy here, but I tend to put more blame on the party that can't even agree amongst itself about what it wants.
Spoken like a blind partisan.
In what way?
Blaming a party for not having its act together when it quite obviously doesn't have its act together is arguably less partisan than the empty platitude of "well both sides...." Thats a thoughtless reflex more than an actual position informed by facts.
The moderate position is only just that, moderate. It isn't necessarily right. It can be, it often is, I dont think it is in this case.
I mean republicans argument is "We're worried about helping people TOO much. During a pandemic. That out party's leader horribly failed to contain. Because of the deficit that we already exploded. By giving a tax cut to the rich."