More than a month ago, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi successfully negotiated a bipartisan coronavirus response bill. It didn’t include universal paid sick leave or direct cash assistance, but Democrats won expanded free COVID-19 testing and unemployment benefits. Pelosi was criticized for trumpeting a relatively meager relief bill as the coronavirus pandemic spread across the country and businesses began to shutter.
“Pelosi has Trump over a barrel,” wrote Politico’s Michael Grunwald, who extensively covered the economic stimulus negotiations in 2009, arguing that the Republican minorities in the House and Senate at that time did not shy away from exploiting that crisis to win policy concessions from President Obama.
More than a month ago, I argued that the criticism of Democrats was overblown: They hadn’t really been outflanked on the left by some of the most conservative voices in Washington, suddenly refashioned as right-wing populists in the era of Trump. But I conceded this much: “Democrats on Capitol Hill, making a plausibly earnest effort to actually lead in a time of crisis, are losing the messaging battle.”
Now, three congressional relief packages, 22 million lost jobs and nearly 100,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 later, Democrats have won a one-time, means-tested cash payment to most but not all U.S. citizens, strengthened nutritional assistance, and billions in funding for small business grants and loans, albeit in a limited initial offering that showed signs it would be overwhelmed even before it became publicly available.
So indeed the messaging battle is not going well. Apparently, when you’ve got them over a barrel — you take a break?
Some House Democrats are now heading back to Washington after returning to their home districts late last month, to shepherd through the passage of another aid package, this one a Senate-negotiated deal to shore up the funding for small businesses meant to keep up payrolls. To that end, this bill was unplanned but hardly unexpected.
Twelve days ago, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell offered only $250 billion in additional funding for the newly established Paycheck Protection Program, and nothing else. Democrats pushed back and eventually won more federal funding for disease testing and billions more for hospitals and personal protective equipment for medical workers. While the goal of stimulus funding is to keep all employees financially afloat as the economy rides out the coronavirus shelter-in-place orders, Democrats secured the second tranche of PPP funding exclusively for small businesses, after large companies and national chain restaurants gobbled up much of the first round.
Trump has already promised to sign the package into law once it is approved by the House, which is expected to do so on Thursday. Democrats won a national testing program, which, as Salon’s Amanda Marcotte explains, was resisted by the Trump administration for the obvious reason that the president doesn’t want an accurate tally, and would rather foist that responsibility on to governors.
So in a way, Pelosi exerted the Democrats’ leverage, and it worked. This latest bill doesn’t contain any obviously bad concessions. In an election year where Democrats had already planned to run on health care, it makes sense that Pelosi would prioritize a push for national testing. Of course, in a normal administration, even one dominated by “conservatives,” both sides would want testing. So even a win hardly seems like a win.
Why do Democrats keep on losing the messaging wars? Because they refuse to do politics.
Sixty-six percent of voters — including 56% of Republicans — support providing two weeks of paid sick leave for all U.S. workers in the midst of the coronavirus outbreak. Still, with the Senate in recess, not one senator on the left — not even Bernie Sanders nor Elizabeth Warren — tried a filibuster to fight for increased paid sick leave. Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky, on the other hand, a pair of consistent libertarians who oppose most new federal spending, made a show on the Senate floor of their supposedly principled opposition to the bill, and stuck to that even in the middle of this pandemic.
Democrats’ negotiations, on the other hand, have left workers for companies with more than 500 employees, including the overworked essential employees at corporations like Amazon and Walmart, without paid sick leave. They have left undocumented immigrants and many U.S. citizens who are married to immigrants without access to stimulus funds, and millions of involuntary unemployed people without eviction protection. This bill, like all the rest before it, is so much smaller than it should be. For example, it includes no funding to save the U.S. Postal Service, which Trump has threatened to shut down, nothing to protect elections or voters and nearly no oversight of all this free money.
So while Democrats may have campaigned to take back the House in 2018 on the promise to serve as a check on Trump — only to slow-walk impeachment and pass a whole bunch of symbolic legislation to die on the Grim Reaper’s desk, they continue to prefer chipping away at Republican obstruction rather than to face it head-on with policies that are supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans.
This is the problem with evaluating how Democrats wield power in Washington. The way they deploy their so-called leverage almost always means consciously deciding not to help people in the hope of short-term political gain. Furthermore, Republicans know that Democrats will always cave rather than be perceived as doing nothing — and Democrats often have little choice, because Republicans are more than happy to do nothing. Those who want to build will always be at a disadvantage, faced with those who seek to destroy.
Now Mitch McConnell has said he wants to hit the brakes on any future bills aimed at helping people on the front lines of this crisis. Republicans have said again and again that they oppose aid to state and local governments, trashing Democrats’ demands for a phase-four stimulus package as a “blue-state bailout.” But in the middle of a once-in-a-generation global pandemic, maybe Republicans are only pretending that they resolutely oppose aid for first responders. It’s time for Democrats to call their bluff.
From the financial crisis to the debt ceiling, Republicans have long used emergencies like hostage situations to demand deeply unpopular policies. A diverse group of more than 20 activist groups on the left has now demanded that Democratic leadership step aside to make way for bold proposals from the ranks. Democrats should push progressive policies, they argue in a letter to the House Democratic Caucus: The bill from Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., to cancel rent and mortgage payments for the duration of the crisis; the bill from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., to provide emergency health care coverage during the pandemic; and a temporary Universal Basic Income bill written by Jayapal and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., that would provide $2,000 to every person in the U.S., every month that the shutdown continues.
“If we pass a relief bill next year, we’re gonna be paying for morgues, and if we pass a relief bill now, we will be paying for prevention. And that’s the difference,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., recently told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
Pelosi has again promised to play hardball on the next round of negotiations, even before voting on this round. Pointing to a Trump tweet in support of federal funding for states, Pelosi told the Washington Post that “McConnell will do whatever the president wants … and the president needs this.”
But here’s the problem with always planning to get more in the next round: You have less leverage each time. Without a message strategy to harness public pressure behind a more progressive agenda, Republicans will continue to feel insulated from their decisions. It would be wise for Democrats to exploit the galling admissions from members of what Salon’s Chauncey DeVega describes as the Republican “death cult,” such as Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s suggestion that America’s elderly are expendable when it comes to the economy.
Eventually, Fox News viewers could grow resentful of such callousness. Consider this: Net approval for Trump’s coronavirus response among people aged 65 and up has gone from +19 percentage points to -1, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll of 11 battleground states. Older voters now disapprove of Trump’s handling of the coronavirus response more than any age group other than 18-to-29-year-olds.
No matter how Democrats play their hand, Republicans are already blaming them for sky-high jobless numbers. McConnell will take his ball and go home, while most Americans get no additional support, for at least a couple of more months. Ours is a political system that needs compromise to function. But one political party views such compromise as tantamount to treason. We can debate Democrats’ specific policy failures, which may be defensible. But their unwillingness to make Republicans own their choices in the middle of a pandemic — by publicly calling them out and playing politics during an election year — is a clear indication that our political system is not equipped for this moment.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.