The House will vote Monday to replace the $ 600 stimulus payments in the newly enacted pandemic relief law with the $ 2,000 demanded by President Trump – a Democrat-led effort that is politically hampered for Republican Republicans and probably not law will not be.
The bill will need two-thirds support to clean up the House under the procedure used for the vote, and it remains unclear whether enough Republicans will defend their opposition to higher payments – driven in part by deficit problems – to support Trump’s request. .
If the attempt fails in the House on Monday, the Democrats could later get it back to a simple majority vote. Even if the bill passes the House, it is unlikely to be approved by the Senate.
The focus on the issue could nevertheless be troublesome for Republicans, as a vote against the increased payments puts them at odds with the leader of their party and is on record against a politically popular idea. Republicans are trying to stay united ahead of two major elections in Georgia next week, which will determine Senate control.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is putting the stimulus checks bill to the vote after Trump last week called for a change in a surprise overhaul in which he denounced the payment of $ 600 as a “ridiculously low”, despite the fact that the Finance Minister Steven T. Mnuchin was involved in the negotiations.
House Democrats tried to pass the bill unanimously on Dec. 24, but Republican leaders objected. Democrats then blocked an attempt by the IDP to cut off foreign aid in the package – another of Trump’s demands.
After days of threats for the pandemic relief and the government’s spending package needing its signature to become law, Trump capitulated Sunday night and signed the bill. In a statement, he said the Senate had agreed to begin the process of voting on the $ 2,000 checks, along with a measure to end social media liability and an investigation into alleged voter fraud.
It is not yet clear whether this means that the Senate leaders are compiling such provisions. If they do, such a bill is likely to attract enough opposition from both parties to fail on the floor.
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer calls on Republicans to draw up a clean bill, such as the House Measure, to increase payments to $ 2,000.
On Sunday, Senator Pat Toomey, a Republican, in Pennsylvania said he would vote $ 2,000 checks. During months of COVID-19 emergency relief negotiations, Republicans fought against any direct payments, demanding that $ 600 be the maximum they could support in this round of economic support.
In Georgia, Democratic Senate candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock used the $ 2,000 payment proposal to attack the positions of GOP David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. Loeffler said she would consider the increase if it is offset by spending cuts elsewhere, while Perdue did not express support.
IDP departments
The leadership of the GOP House allows its members to decide how to vote on Pelosi’s bill, and the Republican split over the stimulus checks was shown live on Monday.
The Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, a close ally of Trump, in Alabama, made it clear on Fox News Monday morning that he does not support Trump’s idea for $ 2,000 checks.
“I don’t think people understand what happens when a central government goes bankrupt, but it’s not nice,” he said. “It’s dangerous.”
New York Rep. Tom Reed, a moderate Republican who is the chairman of the dual Problem Solvers Caucus, came in favor of the bill, saying he could bring the 25 GOP members of his group together.
“The American people are hurting. “Economic stagnation and oppression have left many in difficult financial situations,” Reed said in a statement. “It is only fair that we are now taking decisive action to provide the comprehensive relief that individuals desperately need.”
Other Republicans, such as the rep. Elise Stefanik, New York, said they still support aid.
“I’m open to the $ 2,000 checks,” she told Fox News on Monday. ‘I want to see what actually appears in Speaker Pelosi’s bill. She always tends to use biased language. ”
According to preliminary projections from the committee for a responsible federal budget, the increase in payments could cost an estimated $ 435 billion. In addition, it is the $ 164 billion that the Joint Committee on Taxation, the non-party holder of Congress, estimates that the payments cost $ 600.
Additional terms
The bill, which will be on the floor of the House floor on Monday at 17:00 (EST), does contain certain provisions, except that $ 1,400 will be added to the direct payments.
The House Bill will increase the suitability of household members who can get the money so that adult dependents as well as child dependents can receive the payments. Currently, only children of adults who are under the income caps qualify for the payments.
Increasing the payments to $ 2,000 will also increase the number of eligible households according to the phasing-out formula set out in the Stimulus Act. Higher amounts mean that payments phase out at higher income levels.
Married couples with a combined adjusted gross income of $ 150,000 or less and individuals earning $ 75,000 or less annually are eligible for the full amount of $ 2,000 per person. The payments are less for higher income, based on family size. For example, a single adult earning less than $ 115,000, a couple earning up to $ 230,000, and a family of four with up to $ 310,000 in annual income will receive a share of the $ 2,000 per person.
The Internal Revenue Service referred questions to the Department of Treasury to questions about the timing and processing of the payments signed on Sunday. The Treasury did not respond to a request for comment on when the payments would begin sending. Mnuchin said earlier this month that transfers would begin this week, but that was before Trump’s delay in signing the legislation.
The Internal Revenue Service was able to begin processing the $ 1,200 payment within about two weeks of the Cares Act being signed in March. The agency said it would be able to move this round faster because much of the preparatory work has already been done.
– With the help of Jennifer Jacobs.