Current Events > 10 Senate Republicans offer counter-proposal to Dem relief plan

(+) Yeah! (+)

Republicans who want a bipartisan deal on coronavirus relief are making a last-ditch effort to turn President Joe Biden away from a party-line approach that would avoid the Senate's supermajority requirement.

A group of Senate Republicans is requesting a meeting with Biden to begin bipartisan negotiations on the next coronavirus relief bill, even as Democratic leaders are prepared this week to go down a path that could pass a new $1.9 trillion coronavirus aid package with all Democratic votes. The new package would be roughly a third the size of Biden's proposal, one GOP senator said Sunday.

In a letter to Biden sent on Sunday, 10 Senate Republicans informed the president that they are working on a counterproposal focusing on spending $160 billion on vaccines, testing, treatment and personal protective equipment. Led by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the senators said that if Biden signs off on their framework, we believe that this plan could be approved quickly by Congress with bipartisan support.

In the spirit of bipartisanship and unity, we have developed a COVID-19 relief framework that builds on prior COVID assistance laws, all of which passed with bipartisan support, the senators wrote to Biden. We request the opportunity to meet with you to discuss our proposal in greater detail and how we can work together to meet the needs of the American people during this persistent pandemic.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a member of the group, estimated the legislation would cost roughly $600 billion. Senate Republicans contend there are hundreds of billions of dollars left over from previous bills, undercutting the need for the amount proposed by Biden.

"If you want unity, you want bipartisanship, you ought to start with the group that's willing to work together," Cassidy said on "Fox News Sunday." "They did not."

The letter is a clear attempt to head off Democratic efforts to pursue budget reconciliation as the pathway to the next round of coronavirus aid. This week, Democrats in both chambers are planning to pass budget resolutions allowing the party to approve Bidens $1.9 trillion coronavirus plan without GOP votes. That tactic, called budget reconciliation, would allow Democrats and Biden to move more quickly than trying to cut a deal with Republicans that can get 60 votes.

Noting the failings of the government response to the last economic crisis in 2009 and the GOP reluctance to spend money, White House officials and Democratic senators contend that the biggest risk at the moment is not going big enough.

Biden "is absolutely willing to negotiate," said Jared Bernstein, a top Biden economic adviser, on "Fox News Sunday." But, he added: "The cost of inaction is extremely high."

Still, that path has little room for error: All 50 Senate Democrats would need to be on board, and House leaders could afford few defections. And Republicans in a bipartisan negotiating group have urged Biden to squash the effort to move forward without them, though Democrats are skeptical they will ever come on board with the large spending plan they say is needed to revive the economy.

The Biden administration said it would see what the Senate Republicans had to offer. Weve received the letter and we certainly will be reviewing it over the course of the day, Brian Deese, director of the National Economic Council, said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Deese spoke to the Senate Democratic Caucus last week and has been engaged directly with members of both parties. He said on NBC's "Meet the Press" he would continue doing that and that the president's open to compromise: "What he's uncompromising about is the need to move with speed on a comprehensive approach here."

The Republican senators will release more details of their plan Monday, according to a Republican aide.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/31/biden-senate-republicans-covid-relief-464057
https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1355937422157213703

This is what you offer when you're angling to get rejected.

---

So they want to have a bipartisan deal but come to the table with a third of the asking price?

---

MonkeyBones23 posted...

So they want to have a bipartisan deal but come to the table with a third of the asking price?

That is the story they are going with.

---

b-but democrats are the problem guys

here take $1000

---

Exactly 10? Well how bout that?

No thanks.

---

Where money

---

why would Biden even look at this lol? The dems can just past their own shit at this point right

---

1.9 trillion gavve the wealthy tax cuts Biden and the dems want to help americans with the next 1.9 fuck the gop

How cucked do these low income GOP voters need to be at this point to want to get less money just to own the libs?

---

fuck you $2000

---

So basically the Republicans offered to pay $20 for a new BMW and then will offer to split the difference in a few weeks and pay $20,000 and act shocked when their completely sincere olive branch *wink* is turned down.

---

https://twitter.com/SeanEldridge/status/1355909578735689731

fuck the slimey rat gop dont work with them at all unless they convict Trump

---

Who are they even trying to play to with this? Rich people?
---

Why does the wealthy even need stimulus money for? Fucking greedy GOP.

---

Bio1590 posted...

Who are they even trying to play to with this? Rich people?

Nobody. They're trying to reduce the impact of the relief to hurt that administration's image. Reducing the 1400 to 1000 is there for the sole purpose of letting them claim democrats broke their promise.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

And they dont expect Dems to take it because they want to claim Biden isnt living up to his bipartisan commitments.

Right. The move here is make an offer Democrats have to reject, then criticize them for not living up to Biden's claims about unity.

---

This is a much better offer tbqh

Maybe Democrats should stop working with Republicans and ditch this idea of bipartisanship.

Antifar posted...

Right. The move here is make an offer Democrats have to reject, then criticize them for not living up to Biden's claims about unity.

it's like a catch-22. if the democrats don't take the low ball offer, GOP blasts them for not living up to the "unity" angle
if they do take the low ball offer, then the GOP blasts them for not keeping to the $2K check promise
either way, GOP will attack them

---

CommonStar posted...

Maybe Democrats should stop working with Republicans and ditch this idea of bipartisanship.

How?

---

"I'm asking for $500."

"Let's meet in the middle. $7 works for everyone, no?"

---

You can't have unity with a party that works against the people's interest and regularly undermines democracy.

Simply another death throe of the GOP

---

Repubs completely misunderstanding what unity is. I am shocked

---

I mean, fuck unity with these seditious bastards. The voting population gave the dems the Presidency, the house, and the senate.

If they want to vote to convict Trump unanimously, then I would consider working with them, otherwise, tell them to fuck off.

---

Democrats: 1.9 trillion for the working class
Republicans: we can't afford that, how about 2 billion for the working class and 8 trillion for the rich though?


---

COVxy posted...

How?

Using budget reconcilation process to push through big changes unilaterally?

---

COVxy posted...

How?

If people don't want to work with you, use and abuse you, and vow to never compromise, then at some point you should get a fucking hint and stop inviting them to the table. I don't know who the Democrats think they're doing the whole prim and proper act for. Everyone knows they're wasting their time. We're just going to slowly collapse while we alternate between the Democrats getting blocked at all turns by the Republicans and the Republicans dragging us back to the stone age.

---

republicans are literal captain planet supervillains

---

Balrog0 posted...

Using budget reconcilation process to push through big changes unilaterally?

And that'll work for all legislative goals of the Biden admin? Seems like the answer is very much so no. The only reason this bill is not being passed through reconciliation immediately is to try to set the precedent for future bipartisan action, as far as I can tell.

---

Fuck outta here Pubs.

---

"If you don't give up everything you want and do all we want then I guess you just hate America"

---

Do we know if the current Dem plan covers adult dependents?

---

COVxy posted...

The only reason this bill is not being passed through reconciliation immediately is to try to set the precedent for future bipartisan action, as far as I can tell.

The precedent being set here is Republicans would rather implode the budgets of state and local governments than cooperate with the Biden administration.

---

Antifar posted...

The precedent being set here is Republicans would rather implode the budgets of state and local governments than cooperate with the Biden administration.

Yes, can't say this is a great sign for legislative successes in the near future lol.

---

COVxy posted...

Yes, can't say this is a great sign for legislative successes in the near future lol.

Democrats can either get rid of the filibuster and ram through legislation with 50+1 votes, or pass nothing and hope voters will reward them for it in two years.

---

Antifar posted...

Democrats can either get rid of the filibuster and ram through legislation with 50+1 votes, or pass nothing and hope voters will reward them for it in two years.

I'm not liking the risk of that first option, long term.

---

I think there are much greater risks, long term, in preserving an anti-democratic (small d) rule invented by segregationists even as it prevents the passage of aid Democrats promised during a crisis. A de facto 60 vote requirement makes the senate unworkable as an institution, and inflates the already inflated power it affords to small, rural states.

---

If they get rid of the filibuster they can make DC a state. Unfortunately the democrats don't really care about that.

---

There's a fundamental issue here in that legislation is so important because it is likely to produce stable changes. This is at least in part because it's hard to get legislation passed, meaning it's also particularly hard to get it overturned once in.

Changing this changes the dynamics a lot, potentially making legislative change just as ineffective as EO.

---

Antifar posted...

"If you want unity, you want bipartisanship, you ought to start with the group that's willing to work together," Cassidy said on "Fox News Sunday." "They did not."

Fuck these people so hard

---

COVxy posted...
COVxy posted...

There's a fundamental issue here in that legislation is so important because it is likely to produce stable changes. This is at least in part because it's hard to get legislation passed,

It wasn't this hard until like 20 years ago. The 60-vote requirement everyone now accepts as set in stone basically didn't exist for the first two hundred years of this government. It was never intended to be this hard!

---

Antifar posted...

Democrats can either get rid of the filibuster and ram through legislation with 50+1 votes, or pass nothing and hope voters will reward them for it in two years.

Which is essentially the fascism we heard so much about the last 4 years

Alexis_Heartly posted...

Which is essentially the fascism we heard so much about the last 4 years

You don't know what fascism is 5 karma account.

---

Tmaster148 posted...

You don't know what fascism is 5 karma account.

You mean a government forcing things through without representation of the people?

Alexis_Heartly posted...

You mean a government forcing things through without representation of the people?

People already voted for the people in Congress to represent them and the president and vice president. So a bill passing by 50+1 votes is infact being represented by the people.

---

i don't trust what the republican's are selling this time. they'll find a way to screw out a few groups out of the money again.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

People already voted for the people in Congress to represent them and the president and vice president. So a bill passing by 50+1 votes is infact being represented by the people.

Its not. Skirting the system is cheating. Getting rid of things like the filibuster because you know it won't pass means its not a good plan to begin with

Don't even respond to a 2021 account do

---