Mediaboss Marketing

The House first passed the bill in February, but after the Senate made provision, it came back to the representatives for approval. USA TODAY

WASHINGTON The latest COVID-19 relief packagehas now passed the Senate and House, and will soon be on it's way to President Joe Biden's desk.

The legislation, dubbed the American Rescue Plan,includes$1,400 stimulus checks, billions of dollars for vaccines, and money to reopen schools.

While Biden and Democrats are cheering the bill as a victory in the quest to fight the impacts of the coronavirus crisis, Republicans say the bill is wasteful and full of provisions that don't address the virus. No Republicans vote for the billin either chamber of Congress..

Here are sometakeaways of the bill's passage through Congress and what happens next:

The American Rescue plan madeit through Congress with only Democratic support, makingitstandout from the bipartisan COVID reliefplans Congress passed over the last year.

Though the two sides squabbled over priorities in each of the previous packages that cleared Congress,allwere approved with members of both parties in support except the one approved Wednesday.

More: Biden's relief bill isn't getting bipartisan support like previous stimulus bills. What do Republicans dislike so much?

Live updates: Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion COVID-19 stimulus plan expected to get final passage Wednesday

The final vote Saturdayin the Senate was 50-49 with all Republicans voting against the measure and all members of the Senate Democratic caucus supporting it. Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, was not present for the vote. In the House,it didn't earn a single Republican vote in the two times the bill came to a vote.

Biden ran on his ability to broker bipartisanefforts on Capitol Hill, drawing onhis 36 years in the Senate and eight years as vice president.Republicans haveviewedthe bill as a betrayal of thebipartisanship Biden embracedand spoke of during his campaign.

Surrounded by Democratic House and Senate committee chairs, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., sign the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill during a bill enrollment ceremony on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. The bill now goes to President Joe Biden, who will sign the bill into law Friday.(Photo: Drew Angerer, Getty Images)

Republican lawmakers described the stimulus planas a "clunker,""bad politics" and wildly expensive."

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., described it as a "laundry list of leftwing priorities" that "do not meet the needs of American families."

"It is very liberal," he said. "They called this the most progressive piece of legislation in history. For those who are watching, progressive means socialism."

Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., called the legislation a progressive wish list forced down by the Democrat party.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., said in a statement he was "glad to know" his constituents would get a stimulus payment and other benefits of the bill, but explained why he voted against it.

But the legislation passed today is one of the largest expenditures in American historywith spending unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic and Republicans were left out of all negotiations," he continued, saying the legislation"still manages to spend way too much money".

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo.,the House Republican Conference chair, saidin a statementthe bill "does far more harm than good, and the damage it does will only make our recovery efforts more difficult."

The bill sailed through the House despite complaints from progressive Democrats who believed too many concessions were made to moderate Democrats when the bill passed Senate on Saturday.

The final vote was 220-211, with oneDemocrat Rep. Jared Golden of Maine opposing it,saying it would borrow and spend far more than is needed.

Borrowing and spending hundreds of billions more in excess of meeting the most urgent needs poses a risk to both our economic recovery and the priorities I would like to work with the Biden administration to achieve, like rebuilding our nations infrastructure and fixing our broken and unaffordable healthcare system, Goldensaid in a statement on Wednesday.

Golden also opposed the House's first vote on the legislation in late February before it went to the Senate. The bill had to go through the House one last time because of changes made in the Senate.

Rep.Kurt Schrader,D-Ore., voted against the first bill in February, but supported the Senate's modified legislation during Wednesday's vote.

With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, some Republicanspulled out all the stops in attempts todelay voting on the legislation.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., forced the Senate to begin reading all628 pagesofBiden's COVID billaloud on the Senate floor Thursday.

More: Republican Sen. Ron Johnson forces Senate to read all 628 pages of Biden's COVID bill aloud

Johnson said his tactic was about educating the American public on what was in the$1.9 trillion package, which he has derided as full of provisions unrelated to COVID relief.The entire process took more than10 hours.

Then senators were allowed to bring upamendments to the bill. The rapid succession of votes on each proposed change is dubbed a "vote-a-rama."

Republican Senators filed nearly 600 amendments, but only brought forth a fraction of those for debate. It was enough to draw out the voting session for more than 24 hours,keeping senators voting from from Friday morning into Saturday.

More: Senate OKs extension of $300 weekly unemployment benefit after long delay

One issue, unemployment insurance, was stalled by Democratic senators for most of the day Friday as they negotiated behind closed doors,focusing on the vote from Sen. Joe Manchin, a moderate Democrat from West Virginiawho expressed interest in plans from Republicans and Democrats.

During the House's session on Wednesday, before lawmakers began debating on the legislation,Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greeneforced the House to delay debatingand voting on the stimulus billby forcing a vote to adjourn House proceedings ahead of the debate. The effort failed.

Signing COVID-19 reliefhas been Biden's chief legislative priority sincehe beganhis presidency.

He's stressed the aid is sorely needed for Americans battling the economic impacts of the pandemic and repeatedlypushed for Congress to pass the bill quickly.

More: With passage of COVID-19 relief plan imminent, Biden delivers a final sales pitch

On the campaign trail, and in the first hours of his presidency, Biden promised to pass massive relief in Congress.

In announcing the American Rescue Plan on the same day as his inauguration, Biden called the smaller, bipartisan legislation passed in December "a down payment."

The White House described the new legislation as "ambitious, but achievable, and will rescue the American economy and start beating the virus."

Several polls show the latest package enjoys wide popularity, particularly the direct payments to Americans.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., praised the bill as part of Biden's legacy, calling it the "Biden American Rescue Plan."

We will get to work immediately to deliver lifesaving resources springing from this bill as soon as it is passed and signed as we join President Biden. in his promise that at last help is on the way," she said.

More: Polls find most Americans support Biden's COVID-19 stimulus package

Republicans in the Senate were successful in changing several key portions of the legislation.

Some House Democrats gripedover the modificationsmade to the legislation particularly the removal of a $15 federal minimum wage hikewhen the bill cameback to their chamber for avote Wednesday. But those peevedprogressives set aside their misgivings, and approved the Senate changes.

A federal hourly minimum wage increase was included in the version of the relief bill that was approved by the House last month. But it was stripped from the Senate versionafter the Senate parliamentarian foundit to be against budgetrules. Senate Democrats'attempt to reinsert a $15 minimum wage provision Friday also failed when eight Democratic caucus members voted with all Senate Republicans against Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders proposal.

More: Some House progressives aren't happy with Senate version of COVID relief package. Here's what changed.

Like the House version, the Senate bill includes$1,400 stimulus checks to Americans but it lowered the income eligibility for taxpayers getting the payments.Under the Senate bill, the checks phase out forindividuals making $80,000 per year and $160,000 for couples.

Roughly 8 million fewer households will get a check under the Senate bill compared with what the House passed, according to an analysis from the Tax Policy Center.

More: $1,400 checks are coming in the new coronavirus relief bill. Here's who will get them, and who won't.

The House bill extended federal unemployment benefits through August and increased that aid to $400 a week, but the final bill only extends the enhanced unemployment benefits through August at $300 a week.

The House vote was the final legislative hurdle for the legislation.

It now goes to Biden, who will sign the bill into law Friday, the White House said.

More: $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill with $1,400 stimulus checks passes House, heads to President Biden for signature

"This legislation is about giving the backbone of this nation the essential workers, the working people who built this country, the people who keep this country going a fighting chance," Biden said in a statement following the vote.

"On Friday, I look forward to signing the American Rescue Plan into law at the White House a peoples law at the peoples house."

After the bill is signed into law, the IRS may begin delivering stimuluschecks within one to two weeks.

"Middle-class Western New York households will be getting a $1,400 check in the mail in about two weeks," said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "They should get them by the end of March, so it'll be a nice Easter present for everybody."

More: With the economy healing, is Biden's $1.9T COVID-19 relief package too much?

Contributing: Michael Collins, Nicholas Wu,Sarah Elbeshbishi, Christal Hayes, Ledyard King

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/10/covid-stimulus-passes-house-takeaways-president-joe-bidens-bill/6929739002/

Go here to see the original:
Takeaways from the COVID-19 stimulus bill passing Congress: Weeks of partisan fighting comes to an end with a win for Biden - USA TODAY

According to the St. Marys County Equity Task Forces Joint Resolution to Advance Equity in St. Marys County, on June 29, 2020, Racial justice is the systematic fair treatment of people of all races, resulting in equitable opportunities and outcome for all.

The fundamental problem with this statement is its acceptance of the socially constructed system of categorizing human races based on observable physical features, such as skin color and ancestry. It is antithetical to the goal of a colorblind society and serves to perpetuate and exploit racism for political, legal, economic and social purposes.

Another problem is the intentional omission of equal treatment. Justice is the systematic, fair and equal treatment of people without regard to differences that foster discrimination and injustice. Note the term equitable opportunities instead of equal opportunity.

The task forces advancing equity goal is an equitable outcome for all through the absence of disparities among groups of people that would have otherwise arisen because of their socioeconomic status, geographical area, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender, or racial/ethnic group. In other words, equity is diversity without disparities in the outcomes of different groups.

The compensatory means of eliminating disparities or leveling the playing field is through the redistribution of resources by taking from some and giving to others, such as using a weighted formula.

Equity treats people unequally through preferential treatment for some and less favorable actions toward others. Equity is a euphemism for affirmative action and an excuse for reverse discrimination. Equity conforms with the Marxist phrase, From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Acquiescing to equity also requires the woke renouncing of the so-called disparity of white privilege. Equity is a steppingstone in the movement toward socialism.

If equity improves equality of opportunity, it may succeed, but if it is intended to idealistically achieve equal outcomes, it will undoubtably fail and will result in more government coercion and less individual liberty.

Read more here:
Equity is 'steppingstone' on the way to socialism - SoMdNews.com

Editor,

There is an enduring right-wing canard that were hearing more of these days: the Democratic Party is intent on turning America into a socialist nation. Cynical Republican politicians, Fox News and talk radio pundits, voices from the fever swamps of social media and more than a few Standard-Speaker letter writers are singing from the same hymnal.

They are not unlike Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass when he says to Alice: When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.

So what does socialism actually mean? The Oxford American Dictionary defines it as a political economic theory which advocates that the community as a whole should own and control the means of production, distribution and exchange. Which means in practice that a one-party central government runs a planned command and control economy which restricts private enterprise and property. That of course is the opposite of a democratic, free market society.

As most of us know, socialism has been thrown onto the dung heap of history. The stunning economic rise of communist China is precisely because it has abandoned the socialist system in favor of state capitalism while remaining a politically repressive dictatorship.

Paradoxically, some on the left such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez style themselves as Democratic Socialists, perhaps to make themselves appear to be more interesting than they actually are. Yet none of them have advocated the nationalization of Exxon, General Motors, Amazon or any other company. They are actually more like Scandinavian social democrats, who embrace capitalism tempered by generous social programs and a strong social safety net. Those nations are among the happiest in the world, as contrasted with America, which is experiencing decreased longevity, income inequality, social turmoil and increasing pessimism.

The Democratic agenda that is attempting to address the historical marginalization of women, racial minorities and the LGBTQ community is not socialistic. It is about economic and social justice. Furthermore, the American far left project of defunding the police, abolishing ICE and opening the borders to unlimited immigration is not socialistic. Socialist regimes are notoriously xenophobic police states.

Whatever the American left is actually all about, it is not socialist. Republicans need not worry that the Democrats will start a revolution. If the ultra progressives try to go too far left, they will lose Congress in the midterm election. Thats why we have a two-party system, to keep the country somewhere near the political middle.

Drew Magill

Sugarloaf Twp.

See original here:
What the Left is really about | Letters to the Editor | standardspeaker.com - Standard Speaker

The Daily Beast

Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/US Justice DepartmentIn February, a 95-year-old man was deported to Germany, a year after he was found to have served as a guard at Meppen, a Nazi concentration sub-camp of Neuengamme. It wasnt one of the worst campsit had no modern gas chambers, but instead relied on the old-school expedient of working the prisoners to death. An assemblage of Danes, Dutch, French, Italians, Jews, Latvians, Poles, and Russians were forced by the guards to dig anti-tank fortifications during the winter of 1945, to the point of exhaustion and death.This particular guard, Friedrich Karl Berger, who had lived in comfort and safety in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, since 1959, enjoying, presumably, all the benefits of life in the U.S. for law-abiding citizens who keep their heads down, claimed he was 1.) just following orders, 2.) theyd made him do it, 3.) he hadnt been there long, and 4.) he couldnt be tied to any particular murder.Elderly Nazis Laugh as They Recall Massacring JewsThat defense, however, which had worked to the advantage of so many death-camp low lives in the past, proved outdated, and had since John Demjanjuk, a death camp guard whod been living his own version of the American good life as an auto worker near Cleveland, was convicted in 2011 on 28,000 counts of accessory to murder. This legal construct gave prosecutors a way in, since it had proved nearly impossible to pin specific deaths on the surviving perpetrators, particularly as years went by.And it came just in time. The last of these war criminals are now in their nineties, some older. One former guard under indictment in Germany is 100. Apologists for these ancient criminals are suggesting that bygones be bygones. That we the people let them live out their lives in whatever peace they have conjured for themselves. That we leave justice to God. Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/US Justice Department This argument might better wash if there were evidence of some moral atonement on the part of the perps. But they, for the most part, seem to have walked away from the death camps, whistling a merry tune. Some were helped to South America via the Ratline, with our CIA paving the way. Josef Mengele, the sadist who found his spiritual home at Auschwitz and whose only regret was that the killing didnt reach its ultimate conclusion, lived pleasantly amidst friends and supporters in So Paulo till he drowned swimming at his leisure on a beautiful beach. That list goes on, and on, not excluding the princes of commerce, most of whom profited from slave labor. Bayer, Siemens, I.G. Farben, Krupp, Mercedes, and Volkswagen built their factories right next to the death camps and signed contracts with the SS, who would provide a specified supply of guards, dogs and whips, along with steady replacements for prisoners who would, it was understood, be worked to death. None of those responsible paid any significant price.In light of this, these last old Nazis being dragged in to face the music at this point look like very small fry, as indeed they were and are. On the other hand, as Raul Hilberg pointed out in Claud Lanzmanns film Shoah and elsewhere, it was these cogs on whom the whole death machine depended. Without the guards at the camps, or the schedulers of the trains full of prisoners, running with storied efficiency day and night, or the wholesalers of the barely used baby clothes flooding from Auschwitz into Berlin, none of it would have worked, or not nearly so seamlessly. Even a guard who didnt personally sic his dog on a faltering inmate or turn a beautiful young girl over to Ilse Koch to make her skin into gloves, was, if you stand back a bit, guilty.And where theres guilt, theres also a need for justice. Without it, one is left with resignation, fine for a Buddhist monk in a rhododendron forest, but not quite the thing for a judge and jury in contemporary Americanot to mention a general public, who have by now read Anne Frank and Night. Who had to watch last month as home-grown Nazis sporting Camp Auschwitz hoodies beat our own police officers to death.As we seek justice in Washington for these contemporary crazed haters, who, by the way, we can easily see standing shoulder to shoulder with the last of these indicted Nazis, whip or club or fire extinguisher in hand, we are reminded viscerally of why it matters so much. As Hannah Arendt wrote in Eichmann in Jerusalem, what we as a society are saying is that Something happened to which we cannot reconcile ourselves.Nor are we, as Americans whose fathers and grandfather fought and died to stop the Nazis, willing yet to reconcile ourselves to what happened to men, women, and children at their hands, not while there is still some measure of punishment to be meted out. Its true that these last convicts are old, but Justice has no expiration date, as Christoph Heubner, vice-president of the International Auschwitz Committee put it.Berger protested his deportation to a judge. After 75 years, this is ridiculousI cannot believe it. Youre forcing me out of my home.Welcome to the Holocaust, Mr. Berger.Victoria Shorr is the author of the novel The Plum Trees, a story of loss and survival during the Holocaust.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

Read more here:
Kudlow: Green Socialism coming on heels of massive stimulus - Yahoo News

Let me start with my favourite question. Why is it that, of the thirty/ forty nascent nations which emerged from the yoke of imperialism in the first half of the twentieth century in Asia, Australasia, Africa and South-America, India comprises the only country of its size and diversity to have remained a vibrant functioning democracy, while innumerable contemporary wrecks and ruins of constitutionalism litter the global landscape?

No doubt the first answer is possibly sheer good luck. But a close second is that while Gandhi and his atomic weapon of Ahimsa was vital to attain independence, India has remained a functioning & vibrant democracy because of Nehru as Indias first Prime Minister. India was singularly fortunate in getting its sequencing right: Gandhi first and Nehru later.

Nehru, intuitively, typified and practiced Voltaires famous dictum (also the essence of democracy) : I disagree vehemently with you but defend to death your right to disagree with me.

Three of the five tenets which he considered to be foundational to Indias destiny remain a vital part of the less visible non-institutional pillars of Indian democracy ( the other two being Parliamentary

Democracy and non-alignment). They are Secularism, Socialism and Federalism.

SECULARISM has been the heart and soul of Indian democracy from its inception, though it found express Constitutional expression much later. There is no more diverse spot on earth than India: the worlds largest democracy, the second most populous, the seventh largest in terms of area and the fourth largest by national GDP measured on purchasing power parity (PPP).

Its diversity is manifested in 22 scheduled languages, over 700 mother tongues, over 2000 dialects, the worlds largest population of 4 religions (Hindu, Sikh, Jain, and Parsi), the worlds second largest population of Muslims, and a significant number of other religious adherents. Every major racial grouping is present in India and it has thousands of bewildering rituals, foods, smells, sounds, music in all forms, dances and so on.

With such pluralities, Secularism is a self-protective mechanism for India. India has had a remarkable record of secular, non theocratic governance, but if truth be told, the more one lets go in India, the more India binds and holds together. Conversely, the more one pulls or tries to bind or impose any uniform ethic, the more India is likely to break apart.

Secularism has been an effective vehicle to manage diversities. It has generated a sense of reassurance and security to Indias multiple diversities and provided a crucial underpinning for democracy. It is meant and intended to convey part ownership of democracy. Without this sense of belonging to and ownership of democracy by each Aam Admi, democracy cannot succeed.

As usual, the threats are almost entirely from within. There is a sinister and sustained attempt to impose a uniform ethic, to paternalistically decide what a citizen can wear, sing and eat, how he can behave, what he must think on certain occasions and what he must say on others. Instead of celebrating diversity, we mourn it as the biggest obstruction to nationalism.

We distort the idea of India by redefining the India of our dreams as the India of our demands. We live by a new ethic of suspicion and distrust, of glee at the fellow citizens discomfiture and of fear of speaking up in his favour when he is being tormented.

FEDERALISM: A second non-institutional pillar of democracy is federalism. It is vital for managing diversities. Federalism operates as a safety valve for the three Ds-dissent, discomfort and dissatisfaction. It channels these three Ds into relatively manageable outlets of constitutional structures, whether they are provincial legislatures, district level autonomous councils or models of local governance like Panchayati Raj. Indian federalism has quarantined conflicts within states or sub-state units and thus successfully prevented national conflagration.

Five significant developments have transmuted, over the last 70 years, the heavily unitary, quasi federal India at inception into a significantly more federal entity in operation, rightly resulting in it being called accidental or inadvertent federalism. Linguistic diversity resulted in creation of new states on the principle of linguistic contiguity and the three-language formula largely quietened the language riots of the 1960s.

Secondly, vigorous judicial review by the apex court since the new millennium has repeatedly quashed Article 356 incursions into federal autonomy. Thirdly, Panchayati Raj and local self-government, has created a humongous diaspora of elected local Panchayat officials (including 1.5 million women) who administer local self-government in the worlds largest model of fiscal and administrative decentralisation. Fourthly, economic liberalisation since 1988 and 1991 has considerably diluted the stranglehold of the central government in decision making. Finally, fiscal federalism, results in almost 45% receipts of the centre being transferred to the state either as the sharable tax revenues or as Central grants.

Threats to federalism include Central government discriminatory practices in fund devolution, selective waivers of financial demands according to matching or differing political colors of the Centre and the state concerned and a clearly Presidential style of central governance focussed on micro managing everything. Catchwords or jumlebaazi like competitive or cooperative federalism cannot camouflage these aberrations.

SOCIALISM: Modern arm chair critics who retrospectively criticise Nehrus belief in socialisma third non institutional pillar by saying that it consigned India to a low so called Hindu rate of growth between 3.5. to 4.5%, fail to realise that it was socialist philosophy which laid a firm foundation for the public sector in India and resulted in Indias solidity and self-reliance in core sectors like steel, chemicals, textiles,indigenous defence manufacturing and banking. It gave us both a self reliant as well as a competitive edge, though, concededly, it overstayed its welcome. Our ability to weather the 2008 global financial crisis with minimum pain and regain the 8.5% annual trajectory of growth within one year owes a lot to these foundations. One contemporary counterpart of Nehrus philosophy of socialism has been the worlds largest social welfare scheme, MNREGA, which despite opportunistic criticism when in opposition, has been largely followed and reluctantly lauded by the right wing successor government.

This vituperative criticism when in opposition and ready adaptation without attribution when in power model has been perfected by the present dispensation. Manifested across the board-from Aadhar, MNREGA, Food Security, GST to many othersthese compliments, albeit left handed, say it all.

In conclusion, Indias amazing diversity is its best insurance against degeneration of democracy or institutionalisation of dictatorship. To that must necessarily be added the intrinsic nature of India and of Indians viz. absorbent and highly argumentative.

Democracy in India has many miles to walk and many promises to keep. If it cannot be fairly castigated as an imperfect democracy, it is certainly also nowhere near being a perfect or near perfect democracy. It is difficult to quantitatively calibrate whether we have covered half or more than 75% of the journey from imperfection to perfection. We have not achieved, for example, the more capacious concept ofdemocracy beyond the narrower view of seeing democracy exclusively in terms of public balloting and not as the exercise of public reason i.e. the larger concept of providing opportunities for citizens to participate in political discussion and, more importantly, to informed public choices in methods that transcend the ballot box.

Personally, I have no doubt, that we are well past the midway mark in the journey and that we will get there in the fairly proximate future. But the story has never been only about the destination or the result. It has been, as much, if not more, about the journey and that has undoubtedly been exciting and unusual.

Views expressed above are the author's own.

END OF ARTICLE

Read more from the original source:
Democracy beyond ballots: Threats to secularism, socialism & federalism - The Times of India Blog