Readers discuss the lack of any Republican support for the Senate bill, despite wide public support.
To the Editor:
“Stimulus Win Shows Quest to Cooperate Is All but Lost,” by Carl Hulse (news analysis, March 7), proposed that bipartisanship is dead because party leaders could not work past partisan politics on the stimulus plan. While I agree that bipartisanship is dead, I believe that this is merely a symptom of a far bigger problem.
Polls show that the American people overwhelmingly support President Biden’s stimulus plan. If the people of the country agree in a bipartisan way, but not the leaders, this shows a huge disconnect. Whom are the leaders representing?
If the Republican leadership and centrist Democrats like Joe Manchin will not abide by the will of the people, we have a problem with representatives acting for party and self, not for the people.
Christopher Martinez
Coram, N.Y.
To the Editor:
Re “Democrats Trim Jobless Benefits in Stimulus Bill” (front page, March 6):
Senate Democrats agreed to cut proposed unemployment benefits in President Biden’s stimulus bill from $400 to $300 a week in order to placate Senator Joe Manchin and other “moderates,” who feel that the larger amount is too generous for out-of-work Americans.
In Maine, one out of every five children suffers from “food insecurity” — a polite term for hunger. A family with an unemployed breadwinner could well use that “extra” $100 a week to put food on the table. That might not be evident, however, to Senator Manchin and his colleagues, who, it should be noted, are paid $174,000 a year, exclusive of benefits.
Ellen D. Murphy
Portland, Maine
To the Editor:
Re “Senate Approves $1.9 Trillion in Aid for Ailing Nation” (front page, March 7):
It should come as no surprise that there was not one single Republican senator who voted for the stimulus bill, claiming it’s unaffordable. In my opinion there is a unified economic theory that explains Republican versus Democratic financial decision making.
Republicans promote bills that give the most to those who need it the least, while Democrats sponsor bills that give the most to those who need it the most. Former President Donald Trump’s tax cut for the wealthy and corporations is an example of the first case, while the stimulus bill is an example of the second.
No more complicated than that.
Joel Jacowitz
New York
To the Editor:
Ahhh, Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, doing the people’s work, forcing Senate clerks to read the 628-page stimulus bill aloud for no apparent reason other than to delay aid to millions of Americans, many of whom desperately need it to survive.
Pretty slick, Ron. You must be so proud! What else have you done lately for the people who elected you? I guess they’ll have a chance to ask the same question if you run for re-election in 2022.
Joanne Polvy Cohen
Sherman Oaks, Calif.
Site Index
Site Information Navigation
Source: Read Full Article
Home » Analysis & Comment » Opinion | A Partisan Vote on the Stimulus Bill
Opinion | A Partisan Vote on the Stimulus Bill
Readers discuss the lack of any Republican support for the Senate bill, despite wide public support.
To the Editor:
“Stimulus Win Shows Quest to Cooperate Is All but Lost,” by Carl Hulse (news analysis, March 7), proposed that bipartisanship is dead because party leaders could not work past partisan politics on the stimulus plan. While I agree that bipartisanship is dead, I believe that this is merely a symptom of a far bigger problem.
Polls show that the American people overwhelmingly support President Biden’s stimulus plan. If the people of the country agree in a bipartisan way, but not the leaders, this shows a huge disconnect. Whom are the leaders representing?
If the Republican leadership and centrist Democrats like Joe Manchin will not abide by the will of the people, we have a problem with representatives acting for party and self, not for the people.
Christopher Martinez
Coram, N.Y.
To the Editor:
Re “Democrats Trim Jobless Benefits in Stimulus Bill” (front page, March 6):
Senate Democrats agreed to cut proposed unemployment benefits in President Biden’s stimulus bill from $400 to $300 a week in order to placate Senator Joe Manchin and other “moderates,” who feel that the larger amount is too generous for out-of-work Americans.
In Maine, one out of every five children suffers from “food insecurity” — a polite term for hunger. A family with an unemployed breadwinner could well use that “extra” $100 a week to put food on the table. That might not be evident, however, to Senator Manchin and his colleagues, who, it should be noted, are paid $174,000 a year, exclusive of benefits.
Ellen D. Murphy
Portland, Maine
To the Editor:
Re “Senate Approves $1.9 Trillion in Aid for Ailing Nation” (front page, March 7):
It should come as no surprise that there was not one single Republican senator who voted for the stimulus bill, claiming it’s unaffordable. In my opinion there is a unified economic theory that explains Republican versus Democratic financial decision making.
Republicans promote bills that give the most to those who need it the least, while Democrats sponsor bills that give the most to those who need it the most. Former President Donald Trump’s tax cut for the wealthy and corporations is an example of the first case, while the stimulus bill is an example of the second.
No more complicated than that.
Joel Jacowitz
New York
To the Editor:
Ahhh, Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, doing the people’s work, forcing Senate clerks to read the 628-page stimulus bill aloud for no apparent reason other than to delay aid to millions of Americans, many of whom desperately need it to survive.
Pretty slick, Ron. You must be so proud! What else have you done lately for the people who elected you? I guess they’ll have a chance to ask the same question if you run for re-election in 2022.
Joanne Polvy Cohen
Sherman Oaks, Calif.
Site Index
Site Information Navigation
Source: Read Full Article