By Anh Nguyen

May 12, 2020. The day United States Representative Nita Lowey proposed the HEROES Act in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Perhaps it was also the day that wreaked havoc in the White House, paving the way for a tumultuous presidential election period. Why? May 12 signified the common issue of partisanship: the Democrat-dominated House of Representatives and the Republican-dominated Senate just cannot agree. Let’s run it back and see how we got here.

There is no denying that the COVID-19 pandemic has had detrimental effects on communities across the United States, especially among working families. In fact, as of October, the U.S. leads the world with more than 7 million confirmed cases and more than 200,000 deaths (Johns Hopkins 2020). To add to that, as a result of the economic downturn from the pandemic, many Americans have lost their jobs and are struggling to make ends meet. Consequently, Congress has taken steps to alleviate the effects of COVID-19 on communities, and it started with the passage of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. On March 27, 2020, the bill came into law with the approval of President Donald Trump. The CARES Act was a $2.2 trillion economic stimulus bill that included benefits such as $300 billion in one-time cash payments to individual Americans and $260 billion in increased unemployment benefits. However, the CARES Act contained some glaring design flaws. Particularly, time-based aid and a lack of guardrails raised concerns that public money would be used to save the wealth of corporate executives rather than the jobs and wages of typical workers.

Thus the second round of stimulus bills began. Representative Nita Lowey’s Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act, passed on May 15, 2020 by the House of Representatives, was meant to be a supplement to the CARES Act stimulus package. How does the HEROES Act stack up against the CARES Act? There is a push for a repeated $1,200 economic impact payments seen in the CARES Act with the same criteria for income level eligibility. However, there is a difference for the additional payment for dependents. The amount for dependents would increase to $1,200 and those eligible would be expanded to include college students, dependents over 16 years old, and disabled relatives and dependent parents. There is a lot of money—$2.2 trillion—going into the bill, which is why the Republicans and Senate were quick to call it “dead on arrival” as an unrealistic and partisan bill (Erica Werner and Jeff Stein 2020). The HEROES Act did pass through the House by a narrow margin, and Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi even accepted that the bill may only be a starting point for the next round of negotiations. Some of the 18 mostly centrist Democrats who voted “no” on the legislation in May expressed frustration that they were voting on a bill that was headed nowhere (Erica Werner and Jeff Stein 2020).

On July 27, 2020, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced a Republican-influenced proposal of the Health, Economic, Assistance, Liability Protection and Schools (HEALS) Act. Compared to the $2.2 trillion HEROES Act, the HEALS Act includes a smaller $1 trillion dollar package and more funding for schools and higher learning institutions. However, it would not provide additional funding for state and local governments short on tax revenue and it would also reduce expanded unemployment benefits. Moreover, rather than increase the amount of money for dependents like the HEROES Act proposed, it would follow the CARES Act at $500 per dependent.

Then, in September, McConnell introduced the Delivering Immediate Relief to America’s Families, Schools and Small Business Act, a $300 billion stimulus bill that included additional unemployment benefits for out-of-work Americans, funding for schools, and liability protections for businesses and health care facilities. However, the bill was defeated in a 52-47 vote as Senate Democrats blocked its passage. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer repeatedly referred to the bill as “emaciated,” delineating that Democrats had no plan to support the “wildly insufficient bill” (Christal Hayes 2020).

With all of these different partisan bills, the White House has been thrown into disarray as the traditional and well-known partisan gridlock dominates the issue of COVID-19 aid. As shown by the different proposals of the Democrat-led HEROES Act and the Republican-led HEALS Act, both Democrats and Republicans have refused to meet in the middle for a compromise. This refusal to compromise on a COVID-19 aid plan has penetrated even the presidential election. In October, President Trump abruptly rejected the Democrats’ COVID-19 aid offer as he sought to postpone months of negotiations until after the November election. Trump tweeted, “I have instructed my representatives to stop negotiating until after the election when, immediately after I win, we will pass a major Stimulus Bill that focuses on hardworking Americans and Small Business.” In response, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden stated that Trump had “turned his back” on the American people, and Nancy Pelosi accused Trump of “putting himself first at the expense of the country” (Nicholas Wu and Christal Hayes 2020).

Ultimately, what does all of this mean for the American people? Well, it means that Americans urgently waiting for receipt of financial aid as soon as possible will not receive anything until at least another month. The continued impasse between Democrats and Republicans leaves a very slim chance for a COVID-19 stimulus bill that will pass in Congress before the November election. Consequently, this will leave many Americans in working families and communities with nothing to live on as the effects of the pandemic continue to impact the economy. Both the Democratic and Republican COVID-19 bill proposals have included some form of aid that will help subsets of people in the country. However, it is the amount of dollars that goes into each party-led bill that leaves very little chance for a bipartisan compromise--something that the United States desperately needs. However they do it, the House and Senate need to come to an agreement fast on the cost of a final stimulus package in order to get money to Americans. With the pandemic expected to continue its impact on the economy and people’s livelihoods, compromise by all sides is needed, with perhaps the beneficial aspects of CARES, HEROES, and HEALS combined. Fundamentally, a good bill needs to put Americans’ health first by investing in robust domestic and global health programs that will improve Americans’ health outcomes. Keep the $600/week unemployment benefits from the CARES Act. Keep the increased stimulus money for dependents and global health funding from the HEROES Act. Keep the $16 billion funding for coronavirus testing from the HEALS Act. Keep whatever is needed to pass meaningful legislation that will protect Americans not only from the effects of COVID-19, but also any future pandemics.

Sources Cited:

“COVID-19 Map.” Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html.

“Democrats Block Senate GOP COVID-19 Relief Proposal.” ABC News, ABC News Network, abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-voting-gop-covid-19-relief-proposal/story?id=72926403.

Ella Nilsen, Li Zhou. “Democrats' $3 Trillion Opening Bid for the next Stimulus Package, Explained.” Vox, Vox, 12 May 2020, www.vox.com/2020/5/12/21254397/next-coronavirus-stimulus-package-democrats-heroes-act.

English, AS. “Stimulus Check: CARES, HEALS and HEROES Acts Compared.” AS.com, AS En, 5 Aug. 2020, en.as.com/en/2020/08/05/latest_news/1596650553_069635.html.

Erica Werner, Jeff Stein. “House Democrats Pass $2.2 Trillion Stimulus Bill over GOP Opposition; Bipartisan Talks Continue.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 2 Oct. 2020, www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/10/01/white-house-democrats-economic-stimulus/.

Hayes, Christal. “Senate Democrats Block $300 Billion Coronavirus Stimulus Package, Leaving Little Hope for Relief before November.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 10 Sept. 2020, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/09/10/coronavirus-senate-set-vote-bill-democrats-vow-block/5762727002/.

Lowey, Nita M. “H.R.6800 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): The Heroes Act.” Congress.gov, 23 July 2020, www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6800.

“Side-By-Side Comparison: the Senate HEALS Act vs. the House HEROES Act COVID-19.” Side-By-Side Comparison: the Senate HEALS Act vs. the House HEROES Act, www.gray-robinson.com/news/post/2663/side-by-side-comparison-the-senate-heals-act-vs-the-house-heroes-act.

Smith, Dale. “Stimulus Package: How the New Heroes Act Compares to the CARES Act from March.” CNET, CNET, 5 Oct. 2020, www.cnet.com/personal-finance/stimulus-package-how-the-new-heroes-act-compares-to-the-cares-act-from-march/.

Wu, Nicholas, and Christal Hayes. “Trump Rejects Democrats' COVID-19 Aid Offer, Says No Deal until after the Election; Pelosi Says White House in 'Complete Disarray'.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 7 Oct. 2020, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/10/06/covid-stimulus-update-trump-rejects-democratic-offer-eyes-election/3627003001/.

Welcome to RJPP Short-Form! We are incredibly enthusiastic about promoting an informal non-partisan platform to share policy ideas and encourage students to engage in discussion. In addition to the traditional, long-form annual publication of The Rice Journal of Public Policy, this short-form blog will be home to policy articles from students and groups across campus for informal policy dialogue. If you have a perspective on any policy issue, whether that be on the federal, state, local, or Rice level, that you wish to share, please feel free to submit short-form papers to us. Rice students have many ideas and opinions, but often lack an intellectual platform on which they can share them. Now, they have an opportunity to do so.

If you are interested, find submission guidelines on the "About" sub-tab.

Thanks for visiting – we hope you get involved.

Shruthi Velidi | The Rice Journal of Public Policy, Editor-in-Chief

shruthi.velidi@rice.edu | ricejpp@gmail.com