Biden Says $1,400 Checks a Promise He Won't Break -- but He's Willing to Limit Who Gets Them

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

President Joe Biden told House Democrats Wednesday that he was open to further limiting eligibility for his proposed coronavirus payments, but that the size of the $1,400 payments was a campaign pledge he can’t break.

“I’m not going to start my administration by breaking a promise to the American people,” Biden reportedly said on a call with the House Democratic Caucus.

Biden reportedly told his fellow Democrats that he’s “not married” to a specific dollar figure for the next Covid relief package and that they could make compromises in a number of areas, but he urged his party’s lawmakers to stick together and act quickly. He also said that the $618 billion Republican counteroffer to his $1.9 trillion proposal “was not even in the cards.”

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Wednesday sharply criticized the plan released this week by 10 Republican senators, saying that it doesn’t go far enough in key areas like direct payments, unemployment benefits, aid to state and local governments and eviction protections. She added that Biden and Senate Democrats were united on the need to “go big” with the next Covid relief package.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-says-dollar1400-checks-a-promise-he-wont-break-%e2%80%94-but-hes-willing-to-limit-who-gets-them/ar-BB1dmYtv?li=BBnb7Kz

[Salviati]

1. He should only do that if it actually gets republicans on board.

Make two versions of the bill, make the republicans vote first. I would prefer that they just keep the eligibility the same as previous, but if anything is changed as a result of republican negotiation, it should be contingent on actually getting republican votes.

[edhopper]

5. Agreed

only for publically promised GOP votes.

[Salviati]

7. Forget publicly promised.

I want actual votes, on the record. The republicans should not be trusted one inch.

[edhopper]

9. Well you can't get the votes

until it is brought to the floor, and it shouldn't be brought to the floor unless Republicans promise to vote for it.

[Mr.Bill]

11. I would tell them that thanks to Trump,

they now belong to a party that has a long way to go before their promises mean anything.

[drray23]

2. hopefully Schumer and Pelosi will stand firm

and also not change the threshold. This 1400 is part of the 2000, 600 of which was given earlier. If they change the rules for getting them some ppls will only get 600 and thats breaking the pledge.

[lilmamba]

8. Exactly. It has to go out to everyone who already got $600...nt

[Drahthaardogs]

20. I'm kind of torn.

I really don’t NEED the $1400. I have been able to work from home, so no real difference to me. On the other hand, if I get it, I WILL spend it. I am going to buy 1/2 beef so I get out less and have less exposure . A bit of a luxury I don’t usually indulge.

To that end, the money will go back into the economy and will be helpful to some areas hit hard by COVID.

[Demsrule86]

34. That is what stimulus is for.

[Drahthaardogs]

49. That is kind of my thinking

Is this to stimulate or bail-out. If it’s a bail out for people, don’t give it to me...I do NOT need it.

If it is a stimulus, I’m exactly the kind of person you do want to give it to because I am not going t use it to pay the light bill, I am going to BUY SOMETHING and put that money back in circulation

[Demsrule86]

54. We need stimulus.

[ProfessorGAC]

60. Actually, It's Both

Some people need a bailout, and the economy needs a consumption jolt.
I think the phase out point and the cap are too low, not too high.
This is turning it into a bailout only.
I agree we need a stimulus as well.
Reducing the 2 limits makes it far less stimulative.

[Demsrule86]

63. That is what I think too.

[Freethinker65]

3. I am ok with getting a reduced or no check if our household income is above a set threshold.

I would prefer the money goes to those people and communities more in need.

[Liberal In Texas]

17. How are they going to know what any houshold's inicome is?

Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2021, 10:52 AM - Edit history (1)

They used tax returns from 2019 last time. I contend a VERY LARGE number of people didn't make anything in 2020 like they did in 2019.

[Freethinker65]

62. Well. The government knows who is still working and who is getting unemployment.

It could be made taxable for 2021 on a sliding scale for those making above certain amounts on their 2020 tax returns?

It is not free money. It is taxpayer money, and I want the payments to work as intended to stimulate the economy and help people and communities that desperately need it.

[Demsrule86]

35. That is not the point. First of all, it was promised in Georgia. And that promise was based on the

first stimulus rules. Secondly, it is not 'aid' ...it is stimulus. The idea is to stimulate the economy and help get it going. Severe income limits will make it so it is of limited use in helping to start the economy.

[Tommymac]

56. The money will not be spent.

Guarantee it. The rethugs will block it.

Don't change it now. If the Dems short folks who got the $600, they will pay the prices in 2022.

And we cannot afford to lose even a single voter. If We lose the House and/or Senate in 2022 Democracy is dead.

The stakes are too high.

Cancel the fucking F-35 boondoggle instead if money needs to be saved.

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. C'mon Man! Don't play centrist politics with people's lives! Nt

[edhopper]

6. If couples making $100 grand

Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2021, 11:14 AM - Edit history (1)

get a little less to get it done quicker, I am for that.

[Liberal In Texas]

16. They might have been making 100 Gs in 2019, but what about 2020?

There is absolutely no way to know who's still good and who isn't.

Just give it to EVERYBODY and be done with it.

[edhopper]

24. good point

[cbdo2007]

23. Even people making $100 grand will just put it right back into the economy...

if "stimulus" is really what it is about then don't limit it to that extent.

People at the $100 grand level don't have fancy cars and boats and all this truly wealthy stuff. Even in small markets a family living off $100 grand is still struggling in some areas.

[DFW]

31. It really matters whrre you live, and with whom

A single grossing $100K in Waco is not badly off, especially if still employed. A family of four in Manhattan, with its high cost of living, state and city tax and big sales tax, is not living a life of luxury. To them, a $1400 check could mean a 3% boost in net income.

[Demsrule86]

36. I am not for that because it breaks a promise. We must keep our promises.

I also want as much stimulus for the economy as possible...we are on precipice of a Depression.

[Lasher]

12. Politifact isn't tracking the $1400 checks as a Biden promise so far.

They currently monitor his 100 most important campaign promises and I'll bet they add the one in question here.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/biden-promise-tracker/?ruling=true

[Rstrstx]

13. What were Biden's original limits and what is being counter-offered?

There seems to be a similar parallel negotiating with the child tax credit; a number of Democrats have proposed a lower income phase-out than what Biden has proposed.

These counter proposals seem fine (they’re six digits for couples) and I suspect Biden may have thrown out deliberately high numbers to give Manchin and Sinema some cover and maybe even get a Collins or Murkowski reluctantly on-board with some scaled back numbers, not in the check amounts but in stricter income tests. Ideally it won’t go to people who don’t need it but will be enough to keep the newly Democratic suburbs happy.

Whether it was smart or not to send Harris to West Virginia (it clearly got under Manchin’s skin) is debatable, but to get WV’s Republican governor to go on record as endorsing a high price tag stimulus was genius.

[Bucky]

14. I support this.

Hey, I'd like to have $1400. Who wouldn't? But I'm gainfully employed and so are lots of other people in line to get those stim checks. I say means-test it and hike the payout to $2000 or $3,000. Some people need the money to get by, I don't.

[Liberal In Texas]

15. Means testing makes it welfare. And this might be fine for you but a lot of people

aren't making anything near what their 2019 gross income was. Not getting help for some might mean they'll lose their house or have their car repossessed. This is going to cause the Democrats to be blamed for letting people twist in the wind.

[Turin_C3PO]

29. What about people

who made a lot in 2019 but were broke in 2020? Limiting the stimulus would cut them off from aid. It’s better just to get the money out to as many as possible to avoid anyone falling through the cracks. Better that some get it who don’t need it than vice-versa.

[Demsrule86]

37. It is not aid...it is stimulus...geez...the GOP have brainwashed us...now is not the time to skimp..

The idea is to jumpstart the economy reducing those eligible will hurt that effort.

[panader0]

18. The Social Security cap is $142,800. Anyone above the cap isn't kicking in the extra bucks.

Let that be the stimulus cap as well.

[Dem2]

26. It's already $100k

And could be as low as $60k, so long as the person is actually earning said salary as we speak. The problem is figuring this out. Chris Hayes suggested a tax give-back for those who don't qualify when they file their 2021 taxes. This would be more fair, though many will get money and have to pay it back...

[aikoaiko]

19. Joe: I'm not breaking my promise of $1400 except to the middle class, maybe.

Sorry Joe, everyone who received relief/stimulus checks has the reasonable expectation of receiving another one.

The relief/stimulus checks already had limits in place.

Remember, these checks are based on 2019 AGI when the economy was essentially good and stable for most middle-class Americans. A lot has changed since then. There are many individuals who were making up to $74,999 then that aren't now.

2020 AGI might be a better criterion for true need, but I don't know that can be used yet

[Liberal In Texas]

21. And that's why there shouldn't be ANY means test. In the last year everything has changed

for a great number of people.

So some get the check who don't need it? Better that than the people that desperately need it not getting it.

[Demsrule86]

39. I absolutely agree.

[roamer65]

22. If I get it, I will throw it right back into the economy.

I’ll spend it.

[CTyankee]

33. THIS is the whole point of a "stimulus" check!

The people who need it the most will SPEND it immediately! That will be a stimulus to the economy! People have to eat, clothe their family, pay rent or make mortgage payments. A stimulus does exactly that.

[roamer65]

38. I could get along without it, but it's designed to be spent.

We have to get the velocity of money higher.

[CTyankee]

43. Unless you are living with a rich stock portfoliio, your spending will stimulate the economy.

At least that's my very broad understanding of something I learned in that Econ 101 course I took...

[Dem2]

25. I don't need it

I only get partial payment as it is, lower the income and/or other qualifications so those who really need it the most get it.

[Liberal In Texas]

27. How will you determine what anyone's income is?

I'm glad you don't need it. But you should also think about other people.

[Dem2]

28. They are currently using 2019 income for calculating it. Did so for the 1st stimulus also

Chris Hayes suggested a tax give-back if one is actually earning over the limit when they file 2021 taxes.

This would be fair, although many would receive it and have to pay it back next spring. I'm actually fine with this, though I would prefer an option to refuse the payment so I don't have to hold it for a year just to pay it back.

[Kaleva]

48. I get about 16k a year and I don't need it but I'll take it.

[Demsrule86]

40. The idea is you will spend it...this is not about need but about stimulus and getting the economy

going...and you will be ceding the suburbs to the GOP is this happens...as many will feel betrayed.

[Dem2]

59. But I won't because I don't get much anyway

It's really not about people like me who have been lucky to still be working, albeit I took a 20% pay cut as things are slow.

[PRETZEL]

30. My own personal opinion

I do agree with President Biden that he may not be married to the 1.9B but I do think that in discussing this proposal, I would like to keep in mind that this bill has more than just the $1,400 stimulus checks.

What I do feel the President needs to keep the criteria for who qualifies for the stimulus as it was. Yes there will be some who will get the stimulus checks that may not necessarily need it, but the number of people who would just put the money into their savings or other investment instrument is relatively small compared to those who not only need it, but would put the money back into the economy. So for me, any discussion of reducing the thresholds are, in my opinion, a non starter.

But, by the same token, maybe see where other areas can be compromised. Granted, I don't know the specifics of the bill and fault me for that, but if there are provisions in the bill where compromise can be made and reduce the bill down to maybe 1.5B, then why not go with that.

[Demsrule86]

46. This a political thing...and you have to consider that...it will look really bad if middle class

people who were qualified under the Trump stimulus are left out. I have little doubt that it would cost us votes in the suburbs particularly in Georgia where we have Senate seat up in 22. We will likely lose in 22 if go down this path.

[PRETZEL]

52. Agree that there's politics involved,

which is why I believe the President and Congressional Dems need not to move away from their original thresholds on who gets the stimulus.

My point was there are other components within that 1.9T that may have room for some negotiations that would not be hot button, deal breaking issues.

[Demsrule86]

53. True...although I think we pass it as is...maybe add people to the mix...those who are currently

unemployed or have lost income since last year which tax returns won't reflect. It is a good billand the GOP won't vote for any of it...none of them.

[PRETZEL]

55. No arguments from me,

[liskddksil]

32. Call Your Senators and Representative to Demand That Income Thresholds Stay the Same

as prior two stimulus checks. We could potentially be screwing us out of power in 2022 and 2024 if people who make $50,000-$75,000 (which is not a lot in high cost areas) got checks 1st two times don't get a check this time.

Capitol Switchboard: [phone].

[Demsrule86]

42. I am going to do that...and not because I wouldn't get it either way. We made less money

last year than the first job we had out of college. We were on unemployment for most of the year...this is stimulus and we need to expand not diminish stimulus...we need to jump start our economy. Also, it was promised. And it is a bad look for us when mostly millionaire decide on who is 'rich'.

[liskddksil]

51. Agree nt

[dawg]

41. If we appear to be stingier with the middle class than the Republicans, it'll be a disaster.

Imagine how they'll spin it if millions of families who got the checks under Trump don't get checks now that the Democrats are in power.

I understand all the people saying that they, personally, don't need the money. But others do. Give your checks to the charity of your choice if you don't need them.

Don't encourage our party to make a stupid political mistake.

[Demsrule86]

44. That would be a disastrous mistake and cost us 2022 and maybe even 2024.

We are winning in the suburbs, let's not blow this up.

[dawg]

47. Not only would it be dumb politically, it would also be dumb in terms of policy.

This thing isn't over yet. Not by a long shot.

Even the people who just save the money might actually end up needing it before all is said and done.

[durablend]

61. "THEY PROMISED YOU CHECKS AND DIDN'T DELIVER!!!!!"

Sound about right?

[Blaukraut]

45. Fine. Then also adjust for cost of living.

We make 100k+, but we also live in Massachusetts, where that kind of money doesn't exactly land you in the lap of luxury. We could use the 2800, that's for sure. Our one and only car got totaled the other day, so we're in the market for a new(ish) one. A down payment is going to drain our savings unless we get the stimulus checks.

[Autumn]

50. Big mistake Joe. nt

[Demsrule86]

57. Agree! I love it when we can agree on an issue.

[Autumn]

58. I hope that they don't fall into the Republican trap of fiscal austerity.

They renege on the campaign talk 2022 will be a bloodbath and it will probably cost us 2024. And that will be on THEIR shoulders. We can't handle another stretch of Republican control.