Those Phony Deficit Hawks starting to swoop back in

It looks as if Congress will soon pass a muchneeded economic relief (not stimulus) bill — something that will help distressed Americans get through the next few months, while we wait for widespread vaccination to set the stage for economic recovery. That’s good news, because something is better than nothing, even though what we know about the legislation says that it’s going to be deeply flawed.

Economic relief legislation is largely about providing individuals and families with a financial lifeline during the pandemic. But who should get that lifeline? Should it go to a majority of the population, like those $1,200 checks sent out in the spring? Or should the focus be on enhanced unemployment benefits for the millions who, thanks to the pandemic, have no income?

The economic pain from the coronavirus has been very unevenly distributed: A minority of the work force has been devastated, while those who have been able to keep working have, by and large, done relatively well.

So if there’s a limit on the amount of aid that can be given, it’s more important to help the unemployed — and, in particular, to sustain that help well beyond the 10 weeks reportedly in the current deal — than to send checks to those who have been able to keep working.

But why is there a limit on the amount of aid?

Republicans appear willing to make a deal because they fear complete stonewalling will hurt them in the Georgia Senate runoffs. But they are determined to keep the deal under $1 trillion, hence the reported $900 billion price tag.

That trillion-dollar cap, however, makes no sense. The amount we spend on emergency relief should be determined by how much aid is needed, not by the sense that $1 trillion is a scary number. Affordability isn’t an issue right now. The U.S. borrowed more than $3 trillion in the 2020 fiscal year; investors were happy to lend it that money, at remarkably low interest rates.

And even economists who worry about deficits normally agree that it’s appropriate to run big deficits in the face of national emergencies.

Of course, we know what’s going on here. While Republicans have made the political calculation that they must cough up some money while control of the Senate is still in doubt, they’re clearly getting ready to invoke fear of budget deficits as a reason to block anything and everything Biden proposes once he’s sworn in.

It should go without saying that the coming GOP pivot to deficit hawkery will be completely insincere. Republicans had no problem with rising deficits during the pre-pandemic Trump years.

But the hypocrisy isn’t the main issue here. More important, shortchanging relief in the name of fiscal prudence would mean vast, unnecessary hardship for millions of Americans. I’m an optimist about prospects for recovery once we achieve widespread vaccination. But that won’t happen until well into 2021. Making a deal that only provides enhanced benefits for 10 weeks is like building a bridge that goes only a quarter of the way across a chasm.

And the case for more spending won’t end with short-term economic recovery. We’ll still need huge investments in infrastructure, child care, clean energy and more.

Republicans will try to stop all of this, claiming they’re worried about debt. They’ll be lying, and we shouldn’t be afraid to say so.