The office of Senator Bernie Sanders released the following statement about President-Elect Biden’s coronavirus relief plan:
BURLINGTON, January 14 — Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement regarding President-Elect Biden’s plan to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and economic crisis:
“President-Elect Biden has put forth a very strong first installment of an emergency relief plan that will begin to provide desperately needed assistance to tens of millions of working families facing economic hardship during the pandemic. The president-elect’s COVID-relief plan includes many initiatives that the American people want and need, including increasing the $600 direct payments to $2,000, and raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. As the incoming Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, I look forward to working with the president-elect and my colleagues in Congress to provide bold emergency relief to the American people as soon as possible.”
That sounds like a good start.
But Biden needs to make good on a promise he made that was quite specific:
“On the eve of the Senate runoffs in Georgia, Biden told the state’s voters that “$2,000 checks” would “go out the door” if they elected Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, who both embraced the push for $2,000 checks on the campaign trail and ultimately defeated their Republican opponents.”
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/01/15/2000-means-2000-ocasio-cortez-says-1400-payments-biden-plan-fall-short-promised
I am well aware that the measure that Democrats passed in the House and which died in the Senate) was simply to raise the initial $600 amount in the bill that was signed into law to $2000.
But the issue here is not actually what Biden, Warnock and Ossoff might have intended. The issue is what their words quite clearly stated. Though many politicians might not believe they do, words actually matter — and if politicians want to know why most people have such a low opinion of them, they need not look any further.
Biden and Warnock promised something very specific: $2000 checks going out the door. They didn’t say, “If you vote for us, you will get a $1400 check in addition to the $600 check you will already be getting”, a distinction they could quite easily have made, by the way.
If the latter is what they meant, they should have made it crystal clear. Whether they realize it or not, to try to explain that now is going to simply sound like lying to a lot of people, particularly voters in Georgia, where candidates Warnock and Ossoff were quite literally promising “elect me and you will get a $2000 check”. Warnock even included a fake image of a US Treasury check for $2000 made out to John Doe. Not for $1400. $2000. How much more specific/literal can one get?
Saying now “oh, you thought that meant you would literally get a check for $2000? Sorry. But that’s just your misunderstanding” is precisely the sort of thing that gives politicians a reputation for disingenuousness.
If Biden wants to start things off in this way, that’s up to him, but I think he is making a big mistake.
I actually believe it is a big mistake for a politician to promise specific things like this at any rate because there is no guarantee that they can deliver. One member of the Senate has already said he opposes the $2000 relief .
And how is the promise that “if you vote for me, you will get a $2000 check” different from bribery?
SDP,
I did not understand Biden to say that he would add another $2,000 to the $600 that was approved.
What I understood was that the amount of federal checks would be a total of $2,000, not $600.
Everyone seems to understand that $600 + $1,400= $2,000.
No lie.
I didn’t say it was a lie.
What I said was that is how some might perceive it .
And quite rightly so.
Look at the image of the check on the link I provided.
It’s of a $2000 check.
AOC is right about this, as she is about so many other things.
The thing I that so many people (including myself) like about her is that she does not believe in word games.
Biden did not promise $2,600.
He promised $2,000.
That’s what I understood.
He was reasserting the validity of the original proposal for $2,000, not an enhanced package of $2,600.
Diane
The issue here is not what you or I understood.
Its how others — specifically voters in Georgia — understood.
I suspect that a lot of them were probably not even aware of the bill passed by the House (which died in the Senate) to boost the $600 to $2000.
So, one has to view this from their perspective. If they hear a statement that $2000 checks will be going out the door and see a campaign ad with a $2000 check in it, what are they supposed to think?
Personally, I don’t believe Biden intended $2600 total. I just think this was a major screwup because it should — and could — have been made crystal clear and would have made no real difference to the outcome in Georgia.
. . . probably more wishful than good thinking. CBK
I can sure you. I can do simple math.
I said as much above
I am well aware that the measure that Democrats passed in the House and which died in the Senate) was simply to raise the initial $600 amount in the bill that was signed into law to $2000.”
As I noted, the issue here is what was quite specifically promised.
Biden promised $2,000. Those who are eligible will receive $2,000.
Biden’s actual words to encourage votes for Warnock and Ossoff
“$2,000 checks will go out the door”
Not “An additional $1400 check will go out the door in addition to the $600 check that is already slated to go out the door”
And the image at the link shows a $2000 US Treasury check that was used in a campaign ad by Warnock.
As I indicated above, I am quite aware of the measure passed by the House (but which died in the Senate) to simply boost the total from $600 to $2000, but the actual actual words used by Biden and image used by Warnock matter.
I’m also sure that AOC can do simple math.
But AOC is already being ostracized by the Washington Post for pointing out the obvious. They hate her not only because of her progressive views but also because she is right.
It is not incidental to this whole discussion that $600 stimulus checks have already been mailed out.
Biden did not promise $2,600.
So it is not particularly implausible that after some receive that they might also expect a check for $2000 because that’s what the words and campaign images promised.
I have already wasted way too many words on this because as I said, I already interpreted it as $2000 total and I have also come to disbelieve most of what politicians promise during campaigns, at any rate.
And there is a quite legitimate reason for that not unrelated to the above issue. They very often don’t say what they mean .
If you read what I said above, you will see that I never said that he promised $2600.
What he promised was $2000 checks.
And if you think you will already get a $600 check because of the stimulus that Congress and the President already OKed, it’s not a leap to think that some might have expected to receive a second check for$2000.
But I don’t think this conversation is going anywhere, so we’ll have to agree to disagree.
But just so it is perfectly clear: I don’t believe the intention was to lie. Just that it was a major screwup.
Did anybody here get the $600 stimulus check or direct payment? I got nothing so far but my income is a little bit above the limit. So will I get a reduced amount? The IRS web site is not specific about this but I probably am not doing a good job of locating the info. I’ll try again later.
Joe Jersey I received a $600 deposit to my bank account on January 4. CBK
Thanks CK, glad you got the payment.
Joe Jersey I don’t know what their criteria for timing was, but no one in my close circle of friends or family received theirs. Go figure. CBK
Update: I just got my stimulus check in the mail today, whoopee, $24.95. It must have cost more in paper used, processing and postage. I must admit I had a good laugh.
Joe Jersey Oh, dear . . . .now everyone knows I am poor. . . . (signed alias: POR)
I haven’t received my second payment, Get My Payment still says that it is clueless, and the law requires the payments to go out by the 15th. I’m probably going to have to file the request for it on a tax return.
Incompetence.
Strange, Bob. It took forever for the first stimulus payment to get to my family, but the second one was in my account about two days after it was signed into law, which surprised the h-e-two hockey sticks out of me.
Yes! The Senate Budget Committee will be chaired by Senator Bernie Sanders, not by Lindsey Graham. Bernie’s words are music to my ears.
Bernie will fight hard to look out for the little guy.
<3!!!
“…including increasing the $600 direct payments to $2,000….:
Sad to see Bernie joining in the lie. Biden didn’t promise to increase the $600 payments to $2,000. He promised $2,000 (which itself is woefully inadequate). He promised it on day one. He promised it in return for voting Warnock and Ossoff. Well, whaddya know, he lied again.
But at least I feel confident we can trust his promise to deliver the Patriot Act 2.0.
???
So now Bernie Sanders is a liar, too? It does not surprise me one bit to see that falsehood posted here because I was positive that was the narrative that was going to be pushed if Bernie had won the nomination (along with the usual attacks – but that one would have been pushed towards progressives to convince them not to vote for Bernie).
There’s a pattern in all these temper tantrums. If I could only put my finger on it…
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/secretary-of-defense-chris-miller-likes-russia-wants-to-quit_n_600214e2c5b6df63a916bfc4
Bizarre.
To those who cannot distinguish between Donald Trump and Joe Biden: The former called climate change and Covid-18 hoaxes, wanted to nuke hurricanes, thought that stealth airplanes were actually invisible, politicized the CDC, blamed wildfires on not sweeping forests, erased federal clean air and water regulations, wanted to make asbestos building materials legal again, conducted a war on government publishing of scientific reports, suggested sending astronauts to the sun, pushed Hydroxychloroquine as a miracle cure for SARS-CoV-2, and suggested that doctors look into telling people to inject disinfectants.
The latter just made Science Advisor to the President a cabinet-level position.
CX: Covid-19, ofc. LMAO!
In not-so-good news, Biden’s new Science Advisor was president of the Broad Institute for Education Deform [insert “I told you so” post from Dienne77 here].
That’s wrong, Bob. Biden’s science advisor is a scientist.
From APNews:
President-elect Joe Biden announced Friday that he has chosen a pioneer in mapping the human genome — the so-called “book of life” — to be his chief science adviser and is elevating the top science job to a Cabinet position.
Biden nominated Eric Lander, founding director of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, who was the lead author of the first paper announcing the details of the human genome, as director of Office of Science and Technology Policy and adviser on science. He is the first life scientist to have that job. His predecessor is a meteorologist.
Oh. Thank goodness!!!! That’s a great relief!
Btw, Trump’s healthcare plan is going to be much better than Obama’s and will be rolling out in just a couple weeks now. I know because he has said so repeatedly.
That’s great to hear, Diane!!!!!
Thank you, Diane, for that clarification!!! I read Broad Institute and drew a hasty and stupid conclusion. I was just reading about this fellow. This is just awesome.
BTW, you can tell Biden is really serious about controlling COVID because he’s planning five days of gala star-studded events for his inauguration.
Biden has been scrupulous about mask wearing and social distancing.
Your cynicism knows no bounds.
Exactly, Diane. When Biden takes office, the United States steps off the ledge. Not seeing the difference between the two–well, that’s pretty out there.
Call me a crazy dupe, but I am very thankful that we have President Biden for the next four years and not Trump redux. The American people have spoken, Biden won, live with it and you can call him out for any missteps he may make. In any case, Trump won’t be appointing any more right wingers to the SCOTUS or the lower courts, that’s huge.
Joe, you are not a “crazy dupe.” I too am thrilled that Joe Biden will be inaugurated as President of the United States in 5 days (122 hours, 7326 minutes, 439,614 seconds, as I write this).
I will criticize him when I think he is wrong. He is a normal human being, not a cult leader like Trump, whose cult are killers and haters.
You crazy dupe! There, I did it.
Frankly, I think these “stimulus” payments should be reserved for people who have lost their income or jobs over these horrible 10+ months.
FLERP Probably needs some research but I think, for the most part, the money was meant for those who lost their jobs or were “put on leave” because of the drastic change in the situation. CBK
Eligibility for stimulus payments in 2020 was based on 2019 income. I believe the same is true of this round.
FLERP Did that really happen (in like NYC)? and wasn’t the cap for eligibility $75,000 a year? I do think the sledgehammer to fly effect was difficult to work with . . . but they are aware of that from the first go-round?
On the other hand, I never saw the fairness in the Social Security law that says: if you take your income at age 63 because you cannot wait until 65 for many legitimate reasons, you get less per month than a person who can afford to wait until age 65 to apply for it. Seems to me that its based on the apparently cosmic rule that the more-wealthy and privileged get more wealthy and privileged, while the poor get poorer . . . and those are the ones who are probably more likely to die before they reach 65 than the wealthy and well-cared-for. CBK
Yep. $75k per year for individual filers. Head of houseful something like $110k. Multiple filers would go high her. It is insane.
FLERP! I always try to cut them some “insane” slack . . . The ratio of “1 government institution-to-millions of individual circumstances” is itself insane, but that’s what they have to deal with. CBK (alias: POR)
And frankly it is annoying as heck that people in low-cost-of-living areas of the country with household incomes well over a hundred thousand dollars keep getting checks while people in places like NYC who lost their jobs get nothing because of their prior year’s income (which barely paid their bills in a high cost of living area).
There are some other avenues for aid as well. My university just received it’s share of the stimulus money. We are planning to pass about half of it off to our students using Pell eligibility as the criteria and using the other half to partially offset pandemic specific costs like renting out multiple hotels near campus to provide de-densified housing.
Teachingeconomist Yes . . . the sound of excellence at work. CBK
They are indeed called stimulus payments. That is an apt name for them, as they are intended to stimulate consumers. Therefore, they are for everyone who consumes. They’re nowhere near enough to cover basic needs, but they’re the right amount for many to spend on entertainment to make Amazon and Apple, for example, a good chunk of money. If the checks were intended as relief for people who need it, they would be called relief payments, not stimulus payments. There is no relief anymore.
Right. They should be relief payments. And they’re not for everyone who consumes. If they were, they’d be universal, and they would certainly include people who were financially destroyed in 2020 but who happened to have income above the limit in 2019. Which they are not.
A Note to Would-be Education “Reformers”: It’s the poverty, stupid. Until you learn that fundamental fact, you will simply continue to repeat the utter failures of the last 30 years of “Reform,” which has resulted in a) NO statistically significant increase in test scores (failure by your own invalid measures) and b) NO decrease in racial gaps.
Here, a little Zen story that is much to the point:
https://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/a-cup-of-tea/
stimulus payment is 1400 not 2000
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:30 AM Diane Ravitch’s blog wrote:
> dianeravitch posted: ” The office of Senator Bernie Sanders released the > following statement about President-Elect Biden’s coronavirus relief plan: > BURLINGTON, January 14 — Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following > statement regarding President-Elect Biden’s plan to ” >
The $15 min wage as “living wage” may be the single most significant tool to eliminate poverty in this country.
Mate The $15 min wage as “living wage” may be the single most significant tool to eliminate poverty in this country.
That statement: Best in Show.
I remember just out of high school, living with my mother who was a seamstress at Capwell’s in Walnut Creek California and made very little . . . my first job was making $4.50 an hour. There was no way I could pay for my own way on that.
Also, there is some pride to be had in working and getting a decent wage for doing so, regardless of what we do. Just the uplift from the economic poverty of the “working poor,” and being able to support yourself and your children, provides a general spiritual uplift that also makes it easier to be proud in doing your job . . . instead of harboring a pervasive shame that makes a person NOT want to be excellent about it.
So, with your statement, we could also say this: The $15 min wage as “living wage” may be the single most significant tool to eliminate a sense of resentment and hopelessness that pervades the under-consciousness of this country. CBK
And, as we talked about it here many times, it would also help equalize educational opportunities, since poverty is the single most important predictor of how kids do in school.
Mate Yes, . . . exactly that. And it’s circular and overlapping.
This is why I think it’s so important to link up more formally . . . K-12, and how we think of public education in general, with organizations that support community adult education, for instance, the National Literacy Association and related programming (NLA). <–this is a huge and organized movement that has been around for decades, at least since WWII.
One of their oft-neglected functions is to analyze and understand the relationship of at-home parents (mostly mothers until lately) to the character-formation and school-readiness of children when they enter early formal education.
One of the probably-hidden benefits of the wage increase will be how it influences the largely neglected informal field of at-home “baby-sitters,” including grandmothers. Some of course are actually good educators (of experience-driven character and knowledge); but many are just that: “sitters.” What will a wage increase do to that group? is a question where the reality-answer will, in turn, have its influence on our next overlapped generation of children. CBK
As for other basic issues affecting poverty and education: did Biden talk about free childcare? Because in my opinion that is more important than free higher ed, and it’s probably an easier goal to accomplish since it’s such a basic need.
Mate Good question . . . along with the question of universal health care. . . . CBK
He did talk about free healhtcare. But not childcare.