coronavirus
Joe Biden's Got Green New Deal In Your Stimulus!
You've got stimulus in your Green New Deal!
April 27, 2020 01:05 PM
Joe Biden has some ideas about economic stimulus. In an interview with Politico, Biden said America needs a new stimulus bill that's a "hell of a lot bigger" than last month's $2.2 trillion CARES Act to get people through the economic chaos caused by the coronavirus, as well as bold thinking that goes well beyond the immediate crisis. My gosh, it's almost as if he knows that you don't get out of economic doldrums by forcing austerity.
Also, he cussed a lot about Donald Trump's terrible management of the crisis, but limited it to hells and damns to keep it all safe for primetime TV. We'll confess, we like Angry Joe.
<p>Politico's Michael Grunwald noted that Biden's economic talk "sounded a bit like his angrier and less moderate primary rivals, Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren," which is all to the good. Any new stimulus, he said, has to be aimed at making sure state and local governments can avoid "laying off a hell of a lot of teachers and cops and firefighters," and needs better oversight built into it, since the Trump administration is "wasting a hell of a lot of money" with the current stimulus funding. </p><blockquote>[Stimulus] is a subject close to his heart, and he passionately contrasted his own management of President Barack Obama's $800 billion Recovery Act in 2009 with President Donald Trump's approach to the trillions of dollars flowing out of Capitol Hill.<br><br>The Obama stimulus was wildly controversial, but it won bipartisan praise for its strict oversight and unusually low levels of fraud. In the interview, Biden was at his most indignant when he recounted how he recruited a gruff law enforcement veteran and government watchdog named Earl Devaney to oversee the Recovery Act in 2009, and how President Donald Trump fired the Pentagon inspector general who had been selected to oversee the CARES Act almost immediately after he signed it.</blockquote><p>Why yes, we would like to quibble with that "wildly controversial" label there, since it came from Republicans who only give two shits about deficits when there's a Democrat in the White House, and then turn around and pass tax cuts that are far larger once they're in office. But yes, more about Biden's oversight of the 2009 stimulus, please? </p><blockquote>"I wanted to bring in the toughest son-of-a-bitch in the country — I really mean it, I'm not joking — because we wanted to make sure we did it by the numbers with genuine oversight," Biden said. "Right now, there's no oversight. [Trump] made it real clear he doesn't have any damn interest in being checked. The last thing he wants is anyone watching that $500 billion going to corporate America, for God's sake."</blockquote><p>Unfortunately, the Politico piece went on to misidentify the oversight dude Trump fired, saying it was<a href="https://www.wonkette.com/trump-firing-intelligence-ig-for-doing-his-job-sure-why-not" target="_blank"> Michael Atkinson,</a> the intelligence community inspector general who forwarded the Ukraine whistleblower complaint to Congress, which led to Trump's impeachment. Silly Politico, not <em>that </em>fired IG! It was actually the<a href="https://www.wonkette.com/which-inspector-general-is-trump-saturday-night-massacring-this-lovely-tuesday" target="_blank"> Defense Department's (acting) IG Glenn Fine,</a> for the record. We can see how Politico would mix them up, since both were fired the same week in April, along with several thousand other IGs. Because Donald Trump was so focused on dealing with the pandemic, probably. </p><p>Biden had a lot more to say about how this stimmy stuff should be helping small businesses, not the big banks that have been the conduit for the "small-business" loan program that has ended up<a href="https://www.wonkette.com/mnuchin-so-mad-big-companies-bogarted-small-business-stimmy-funds-as-designed" target="_blank"> benefiting so many very large businesses.</a> Biden said Republicans had been entirely too generous to the banks, making this "the second time we've bailed their asses out," and complaining that giant banks, which are "only alive because of the American taxpayer" have given preferential treatment to their existing — and most profitable — customers in making loans through the Paycheck Protection Program.<br></p><blockquote>"We knew from the beginning that the big banks don't like lending to small businesses," Biden said. "I'm telling you, though, if Main Street businesses don't get help, they're gone."</blockquote><p>For the next round of stimulus spending, Biden said it's vital to get aid for state and local government, and beyond that, to focus on the long-term thinking that'll be needed to help the economy get back on track. But not back to the same old thing: </p><blockquote>Biden suggested that after four rounds of legislation designed primarily to stanch the economic bleeding, the next round should include more forward-looking investments that could help the economy start to recover and grow once the virus is contained. He suggested a "trillion-dollar infrastructure program that can be implemented really rapidly," as well as "dealing with environmental things that create good-paying jobs."<br><br>Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have suggested that "green stimulus" would be a nonstarter with Republicans, but Biden said investments in light rail, clean drinking water, and half a million electric vehicle chargers on the nation's highways could help retool the economy for the future.</blockquote><p>Such long-term investments, he said, would lead to the economic growth that would help pay for the spending that will dig us out of the current slump. We should repeal the 2017 Big Fat Tax Cuts for Rich Fuckwads, he said, which "wasn't worth the powder it will take to blow it to hell." Instead, investing in green infrastructure and jobs for the future will be "the only thing that grows the economy back so the deficit doesn't eat you alive." </p><p>Not surprisingly, once the Politico interview went up, a Trump campaign spokesidiot, Tim Murtaugh, offered a load of codswallop, claiming that Biden wants to use the coronavirus crisis to sneak through a Green New Deal while the planet's temporarily less polluted (OK, he didn't say it <em>that</em> way), and that green energy would create "millions of job losses in the energy sector," as if nobody would have jobs in clean energy. Then Murtaugh told another whopper: </p><blockquote>Joe Biden helped preside over the worst economic recovery since World War II, so economic advice from him is not exactly a hot commodity.</blockquote><p>Pre-Rona <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/10/30/two-charts-show-trumps-job-gains-are-just-a-continuation-from-obamas-presidency/#48a8be451af3" target="_blank">Unemployment </a>and <a href="https://www.mikebloomberg2020.com/news/chart-of-the-week-debunking-the-trump-economy" target="_blank">GDP</a> charts, please? </p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzE2OTIzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNTk1MzkzN30.qMC2IWS8DWUdpKGDAJwaB2WBPUwJFxj5cJ_nZ5bfLgY/img.jpg?width=980" id="cc480" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="47d34f75a4cb31a79ba93f36b79233ad" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzE2OTIzNi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzNzc3MjQzMH0.VQshUk7mt1WaIFuQweqh-O3H_ayI-K7_tAy9-yMtK_A/img.jpg?width=980" id="69d37" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="16be304df9e9f250545f4d3e5d9c6753" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>And of course, the Obama recovery could have been much stronger were it not for deficit hawks' insistence on austerity, which limited the effects of the post-2008 stimulus. Let us lecture you about how Republican austerity also fucked over the progress being made by the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2011/07/16/138185648/when-a-turn-toward-austerity-turned-to-disaster" target="_blank">New Deal in 1937,</a> shall we? Grrr. Makes us so mad we could mildly cuss like Joe Biden! </p><p>In any case, it's a good interview and you should read it; Joe Biden is clearly listening to people telling him we could use some genuinely progressive economics right now, and we're looking forward to hearing more of this stuff. The Biden campaign really needs to write all this up in some policy papers for us to roll around in.</p><p>[<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/25/joe-biden-green-stimulus-207848" target="_blank">Politico</a> / Photo by <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/49554622748/" target="_blank">Gage Skidmore,</a> Creative Commons <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/" target="_blank">license 2.0</a>]<br></p><p>Yr Wonkette is supported entirely by reader donations. Help us keep the servers humming and the writers paid. And if you're sheltering in place, here's our <a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Amazon linky</a>, too.</p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
coronavirus
Dr. Birx Did Some Sunday Shows. It Was ... Yep!
It's your Sunday Rundown!
April 27, 2020 11:27 AM
It's another week of quarantine, caused by an infectious virus and the narcissistic and incompetent virus in the White House.
Since this pandemic began we have had two main medical experts dealing with Trump and trying to help the American people, Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx. While they have similar goals, their approaches to walking the tightrope between informing the public while soothing Trump's fragile ego have differentiated them. Dr. Fauci, for his part, has been respectful not to go out of his way to piss off the
Hamburglar-In-Chief while also informing the public. He has passed on actual real information during Trump's coronavirus briefings. For this, and for being an honest broker in this pandemic, he was rewarded by getting his wish to be portrayed on "Saturday Night Live":
But what of Dr. Birx? Well, Dr. Birx has taken a different tack. Appearing on the Sunday shows, Birx appears to have decided defending the idiocy of Trump is more important than her decades of medical credibility. At least that's what it looked like.
<p>On CNN's "State Of The Union," host Jake Tapper asked Birx a few questions about contact tracing and testing, then asked about Trump's <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/reports-of-bleach-and-lysol-drinking-increase-day-after-trump-sarcastically-suggests-it">batshit advice about disinfectants</a> to treat COVID-19, presumably in order to give Birx an opportunity to correct the disinformation. Birx decided to cover for Trump instead:</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7c06f311a829f6fe880e4ed2eb098450"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_FXeaqNaBI0?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Dr. Deborah Birx: This is not just about diagnosing cases you see</small>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FXeaqNaBI0" target="_blank">www.youtube.com</a>
</small>
</p>
<p><br></p><blockquote style="margin-left: 20px;">
<strong>BIRX</strong>: Well, first, that was a dialogue he was having between the DHS scientist and himself for information that he had received and he was discussing.
We have made it clear, and he -- when he turned to me, I made it clear, and he understood, that it was not as a treatment.
And I think that kind of dialogue will happen.
I think what got lost in there, which very -- is unfortunate, I think, in what happened next is, that study was critically important for the American people.
And you say, why was that important? Because we had an MIT study just from a few weeks ago that said -- that suggests, when people are talking and singing, aerosolized virus could be moving forward.
What this study showed for the first time is that sunlight can impact that aerosolization outside. This -- this is why we asked them to do it.
We're trying to understand why people should be wearing masks. You're wearing masks because you could have asymptomatic infection, and you will decrease your transmission to others. And I think the half-life in the sunlight is very important as we move forward to really understand how we can effectively create decontamination in different environments. <br>
<br>
<strong>TAPPER</strong>: Yes.
No, look, I get it. And I understand the importance of that study that the DHS official was discussing from the lab in Maryland about the effect of sunlight on having or, even more effectively, the life of coronavirus, the effect of disinfectants on nonporous solids, like doorknobs.
But that's not what the president was musing about. He was talking to about ways to take that science and somehow turn it into injecting UV light or disinfectants into the human body, which, as you know, especially with disinfectants, can be lethal.
And the CDC had to issue a statement. Lysol had to issue a statement.
I understand that you're taking a generous approach to this when it comes to President Trump musing aloud. But this is potentially dangerous. I mean, poison control centers got calls from people, and they had to issue statements saying, do not internally use disinfectants.
As a doctor, doesn't that bother you that you have to even spend any time discussing this? <br>
<br>
<strong>BIRX</strong>: Well, I think it bothers me that this is still in the news cycle, because I think we're missing the bigger pieces of what we need to be doing, as an American people, to continue to protect one another.
And we should be having that dialogue about asymptomatics. We should be having that dialogue about this unique clotting that we're seeing.
</blockquote><p>
OK sure, the problem is <em>definitely</em> not that Trump delivered such a shitshow of misinformation that CDC and Lysol had to issue statements to tell people <em>not to listen to the president of the United States</em>.<br>
</p><p>
Of course, Birx's excuse is just horseshit. Moving on!<br>
</p><p>
Birx also went on NBC's "Meet The Press," where she got less pushback from Chuck Todd because of course. Watch it if that's what you'd like to do.<br>
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2f4bbd1c1370a1ef9f4b6b1c496dabe9"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/twEBUQevc_Y?start=562&rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://youtu.be/twEBUQevc_Y?t=562" target="_blank">youtu.be</a>
</small>
</p><p>
But you know who had zero time for any bullshit this weekend? Andrea Mitchell, who had some smoke for Birx and anyone else passing misinformation or not calling it out strongly enough:
</p><blockquote>
<strong>MITCHELL</strong>: [W]hen Dr. Birx said to you today that sunlight does kill the virus, she is perpetuating an unscientific, untested single study presented by a non-scientist from the Department of Homeland Security which led to the president, as she put it, not fully digesting the data. She needed to be very clear on disavowing it. And to this point, she still has not been even this morning.
</blockquote><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8de7a79661044632ba4d0ee905dfd8c4"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CWhjdtKi0MI?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://youtu.be/CWhjdtKi0MI" target="_blank">youtu.be</a>
</small>
</p><p>
And that is what happened with Dr. Birx on Sunday. On Saturday, <a href="https://www.axios.com/birx-coronavirus-news-headlines-10c6aa32-3808-4bcd-a6e5-d4f134fbb5c6.html" target="_blank">she went on Fox News</a> and complained that the media's coronavirus headlines are "slicey and dicey."<br>
</p><p>So ... yep!</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<a href="https://media2.giphy.com/media/VbbqNbtzf8Z8bARML7/giphy.gif?cid=2fb0ca765be7ec94941da111ca394879ac772e3d028d6780&rid=giphy.gif" target="_blank"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzE2ODc4MS9vcmlnaW4uZ2lmIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwODcwNzgzNH0.qmfxWAPGT2v3MrORuTKT_EMoipK3ie6v9McJJ4KFBtw/img.gif?width=980" id="e842e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="61ad432d228b9370dfeae1257ec3a481" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"></a>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/news-hello-darkness-my-old-friend-deborah-birx-dr-VbbqNbtzf8Z8bARML7" target="_blank">Giphy</a>
</small>
</p><p><strong>Please click here to support your Wonkette. And if you're ordering your quarantine goods on Amazon, </strong><a href="https://amzn.to/2wbH77j" target="_blank"><strong>this is the link to do it.</strong></a></p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Environment
Trump Administration Takes Time Out Of Busy Pandemic To Make Cars Dirty Again
It's a fuck-you to Obama, so it must be done.
April 01, 2020 09:44 AM
The Trump administration rolled out the final version of its vehicle fuel-efficiency rules Tuesday, meaning that Trump will finally have eliminated tougher standards put in place under Barack Obama. The auto industry didn't particularly want the new rules, and several automakers plan to support higher gas-mileage standards planned by California, but now the rules are here and they're going to make you happy if you know what's good for you. The administration has had a hard time presenting any logical rationale for the rules beyond the fact that Obama wanted to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that cause climate change, which of course is all the reason needed to dump his regulations.
EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a joint statement with the Transportation Department that the new rules delivered "on President Trump's promise to correct the current fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards." No, of course he didn't explicitly spell out what needed "correcting." But clearly, dirtier air is a good thing for everyone:
Our final rule puts in place a sensible one national program that strikes the right regulatory balance that protects our environment, and sets reasonable targets for the auto industry. This rule supports our economy, and the safety of American families.
The statement reads a lot more plausibly if you imagine a guy in a suit making the universal jerking-off gesture.
<p>Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao also attempted to justify relaxing fuel efficiency standards by claiming the new rules would magically make cars less expensive, so more people could afford newer, safer cars: </p><blockquote>This rule reflects the Department's #1 priority — safety — by making newer, safer, cleaner vehicles more accessible for Americans who are, on average, driving 12-year-old cars. By making newer, safer, and cleaner vehicles more accessible for American families, more lives will be saved and more jobs will be created.</blockquote><p>You know, whenever the coronavirus shutdown of the entire industry is over. Chao didn't say whether car companies would be allowed to count the oxygen output of the ventilators some may be building as part of their fleet fuel efficiency numbers. </p><p>The Obama standards would have required automakers to improve fuel efficiency by roughly five percent a year through 2026, with average fleet fuel efficiency of <a href="https://www.ewg.org/energy/23098/trump-rollback-auto-emissions-standards-1-billion-more-tons-air-pollution" target="_blank">54 miles per gallon by 2025</a>. Instead, the new Trump rules will require only about 1.5 percent improvements each model year, meaning average fuel efficiency by 2025 would only have to be 40 MPG. </p><p>That's slightly better than the original proposal to gut the Obama standards. The first draft would have frozen efficiency requirements where they are right now. The very modest increases actually came after<a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/03/31/824431240/trump-administration-weakens-auto-emissions-rolling-back-key-climate-policy" target="_blank"> US automakers complained</a> that keeping the 2020 standards in place for years would put them at a disadvantage in the global marketplace. </p><p>Even with the negligible improvement, the new rules will result in emissions of over a billion more tons of carbon dioxide over the life of the US vehicle fleet, compared to the Obama rules, <a href="https://www.ewg.org/energy/23098/trump-rollback-auto-emissions-standards-1-billion-more-tons-air-pollution" target="_blank">according to</a> the Environmental Working Group. As the <em>Washington Post</em> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-rolls-back-rules-on-mileage-standards-dealing-a-blow-to-obama-era-climate-policy/2020/03/31/cb42cbb8-7359-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html" target="_blank">points out</a>, that's equivalent to the CO2 emissions that would result from "running 237 coal power plants for a year, according to the EPA's online calculator." And that's in a country where there are, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kXtAw6QvhE14_KRn5lnGoVPsHN3fDZHVMlvz_s_ch1w/edit#gid=191821593" target="_blank">as of January this year,</a> just 280 coal-fired power plants still operating. </p><p>But what about the much much safer cars, huh? The logic is that since vehicles would be cheaper if automakers don't have to pass on the costs of making them more efficient, more people would buy more newer cars. So over the life of those new cars, the administration <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-rolls-back-rules-on-mileage-standards-dealing-a-blow-to-obama-era-climate-policy/2020/03/31/cb42cbb8-7359-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html" target="_blank">claims</a>, there would be 3,300 fewer traffic deaths. (WaPo <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-rolls-back-rules-on-mileage-standards-dealing-a-blow-to-obama-era-climate-policy/2020/03/31/cb42cbb8-7359-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html" target="_blank">notes </a>that's a big reduction from an earlier draft's estimate of 12,700 fewer traffic fatalities.) Mind you, those supposed reductions in traffic deaths are offset a teensy bit by people dying due to dirtier air:</p><blockquote>The rule projects between 440 and 990 premature deaths would occur due to air pollution during that same period, though Environmental Protection Agency officials said the number may be slightly lower.</blockquote><p>Needless to say, the analysis doesn't get into the larger question of how refusing to slow carbon emissions will affect lives otherwise, because global warming is a myth made up by China to hurt American consumers. </p><p>We should also note that the administration appears to have completely dropped its <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/trump-fuel-standards" target="_blank">original bullshit justification</a> for scrapping the Obama standards, which was that if cars continue to get crappier gas mileage, people would <em>choose to drive less</em> than if most vehicles were more efficient. For some reason, the EPA has dropped the argument that good gas mileage might kill you. </p><p>California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who has been fighting the administration's effort to quash California's separate, higher mileage standards, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-rolls-back-rules-on-mileage-standards-dealing-a-blow-to-obama-era-climate-policy/2020/03/31/cb42cbb8-7359-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html" target="_blank">issued a statement</a> saying the rule would </p><blockquote>"fail to increase fuel economy." That's because the industry is already making improvements "on their own at 2 percent without the rule," the statement said.<br><br>They also wrote that the rule "will not save lives" and "is a wash at best. Increased air pollution will likely take more lives than the plan purports to save."</blockquote><p>The one good thing about the new rules is that they're likely to be caught up in lawsuits for the rest of 2020 at least, so there's some chance a new president and Congress might nip them in the bud. And <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/big-timber-agrees-with-greenies-on-oregon-forest-management-republicans-very-sad" target="_blank">like other industries,</a> the auto industry would really just like to have some certainty about what the standards will be, instead of endless lawsuits. </p><p>Nevertheless, Donald Trump took to Twitter with a bunch of lies and nonsense, accusing automakers who prefer stable government of being a bunch of hippie weirdos: </p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
<iframe width="100%" height="150" scrolling="no" class="rm-shortcode twitter-embed-1245076618604875779" id="twitter-embed-1245076618604875779" type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="/res/community/twitter_embed/?iframe_id=twitter-embed-1245076618604875779&created_ts=1585684372.0&screen_name=realDonaldTrump&text=My+proposal+to+the+politically+correct+Automobile+Companies+would+lower+the+average+price+of+a+car+to+consumers+by%E2%80%A6+https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FeBfGp9JoAH&id=1245076618604875779&name=Donald+J.+Trump" frameborder="0" data-rm-shortcode-id="0f6882323d6861b2ec59ac2cbb4a4ece"></iframe>
</p><p>Needless to say, that's some bullshit, as WaPo <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-rolls-back-rules-on-mileage-standards-dealing-a-blow-to-obama-era-climate-policy/2020/03/31/cb42cbb8-7359-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html" target="_blank">explains:</a> </p><blockquote>Those claims are inaccurate or contradicted by information released by his agencies. The Transportation Department says Trump's rule would cut car prices by "about $1,000." Lowering the standards will add pollution, not make it better. And the administration rule does not govern the safety of automobiles.</blockquote><p>Other than that, the new rules are brilliant and very good, and most importantly, they give Barack Obama the middle finger. </p><p>[<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-rollback-mileage-standards-guts-climate-change-push-n1173026" target="_blank">NBC News</a> /<a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/us-dot-and-epa-put-safety-and-american-families-first-final-rule-fuel-economy-standards" target="_blank"> EPA news release</a> /<a href="https://www.ewg.org/energy/23098/trump-rollback-auto-emissions-standards-1-billion-more-tons-air-pollution" target="_blank"> Environmental Working Group</a> / <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-rolls-back-rules-on-mileage-standards-dealing-a-blow-to-obama-era-climate-policy/2020/03/31/cb42cbb8-7359-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html" target="_blank">WaPo</a> / <a href="https://endcoal.org/global-coal-plant-tracker/summary-statistics/" target="_blank">Global Energy Monitor</a>]</p><p><strong>Yr Wonkette is supported entirely by reader donations. Help us keep the servers humming and the writers paid, and if you're sheltering in place, here's our <a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Amazon linky</a>, too.</strong></p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
coronavirus
How Are We Saving The Economy Today (Besides Killing Grandma Millie)?
A quick comparison of the House and Senate plans, because we love you.
March 24, 2020 11:18 AM
While the Senate's economic stimulus bill was bogged down yesterday over Republicans' insistence on big corporate bailouts with little oversight, Nancy Pelosi unveiled a House plan yesterday to provide economic relief to workers and businesses at risk from the effects of dealing with the coronavirus outbreak. The House bill would spend $2.5 trillion, compared to roughly $1.8 trillion in the Senate version, and appears to be largely aimed at influencing the final shape of the stimulus package to make sure Democratic priorities are included. Like, for instance, not just throwing money at giant corporations and hoping for the best. Let's take a quick look at what's in the House bill here, beyond the free solar-powered abortions for lesbian environmentalists that Fox News is already complaining about. We're drawing from summaries at Politico, Fortune, and CNBC.
<p><strong>Your Personal Bailout:</strong> Where the Senate plan would give every adult $1200 (with $500 per child), the <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">House version</a> is $1500 per person, up to $7500 for a family of five. People with incomes over $75,000 (or joint filers over $150,000) would have to pay back the grants over time. <br></p><p><strong>Expanded Unemployment & Sick Leave:</strong> <a href="https://fortune.com/2020/03/24/nancy-pelosi-democrat-coronavirus-stimulus-plan-senate-bill/" target="_blank">Both bills</a> would provide an extra $600 per week of unemployment over whatever state benefits people get from their state unemployment insurance. The House would also give <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">extended medical/family leave</a> to some workers, like first responders and health care workers, who weren't covered by the previous sick leave bill. </p><p><strong>Hospitals & Healthcare:</strong> The House bill provides $80 billion to help out hospitals, plus $150 billion to providers and community health centers. That's compared to just $75 billion in the Senate version. Pelosi's bill would also <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-updates-pelosi-to-release-stimulus-bill-as-senate-plan-stalls.html" target="_blank">eliminate copays and deductibles </a>for coronavirus treatment and, when they become available, vaccines, as well as covering treatment/vaccines for the uninsured. </p><p><strong>Education and Student Debt Relief:</strong> $60 billion would go <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-updates-pelosi-to-release-stimulus-bill-as-senate-plan-stalls.html" target="_blank">to help</a> schools and universities, and the bill would forgive $10,000 for every borrower with a federal student loan. </p><p><strong>Rent and Debt Relief:</strong> Not quite a national rent moratorium, because come on, this is the land where a socialist <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/evgknn/the-secret-anti-landlord-origin-of-monopoly" target="_blank">board game aimed at teaching about rent strikes</a> turned into Monopoly. But<a href="https://fortune.com/2020/03/24/nancy-pelosi-democrat-coronavirus-stimulus-plan-senate-bill/" target="_blank"> good stuff </a>nonetheless! The bill would</p><blockquote>force lenders to grant a temporary reprieve from mortgage and car payments and credit card bills. It would order the Federal Reserve to provide loan servicers with liquidity to allow borrowers to stop paying their mortgages for up to 360 days. Public housing residents would get a temporary reprieve from paying rent [...] <br><br>Negative consumer credit reporting would be halted. Foreclosures and evictions would be banned.</blockquote><p>In addition, the House bill would include $1.5 billion to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">help low-income families</a> with utility bills and would ban utility cutoffs during the crisis. </p><p><strong>Airline Bailout: </strong>The Senate bill offers the airline industry <a href="https://fortune.com/2020/03/24/nancy-pelosi-democrat-coronavirus-stimulus-plan-senate-bill/" target="_blank">loans only</a> ($50 billion for passenger carriers, $8 billion for cargo lines). The House bill provides $37 billion in grants aimed at keeping airlines going and workers employed, on top of $21 billion in loans, but that aid would <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">come with conditions:</a> Airlines getting help would have to commit to</p><blockquote>cut their carbon emissions in half by 2050. The House's measure would also kick in $1 billion to help develop sustainable fuels for planes and create a program for the government to buy less-efficient aircraft, à la "cash-for-clunkers."</blockquote><p>When you hear Republicans mocking the House bill for trying to "sneak parts of the Green New Deal" into coronavirus relief, this is what they're talking about, and they're leaving out the part that the carbon cuts are a condition of the aid to airlines, not just some random crazy environmental tyranny. </p><p><strong>Tax/Business Stuff:</strong> The Senate <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">wants </a>Donald Trump's <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/trump-jolly-tax-holiday" target="_blank">payroll tax jolly holiday, </a>which could gut funding for Social Security and Medicare. The House plan doesn't include any payroll tax cut, but would offer <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">other tax measures</a> to help middle and lower-income Americans. It would </p><blockquote>expand health insurance premium tax credits under the Affordable Care Act and beef up the Earned Income Tax Credit, the Child Tax Credit and the Dependent Care Credit.</blockquote><p>For businesses, the House bill would offer tax credits that<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank"> offset medical/family leave </a>of any kind, not just leave for coronavirus care. <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">And more:</a></p><blockquote>Democrats are pitching $500 billion in grants and interest-free loans to small businesses, including $300 billion in forgivable loans to cover short-term payroll costs. That compares to $300 billion in loans for small businesses in the Senate bill.</blockquote><p><strong>Food Assistance: </strong><a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">Big damn difference</a> here! </p><blockquote>The bill includes an extra $450 million boost to food banks, as well as whatever funds are "necessary" to account for more people in need of food stamps. Senate Republicans had proposed about $15.6 billion in food stamp assistance.</blockquote><p><strong>Voting reform: </strong>This is another of those measures the Republicans are calling "unrelated" to the virus outbreak, because they apparently <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/voting-not-going-so-well-in-illinois-maybe-this-was-a-bad-idea" target="_blank">didn't notice the chaos</a> in the<a href="https://www.wonkette.com/there-is-no-election-in-ohio-today" target="_blank"> most recent primaries</a>, and also because Rs want voting to be hard even under normal circumstances. But because the wild-eyed radicals in the Democrat Party think we shouldn't have to choose between democracy and exposing ourselves to a dangerous virus, the bill <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-updates-pelosi-to-release-stimulus-bill-as-senate-plan-stalls.html" target="_blank">includes</a> $4 billion in grants to states to help them expand absentee voting, and would require 15 days of early voting and allow no-excuse absentee voting during national emergencies. </p><p>And those are most of the big differences between the two approaches to saving the economy; as far as we can tell, the House bill doesn't include a <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/500-billion-corporate-slush-fund-stalls-pandemic-aid-bill-mcconnell-blames-greedy-democrats" target="_blank">half-trillion dollars for the Treasury Department to disburse</a> as it sees fit, because Nancy Pelosi is a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/03/23/trump-coronavirus-senate-economic-stimulus/" target="_blank">big fan of congressional oversight,</a> you see:</p><blockquote>"Democrats take responsibility for our workers," Pelosi said. "We require that any corporation that takes taxpayer dollars must protect their workers' wages and benefits — not CEO pay, stock buybacks or layoffs."</blockquote><p>As of this morning, it's looking like the Senate is much<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/03/23/trump-coronavirus-senate-economic-stimulus/" target="_blank"> closer to an agreement</a> on oversight for the bill's corporate subsidies, although the exact details aren't out yet. It remains to be seen how much of the House proposal will end up being included in a final bill; this would be an excellent time for y'all to get on the phone to your own representatives and senators and tell them about it. </p><p>[<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/23/house-democrats-stimulus-senate-coronavirus-145388" target="_blank">Politico </a>/ <a href="https://fortune.com/2020/03/24/nancy-pelosi-democrat-coronavirus-stimulus-plan-senate-bill/" target="_blank">Fortune</a> / <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-updates-pelosi-to-release-stimulus-bill-as-senate-plan-stalls.html" target="_blank">CNBC</a> / <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/03/23/trump-coronavirus-senate-economic-stimulus/" target="_blank">WaPo</a>]<br></p><p>Yr Wonkette is supported entirely by reader donations! Help us keep the servers humming and the writers paid, and if you're sheltering in place, here's our <a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Amazon linky</a>, too.</p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><br><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Newsletter
©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc
