Trump could backdoor veto the Dec 2020 stimulus bill and it can't be overridden by Congress

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Dec 10, 2005
25,056
8,336
136
Change has to begin somewhere. One change would be to require that all bills be voted on within "X" days. Nothing could be held indefinitely or not acted on at all. Get them to a vote on the record. Let the voters see who supports what.
Head in the clouds. Voters already expressed what they support by continuing to vote for Republican incumbents that have broken government.
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,056
8,336
136
^^^ That was one point I made long ago. I got the 1200, but wasn't out of work due to current events. Should I have got it?

One school of thought was No. I had not suffered directly from loss of a job due to a shut down or restrictions.

Another school of thought was Yes. Money to individuals goes out to retailers who were hurt.

Thing is, how many people didn't spend that 1200, or at least not locally? How many added it to savings or investments?
Now, the stimulus checks aren't totally useless - many had new expenses to cover - people suddenly working from home, additional childcare issues, stop gap as UI rolled out... My main issue is the singular focus many have on the checks.
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,736
126
What this all screams out to me is that EACH element of bills like this need to be individual items. If this 5500 page bill had 100 elements, there should have been 100 separate bills. Let each one be addressed and signed or not.
the supreme court nixed the line items veto for the Pres during the clinton years
 

Stopsignhank

Platinum Member
Mar 1, 2014
2,451
1,778
136
My wife and I were talking about this and I think she is right. Trumps wanting the $2000 check has nothing to do with screwing over the republican party or the democrats, it is only about Trump. He wants everyone to think that he is concerned about the American people so we will rise up and support him to overturn the election results. He is once again trying to buy the election.

Then if he does run in 2024 he can now say, remember when I tried to give you all $2000 and that got rejected. Elecet me and all my cronies so we can give you that $2000.

Everything is always about him.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,017
8,545
136
From what I understand .. the only reason that it’s within pocket veto territory is that it took two days for it to get printed and presented to the President after it was passed on Monday. If it was presented to the President on Monday, then there would have just barely been enough time left in Congress’s term to prevent the pocket veto.

The new Congress will need to pass the bill again when it restarts. If they do so quickly enough, it might still become law during the Trump Administration. I can’t imagine there is going to be a large enough change of personnel in Congress to prevent the same overwhelming majority from passing it. Surely all the necessary runs through committee and such will be expedited as much as possible. The only problem would be if one side decides they want to hold out for something different.

If that’s true, no reason for Loser Donnie to care. It’s Biden’s problem then. That will be the GOP plan. Blame Biden for this bill not passing in 2020. Also, Blame Biden for the massive fuckup in the response to Covid-19, the deficit, the unemployment rate, and also 9/11. And tell everyone that Biden is taking your guns away, while you’re in a lineup at the gun store to buy more guns. I imagine the GOP will start bitching about Biden playing too much golf as well, even if he never steps foot on a course for the next 4 years.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,094
37,297
136
Or he'll go along to bolster GOP chances in Georgia. Well, actually, it would be out of the goodness of his heart & the joy of Christmas. Plus it's a gravy boat for his well heeled friends, anyway.

I think there is a slim chance the GOP could pass $2K (really $1400 extra) checks after the House passes it in a roll call vote if they judge this debacle as fatal to the GOP chances in GA. The house bill will condition the money on Trump signing the COVID/Omni bill.

I do not think there is a chance in hell they're going to renegotiate the COVID package and omnibus which Trump is demanding they do with him. There is nobody left in the admin to do it even if there was time and interest (which there is not) since Trump cannot be trusted.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,083
21,203
136
Trump, the Trump party, and even what little is left of the GOP, all pretty much Evil, just in varying degrees.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,818
136
Exactly why they should be separate items. Some will pass, others won't. But the ones that don't won't hold up those that will.
Obviously you've never worked in or around any sort of governing body. You group stuff because people will vote for what they don't like to get what they do like. Line item vetos and individual clean bills are fantasies pushed by right wing talking headsc while they are brainwashing people into thinking Congress can't function.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
7,582
2,817
136
Indeed. Here are links two to bills I wrote at the State level in 2013, AB425 and AB435. AB425 was our bill pertaining to the ACA, trying to get our state laws in conformity with federal so we could retain state oversight (Our governor at the time, a Republican, was the first to openly support Medicaid expansion and acceptance of the ACA. Other Republicans ignored it or fought against it on principle whereas ours used it to his constituents' advantage.). AB435 was our "omnibus" bill changing our insurance laws as needed. Normally we'd only get one bill per session but we cajoled them into two because we didn't want the ACA changes to torpedo our other changes. AB425 was 88 pages and AB435 was 35. Not much compared to a federal omnibus bill but look at the disparate topics:
  • Licensing Navigator and non-Navigator assisting entities (AB425 §§1-32)
  • Setting premium rate to geography, tobacco use and age curve (AB425 §§33, 46)
  • Adding domestic partnerships and children up to age 26 to family coverage (AB425 §§35, 64)
  • Mandating ABA coverage for autism (AB425 §37)
  • Changing eligibility for HPV vaccine (AB425 §38)
  • Defining geographic rating and service areas (AB425 §§41-45)
  • Eliminating pre-existing conditions (AB425 §§47, 59)
  • Guaranteed renewability (AB435 §50)
  • Codified a defined SIU assessment (AB435 §1)
  • Grants the Commissioner certain oversight over nonadmitted reinsurers (AB435 §4)
  • Allows the Commissioner to exempt certain "discount card" plans from regulation as full insurers (AB435 §6)
  • Changes a reference to federal law to that MEWAs can continue to be regulated appropriately (AB435 §7)
  • Increased the amount of coverage afforded by the Life & Health Guaranty Fund (AB435 §8)
  • Created new laws for evaluating the risk of an insurer that is part of an holding company system (AB435 §§10-13)
  • Changed provisions relating to the acquisition of a domestic insurer (AB435 §§15-21)
  • Amends how a domestic insurer may pay dividends (AB435 §27)
  • Expands the Commissioner's ability to conduct examinations of insurers to also permit examinations of related entities (AB435 §28)
And there were other topics as well. There's no way, ceterus paribus, that we could have passed separate bills for each topic. Hell, the legislators wouldn't have wanted that! Insurance law isn't sexy, they wanted it all in one or two bills that they could push along without much fanfare so they could spend time on their pet project bills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi and K1052

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,939
7,459
136
Methinks it only fair that every person who voted for Trump will, if they're ever printed and delivered, never cash those checks based on their belief that socialism is really bad for the nation. Or better yet, send those socialist checks back to the Treasury so those funds can be immediately redirected to those "commie socialists" who believe that gov't services provided to the people are part and parcel of our democratic way of life.

As far as those SS checks those millions of Repubs receive every month, as well as all those other social safety net programs that they benefit from, well they should stand true and firm on their anti-socialist dogma and refuse any and all of that too.

Or was all of that anti-socialist rhetoric they're so fixated on just them kidd'in around like how Trump said Mexico was going to pay for their wall and how he was going to bring millions of overseas jobs back to America over and over and over again?
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Pohemi and iRONic

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,211
28,916
136
Indeed. Here are links two to bills I wrote at the State level in 2013, AB425 and AB435. AB425 was our bill pertaining to the ACA, trying to get our state laws in conformity with federal so we could retain state oversight (Our governor at the time, a Republican, was the first to openly support Medicaid expansion and acceptance of the ACA. Other Republicans ignored it or fought against it on principle whereas ours used it to his constituents' advantage.). AB435 was our "omnibus" bill changing our insurance laws as needed. Normally we'd only get one bill per session but we cajoled them into two because we didn't want the ACA changes to torpedo our other changes. AB425 was 88 pages and AB435 was 35. Not much compared to a federal omnibus bill but look at the disparate topics:
  • Licensing Navigator and non-Navigator assisting entities (AB425 §§1-32)
  • Setting premium rate to geography, tobacco use and age curve (AB425 §§33, 46)
  • Adding domestic partnerships and children up to age 26 to family coverage (AB425 §§35, 64)
  • Mandating ABA coverage for autism (AB425 §37)
  • Changing eligibility for HPV vaccine (AB425 §38)
  • Defining geographic rating and service areas (AB425 §§41-45)
  • Eliminating pre-existing conditions (AB425 §§47, 59)
  • Guaranteed renewability (AB435 §50)
  • Codified a defined SIU assessment (AB435 §1)
  • Grants the Commissioner certain oversight over nonadmitted reinsurers (AB435 §4)
  • Allows the Commissioner to exempt certain "discount card" plans from regulation as full insurers (AB435 §6)
  • Changes a reference to federal law to that MEWAs can continue to be regulated appropriately (AB435 §7)
  • Increased the amount of coverage afforded by the Life & Health Guaranty Fund (AB435 §8)
  • Created new laws for evaluating the risk of an insurer that is part of an holding company system (AB435 §§10-13)
  • Changed provisions relating to the acquisition of a domestic insurer (AB435 §§15-21)
  • Amends how a domestic insurer may pay dividends (AB435 §27)
  • Expands the Commissioner's ability to conduct examinations of insurers to also permit examinations of related entities (AB435 §28)
And there were other topics as well. There's no way, ceterus paribus, that we could have passed separate bills for each topic. Hell, the legislators wouldn't have wanted that! Insurance law isn't sexy, they wanted it all in one or two bills that they could push along without much fanfare so they could spend time on their pet project bills.
Yep, and compromises include lobbying as well. It’s not unheard of for environmental groups to lobby for esoteric changes in telecommunications laws as a favor to a Congresscritter supporting legislation they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,538
16,320
146


Trump has indicated he will sign stimulus and government spending bill into law, averting shutdown
The president had demanded changes to the stimulus bill but on Sunday signaled he would release the stimulus funds after all

President Trump has indicated that he will sign the stimulus bill into law before Monday night’s deadline and avert a government shutdown, three people familiar with his plans said Sunday evening, a move that would release $900 billion in stimulus funds as soon as possible.

The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter remained fluid and they weren’t authorized to disclose Trump’s plans. They said Trump had repeatedly changed his mind on the matter.
Trump’s new decision to sign the bill came less than a week after he demanded changes to it and had suggested he would refuse to sign it into law. On Tuesday, he referred to the bill as a “disgrace” but he signaled on Sunday he would sign it after all.

The government was set to shut down on Tuesday if Trump did not sign the bill into law. The spending package also included a new round of stimulus checks, unemployment aid, and small business assistance, among other things.

Trump hinted that there had been a development on Sunday, when he wrote on Twitter that there was “Good news on Covid Relief Bill. Information to follow!”
Congress overwhelmingly passed the bipartisan bill on Monday night, and Trump released a video on Tuesday demanding changes. He said, among other things, that the bill should have authorized stimulus checks of $2,000 per person instead of the $600 payments that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had secured. Trump also wanted spending cuts to be included in the package.

Before the video was posted, Mnuchin had said that the stimulus checks could be sent as soon as this week. It’s unclear whether the roughly week-long delay would push back the issuance of the payments.


Trump’s declaration that he wanted changes made to the bill stunned congressional leaders and even many of his own aides. The spending and stimulus bill had been negotiated with Mnuchin and other White House officials, and the treasury secretary had praised the legislation in a Monday CNBC appearance.

Over the weekend, Trump issued a number of tweets appearing to continue his insistence on the $2,000 checks. Approving the checks, however, didn’t seem politically feasible in time to avert a shutdown on Tuesday. Many Democrats were supportive of the idea of larger stimulus checks, but a number of Republicans were opposed. And approving such a change without unanimous consent in one day is not possible.


The consequences of inaction are immense.

If the bill isn’t signed into law by Tuesday, hundreds of thousands of federal employees would be sent home without pay. And even the many federal employees who continue to work because they are deemed “essential,” such as members of the military, will not be paid until a new funding bill is authorized.
In addition to a government shutdown on Tuesday, eviction protections for millions of Americans would lapse later this week; more than 14 million people are losing unemployment benefits; and no stimulus checks would be issued. Failing to sign the bill into law would also freeze new money for vaccine distribution, small business aid, the ailing airline industry, and school aid, among other things.

On Sunday, lawmakers expressed a mix of frustration and fury that Trump had not signaled publicly what he planned to do.

“I understand he wants to be remembered for advocating for big checks, but the danger is he’ll be remembered for chaos and misery and erratic behavior if he allows this to expire,” Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said on Fox News on Sunday. “So I think the best thing to do, as I [said], sign this and then make the case for subsequent legislation."

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on ABC News said the president was behaving as an “extraordinary narcissist” and was almost “pathologically narcissistic” in his eleventh-hour crusade against the bill.

“It is insane. It is really insane, and this president has got to finally . . . do the right thing for the American people and stop worrying about his ego,” Sanders said.

Millions of American families who have lost their jobs during the pandemic and are still struggling have no choice but to await the president’s decision.
Deseree and Matthew Cox have had almost zero income since August, when Matthew was let go from his management job in pest control. His application for unemployment benefits from the state of Florida has never made it through the system’s queue. The $300 per week Matthew, 38, scrapes together driving for DoorDash hardly makes a dent covering bills, rent and food for themselves and their two children with special needs.

The Coxes have depleted their savings and moved from South Florida to the Indianapolis area for cheaper cost of living and to be near family who could help with childcare. But they say they need the extended unemployment benefits, rental assistance, extended eviction moratoriums and direct payments promised by Congress’s stimulus package.

At one point, Deseree, 37, said she couldn’t afford a medication her son needs “just for him to be able to function.”
“People will die without this money,” Deseree said. “People will get evicted. People will not be able to get their medication. To [lawmakers], $600 or $2,000, it seems so little. But to the American people right now, it’s just everything.”

Since the president posted the video on Dec. 22, White House aides have not offered any public briefings on his strategy or plans. Instead, Trump has issued a series of tweets reiterating his demand for changes but not saying much more. Vice President Pence is in Vail, Colo., and has also been out of sight in recent days.
The White House has provided virtually no information about what its plans are to head off the potential economic calamity of a shutdown and the failure of the relief effort. A White House spokesman declined to comment when asked about the president’s intentions. Negotiations between congressional leaders and the administration were at a complete standstill on Sunday, and a backup plan had not materialized.

Before Trump signaled that he would sign the bill after all, people close to the White House described a chaotic scene in which senior officials anxiously await the president’s next move. Republicans have expressed increasing concern that by refusing to sign the bill, Trump could hurt the party’s prospects in the George Senate races on Jan. 5. If Republicans lose those two seats, Democrats would control the chamber.

On Sunday, Trump said he planned to travel to Georgia on Jan. 4 to help campaign for the two Republican candidates.
“Everybody in the White House is trying to figure out what’s in Trump’s head, if this is a bluff or if he’s going to carry this out. He’s been confronted with all the facts and evidence," said one person briefed by several White House officials over the weekend, speaking on the condition of anonymity to reveal internal discussions. “Nobody knows what Trump is going to do. It’s a bizarre situation."
This is a developing story.
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,736
126
i am shocked Trumps signed it today instead of tomorrow to squeeze as much drama out of this as possible.

tomorrow at 11:59pm, the govt shuts down. (Congress lumped the continuing resolution in with 2nd round of covid relief.)

wtf was the point of picking today to sign it instead of day 1?
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,684
5,222
136
i am shocked Trumps signed it today instead of tomorrow to squeeze as much drama out of this as possible.

tomorrow at 11:59pm, the govt shuts down. (Congress lumped the continuing resolution in with 2nd round of covid relief.)

wtf was the point of picking today to sign it instead of day 1?


Dunno.....maybe make sure you give one final, big ole FU to the American public? Remember, extended unemployment ended 12/26 and since the bill was only signed today, 12/28, this lag ensures something like this:

“Payments for the next few weeks are going to be in limbo,” says Pancotti. “Workers should anticipate a couple of weeks in January without pay and with delayed payments.”


I read that if Trump had actually signed the bill the day presented instead of fucking off for a week like he did, there would have been no gap in enhanced/extended UE benefits. C'est la vie.....
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,736
126
Dunno.....maybe make sure you give one final, big ole FU to the American public? Remember, extended unemployment ended 12/26 and since the bill was only signed today, 12/28, this lag ensures something like this:

“Payments for the next few weeks are going to be in limbo,” says Pancotti. “Workers should anticipate a couple of weeks in January without pay and with delayed payments.”


I read that if Trump had actually signed the bill the day presented instead of fucking off for a week like he did, there would have been no gap in enhanced/extended UE benefits. C'est la vie.....
exactly.
there's no point in signing it today.
he could have waited tomorrow at 11pm to sign to keep everyone guessing and all eyes on him for as long as possible.
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
9,457
12,991
146
My wife and I were talking about this and I think she is right. Trumps wanting the $2000 check has nothing to do with screwing over the republican party or the democrats, it is only about Trump. He wants everyone to think that he is concerned about the American people so we will rise up and support him to overturn the election results. He is once again trying to buy the election.

Then if he does run in 2024 he can now say, remember when I tried to give you all $2000 and that got rejected. Elecet me and all my cronies so we can give you that $2000.

Everything is always about him.
Later he'll be tweeting about how he was the American people's savior and everyone should be thankful. :rolleyes:
 

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,322
5,351
136
All we can do is bitch about it. It's not like WE THE PEOPLE have any say-so in the matter, after all who the "F" are we? Mitch thinks this is the united states of Mitch McConnell, Trump thinks this is the united states of Trump, our politicians make sure that their nests are feathered, their jobs are well protected with never a hint of a term limit, and they make sure all the perks go directly to them and only for THEM. For THEM, $100,000 in their pocket is never enough, yet for the middle class $600 is a windfall of untold wealth. It would be great to simply vote THEM out of office once and for all but the problem with that is.... the same type of bastards get voted back into office. Different faces, same bastards over and over, election after election. Maybe we should just face the fact that our system of government is completely dysfunctional and permanently hopelessly broken. You can't assume that the same bad mechanic who screwed up your car can then fix it. I think this pandemic was in its way a god send where it exposed just how incredibly damaged our system of government was, how incredibly damaged that our politicians are, and how completely incompetent the institutions have become. That should be blatantly clear by now. These guys in Washington from top to bottom who run the show are the bad mechanics that broke the system, so we actually believe they can fix it? Hey folks, guess what.... you're on you're own.

Have you heard of paragraphs?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi