We are in a trying time. There is a global pandemic underway, and our overreaction to it may cause even more problems than the spread of the virus itself.
Some reports indicate that the current closing of most businesses, working from home and disruptions to American life may not be enough. The implications of a national shutdown of air travel and more could cause additional issues with the economy.
The situation begs for a federal response for economic stimulus. That will lead to massive amounts of debt and every politician seems to be in agreement that something must be done.
Even budget hawk U.S. Representative Mo Brooks (R-Huntsville) expressed support for some stimulus with both his votes and comments made on WVNN this week.
Brooks noted on “The Dale Jackson Show” that “it’s better to be in debt than dead” during a discussion about the first economic stimulus matters passed by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump.
But Brooks made it clear that he supports more stimulus if it is targeted to those who need it and if it will help. His statements indicate that this is not a blank check for whatever Democratic and Republican leadership come up with moving forward.
Brooks said, “If the Democrats go hog wild, I might vote no, but gosh there are a whole lot of people we can help with this legislation.”
Brooks added that people need help right now, but not just individuals.
“[P]articularly small businesses, the airline industry, we’re talking about low or no-interest loans. $50 billion, in that neighborhood, for the airline industry, another $150 billion for small businesses, like restaurants that are getting hammered. So there are things that we can and should be doing,” he advised.
Brooks warned against Democrats viewing this as a “welfare grab bag” in order to “buy votes.” He said he wants to “limit the money to those people who have suffered financial loss because of a historical disease that’s threatening our planet.”
My takeaway:
Reality may creep in here for Congressman Brooks and others in Washington, D.C. who would like to see targeted assistance. The allure of doing something, anything, and doing big things may end up being too much.
Elected officials like Brooks may need to vote for a bill that they aren’t huge fans of because of the good things in the bill.
Ideally, though, targeted assistance should be the goal: government employees, including teachers and others whose pay will not be affected by this pandemic and the response to it.
This is exactly what was done during the BP oil spill repayment, it should be targeted here as well.
Over its existence More than one million claims of 220,000 individual and business claimants were processed and more than $6.2 billion was paid out from the fund. 97% of payments were made to claimants in the Gulf States.[5] During the transition period before the settlement of claims through the GCCF was replaced by the court supervised settlement program additional $404 million in claims were paid.[3]
The government should use something like that method to help people who are actually harmed by this.
That means giving more money to those actually affected and no money to those that weren’t.
This would be hard to figure out, but this is important and should be done right.
Low-wage workers, those in the service industry, those who have been laid off and furloughed could use more than those who stayed gainfully employed.
Why should I receive a check for $1,200 dollars and a server at a bar that was forced to close in downtown Huntsville receive the same thing?
Those who are harmed should be helped. The goal should not be for the government to make it rain on everyone in order to say they did something.
Listen:
Dale Jackson is a contributing writer to Yellowhammer News and hosts a talk show from 7-11 am weekdays on WVNN.
