Bills

Analysis:  See House Roll Call 250 for the first portion of the House amendments to H.R 133 and our comments on abandoning “regular order,” on last-minute stampeded legislation, and on “dividing the question.”)  The House approved the second portion with House Roll Call 251.

The FY 2021 appropriations portion of H.R. 133 continues all of the unconstitutional “Great Society” programs and departments (such as Housing and Urban Development) instituted under President Johnson, the unconstitutional Department of Education, which is working overtime to enforce political correctness, while creating new monsters to eat out our substance and weaken resistance to Big Brother.  The total non-defense spending exceeded budget caps by $12.5 billion.

The Coronavirus “Relief” Deal
But let’s look at the spending in the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” part of the package. One section would provide $600 stimulus checks to millions of American who earned less than $75,000 in 2019, regardless of need. (Declining amounts would be paid to those with incomes above $75,000 and zero above $87,000).

Politicians from both parties are retailing the shallow but popular deception that the federal government has unlimited wealth to dispense.  The Hill (12-21) reports this example: “We will do some good with this legislation” Pelosi said on the House floor. “But we must recognize that more needs to be done to crush the virus, to put more money in the pockets of the American people.” [Emphasis added.]

Why doesn’t Congress just have the federal government fund our lives completely?  We wouldn’t even have to work.  Most Americans would recognize this as an absurdity.  But, even in lesser amounts, government must get wealth from somewhere— it may create money, but only the people generate wealth.  See our post “The Money Tree.”  It’s a sad commentary on today’s voters that this vote-buying scam of “government should give us more” plays well in so many districts.

During Senate consideration (12-21-20), Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) echoed this criticism on the floor of the Senate.  At the same timed he blasted members of both parties, his own in particular, for supporting the reckless spending of money the federal government doesn’t have.  Here is an excerpt:

Republicans like to mock modern monetary theory, the idea that government can print money with impunity, that government can spend whatever it wants without the need to tax.  Modern monetary theory is basically the Dick Cheney deficits don’t matter crowd, trumped up with a new fancy title.  Most Republicans rightly lampoon this quackery.  That is, when they are not practicing the quackery themselves.  Today, many of these same Republicans will vote for a bill that makes modern monetary theory look like child’s play in comparison.  The monstrous spending bill presented today is not just a deficits don’t matter disaster.  It is everything Republicans say they don’t believe in.

This bill is free money for everyone.  Proponents don’t care if you are fully employed or own your own house or own your own business…. Maybe these new free money Republicans should join the “everybody gets a guaranteed income” caucus.  Why not $20,000 a year for everybody, why not $30,000?  If we can print up money with impunity, why not do it?  The Treasury can just keep printing the money, that is, until someone points out that the emperor has no clothes and that the dollar no longer has value.  To so-called conservatives who are quick to identify the socialism of Democrats, if you vote for this spending monstrosity you are no better. When you vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or fiscal integrity.  [Only Senator Paul and five more of his Republican Senate colleagues vote “nay.”]…

There is another alternative that won’t be debated and that alternative is:  “Open the economy.”

Here is a link to a 12½ minute YouTube video of Senator Paul’s entire “Free Money for Everyone!” floor speech.

Analysis:  See House Roll Call 250 for the first portion of the House amendments to H.R 133 and our comments on abandoning “regular order,” on last-minute stampeded legislation, and on “dividing the question.”)  The House approved the second portion with House Roll Call 251.

The FY 2021 appropriations portion of H.R. 133 continues all of the unconstitutional “Great Society” programs and departments (such as Housing and Urban Development) instituted under President Johnson, the unconstitutional Department of Education, which is working overtime to enforce political correctness, while creating new monsters to eat out our substance and weaken resistance to Big Brother.  The total non-defense spending exceeded budget caps by $12.5 billion.

The Coronavirus “Relief” Deal
But let’s look at the spending in the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” part of the package. One section would provide $600 stimulus checks to millions of American who earned less than $75,000 in 2019, regardless of need. (Declining amounts would be paid to those with incomes above $75,000 and zero above $87,000).

Politicians from both parties are retailing the shallow but popular deception that the federal government has unlimited wealth to dispense.  The Hill (12-21) reports this example: “We will do some good with this legislation” Pelosi said on the House floor. “But we must recognize that more needs to be done to crush the virus, to put more money in the pockets of the American people.” [Emphasis added.]

Why doesn’t Congress just have the federal government fund our lives completely?  We wouldn’t even have to work.  Most Americans would recognize this as an absurdity.  But, even in lesser amounts, government must get wealth from somewhere— it may create money, but only the people generate wealth.  See our post “The Money Tree.”  It’s a sad commentary on today’s voters that this vote-buying scam of “government should give us more” plays well in so many districts.

During Senate consideration (12-21-20), Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) echoed this criticism on the floor of the Senate.  At the same timed he blasted members of both parties, his own in particular, for supporting the reckless spending of money the federal government doesn’t have.  Here is an excerpt:

Republicans like to mock modern monetary theory, the idea that government can print money with impunity, that government can spend whatever it wants without the need to tax.  Modern monetary theory is basically the Dick Cheney deficits don’t matter crowd, trumped up with a new fancy title.  Most Republicans rightly lampoon this quackery.  That is, when they are not practicing the quackery themselves.  Today, many of these same Republicans will vote for a bill that makes modern monetary theory look like child’s play in comparison.  The monstrous spending bill presented today is not just a deficits don’t matter disaster.  It is everything Republicans say they don’t believe in.

This bill is free money for everyone.  Proponents don’t care if you are fully employed or own your own house or own your own business…. Maybe these new free money Republicans should join the “everybody gets a guaranteed income” caucus.  Why not $20,000 a year for everybody, why not $30,000?  If we can print up money with impunity, why not do it?  The Treasury can just keep printing the money, that is, until someone points out that the emperor has no clothes and that the dollar no longer has value.  To so-called conservatives who are quick to identify the socialism of Democrats, if you vote for this spending monstrosity you are no better. When you vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or fiscal integrity.  [Only Senator Paul and five more of his Republican Senate colleagues vote “nay.”]…

There is another alternative that won’t be debated and that alternative is:  “Open the economy.”

Here is a link to a 12½ minute YouTube video of Senator Paul’s entire “Free Money for Everyone!” floor speech.

Bill Summary:  This second piece of the House’s divided H.R 133 bill consisted of the remaining eight FY 2021 appropriations bills — Agriculture, Energy-Water, Interior-Environment, Labor-HHS-Education, Legislative Branch, Military Construction-Veterans Affairs, State -Foreign Operations, Transportation-HUD — plus the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” bill.

Analysis:  The procedure driving H.R. 133 is alone sufficient justification for a  “nay” vote.  Yet the content of both pieces provided further justification.  And this second division, comprised of the remaining appropriations as well as the $900 billion coronavirus relief bill, is most easily shown to advance out-of-control Big-brother government.

This division continues all of the unconstitutional “Great Society” programs and departments (such as Housing and Urban Development) instituted under President Johnson, the unconstitutional Department of Education working to enforce political correctness, while creating new monsters to eat out our substance and weaken resistance to Big Brother.

Indeed, this division of H.R 1333 increases non-defense spending by $12.5 billion over budget caps.

The Coronavirus “Relief” Deal
But let’s take a close look at the spending in the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” part of the package. One section would provide $600 stimulus checks to millions of American who earned less than $75,000 in 2019, regardless of need. (Declining amounts would be paid to those with incomes above $75,000 and zero above $87,000).

Politicians from both parties are retailing the shallow but popular deception that the federal government has unlimited wealth to dispense.  The Hill (12-21) reports this example: “We will do some good with this legislation” Pelosi said on the House floor. “But we must recognize that more needs to be done to crush the virus, to put more money in the pockets of the American people.” [Emphasis added.]

Why doesn’t Congress just have the federal government fund our lives completely?  We wouldn’t even have to work.  Most would recognize this as an absurdity.  But even in lesser amounts government must get wealth from somewhere— it may create money, but only the people generate wealth.  See our post “The Money Tree.”  It’s a sad commentary on today’s voters that this vote-buying scam of “government should give us more” plays well in so many districts.

During Senate consideration (12-21-20), Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) echoed this criticism on the floor of the Senate.  At the same timed he blasted members of both parties, his own in particular, for supporting the reckless spending of money the federal government doesn’t have.  Here is an excerpt:

Republicans like to mock modern monetary theory, the idea that government can print money with impunity, that government can spend whatever it wants without the need to tax.  Modern monetary theory is basically the Dick Cheney deficits don’t matter crowd, trumped up with a new fancy title.  Most Republicans rightly lampoon this quackery.  That is, when they are not practicing the quackery themselves.  Today, many of these same Republicans will vote for a bill that makes modern monetary theory look like child’s play in comparison.  The monstrous spending bill presented today is not just a deficits don’t matter disaster.  It is everything Republicans say they don’t believe in.

This bill is free money for everyone.  Proponents don’t care if you are fully employed or own your own house or own your own business…. Maybe these new free money Republicans should join the “everybody gets a guaranteed income” caucus.  Why not $20,000 a year for everybody, why not $30,000?  If we can print up money with impunity, why not do it?  The Treasury can just keep printing the money, that is, until someone points out that the emperor has no clothes and that the dollar no longer has value.  To so-called conservatives who are quick to identify the socialism of Democrats, if you vote for this spending monstrosity you are no better. When you vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or fiscal integrity. [Only Paul and five more of his Republican Senate colleagues vote “nay.”] …

There is another alternative that won’t be debated and that alternative is:  “Open the economy.”

Here is a link to a 12½ minute YouTube video of Senator Paul’s entire “Free Money for Everyone!” floor speech.

Bill Summary:  This second piece of the House’s divided H.R 133 bill consisted of the remaining eight FY 2021 appropriations bills — Agriculture, Energy-Water, Interior-Environment, Labor-HHS-Education, Legislative Branch, Military Construction-Veterans Affairs, State -Foreign Operations, Transportation-HUD — plus the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” bill.

Analysis:  The procedure driving H.R. 133 is alone sufficient justification for a  “nay” vote.  Yet the content of both pieces provided further justification.  And this second division, comprised of the remaining appropriations as well as the $900 billion coronavirus relief bill, is most easily shown to advance out-of-control Big-brother government.

This division continues all of the unconstitutional “Great Society” programs and departments (such as Housing and Urban Development) instituted under President Johnson, the unconstitutional Department of Education working to enforce political correctness, while creating new monsters to eat out our substance and weaken resistance to Big Brother.

Indeed, this division of H.R 1333 increases non-defense spending by $12.5 billion over budget caps.

The Coronavirus “Relief” Deal
But let’s take a close look at the spending in the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” part of the package. One section would provide $600 stimulus checks to millions of American who earned less than $75,000 in 2019, regardless of need. (Declining amounts would be paid to those with incomes above $75,000 and zero above $87,000).

Politicians from both parties are retailing the shallow but popular deception that the federal government has unlimited wealth to dispense.  The Hill (12-21) reports this example: “We will do some good with this legislation” Pelosi said on the House floor. “But we must recognize that more needs to be done to crush the virus, to put more money in the pockets of the American people.” [Emphasis added.]

Why doesn’t Congress just have the federal government fund our lives completely?  We wouldn’t even have to work.  Most would recognize this as an absurdity.  But even in lesser amounts government must get wealth from somewhere— it may create money, but only the people generate wealth.  See our post “The Money Tree.”  It’s a sad commentary on today’s voters that this vote-buying scam of “government should give us more” plays well in so many districts.

During Senate consideration (12-21-20), Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) echoed this criticism on the floor of the Senate.  At the same timed he blasted members of both parties, his own in particular, for supporting the reckless spending of money the federal government doesn’t have.  Here is an excerpt:

Republicans like to mock modern monetary theory, the idea that government can print money with impunity, that government can spend whatever it wants without the need to tax.  Modern monetary theory is basically the Dick Cheney deficits don’t matter crowd, trumped up with a new fancy title.  Most Republicans rightly lampoon this quackery.  That is, when they are not practicing the quackery themselves.  Today, many of these same Republicans will vote for a bill that makes modern monetary theory look like child’s play in comparison.  The monstrous spending bill presented today is not just a deficits don’t matter disaster.  It is everything Republicans say they don’t believe in.

This bill is free money for everyone.  Proponents don’t care if you are fully employed or own your own house or own your own business…. Maybe these new free money Republicans should join the “everybody gets a guaranteed income” caucus.  Why not $20,000 a year for everybody, why not $30,000?  If we can print up money with impunity, why not do it?  The Treasury can just keep printing the money, that is, until someone points out that the emperor has no clothes and that the dollar no longer has value.  To so-called conservatives who are quick to identify the socialism of Democrats, if you vote for this spending monstrosity you are no better. When you vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or fiscal integrity. [Only Paul and five more of his Republican Senate colleagues vote “nay.”] …

There is another alternative that won’t be debated and that alternative is:  “Open the economy.”

Here is a link to a 12½ minute YouTube video of Senator Paul’s entire “Free Money for Everyone!” floor speech.

Bill Summary:  This piece of the House’s divided bill consisted of FY 2021 appropriations for the consolidated Commerce-Justice-Science, Defense, Financial Services, and Homeland Security pieces of the omnibus.

Analysis:  Before the House amended H.R. 133 to become the $1.4 trillion omnibus appropriations and the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” bill, House leaders first pushed through a resolution (H. Res. 1271, House Roll Call 249) to adopt an unusual procedure called “dividing the question.”  The division created this separate vote for part of the omnibus appropriations. The procedure was opposed unanimously by the House  GOP.

The division served to splinter the opposition, but it also allowed a minority of Democrats to vote against the portion of the omnibus they least favored, while supporting the other portion combined with the $900 billion coronavirus “relief.”  But it was a phony cosmetic division, as both divisions had to pass for the amended H.R. 133 to advance to the Senate as one measure.  Nevertheless, once divided a majority of each party supported both pieces.

This piece (Roll Call 250) consisted of FY 2021 appropriations for the Commerce-Justice-Science, Defense, Financial Services, and Homeland Security pieces of the omnibus.

The second piece (see Roll Call 251) consisted of the other eight spending bills plus the $900 billion coronavirus “relief” and some other legislation slipped in.

Regular Order Abandoned
Last July, the House passed its version of the 12 annual appropriations bills consolidated into two measures  (H.R. 7608 on 7/24 — Roll Call 166 — and H.R. 7617 on 7/31 — Roll Call 178).  Both were unanimously opposed by House Republicans.  Subsequently, the Senate refused to take up the appropriations measures, propose its own versions, and go to conference.

Indeed, these appropriations could have been negotiated and approved in a timely manner, but for partisan political considerations.   Even worse, there was no other justification for making them hostage to the coronavirus relief negotiations.

While continuing this partisan political standoff, Congress would pass four continuing resolutions (see, for example H.R. 8337, House Roll Call 198, 9/22/20) to keep the government open into the new Fiscal year that began on October 1.  And finally, as Congress met in a December lame-duck session to wrap up the legislative session for the concluding 116th Congress, congressional leaders would agree to pass a combined appropriations omnibus with the coronavirus aid package — ensuring even less accountability and visibility for the votes of our representatives.

This is terrible legislative procedure.  Continuing resolutions serve to extend and continue unconstitutional and deficit spending at current levels.  Combining legislation into omnibuses or “minibuses” prevents any real consideration of the smaller focused pieces and allows many congressmen to vote for the bad by claiming that they had to support the good.  And rushed deadlines make the situation even worse.  They frustrate even some of the Leftists, as reported by The Hill (12-21):

Passage of both bills came despite howls from all sides about an opaque process that left lawmakers with just a few hours to read the colossal 5,593-page bill before casting their votes.

“It’s not good enough to hear about what’s in the bill,” tweeted progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). “Members of Congress need to see & read the bills we are expected to vote on.”

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), chairman of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, echoed that message, accusing leaders in both parties of ramming the bill through Congress — and putting lobbyists ahead of the public in the process.

“No one will be able to read it all in its entirety,” he tweeted. “Special interests win. Americans lose.”

Congress has been promising to restore regular order (separate votes on the 12 appropriations bills) for decades.  But with no pressure from an informed electorate to stop, the corrupted leadership of both parties will continue to rely on the lack of accountability in omnibus appropriations to advance Big-Brother government.  This is no small matter.  For the preservation of our free nation, out-of-control government must be brought to a halt.  Just by itself, this vote is evidence that sufficient pressure to hobble Big-Brother government won’t come from politicians.

 Indeed, the pressure to restore regular order will have to come from an informed electorate.  And this forcing of congressmen to defend their votes on individual spending bills for specific areas of government is an important initial step on the way to forcing constitutional voting.

Big Brother-Government
The procedure driving H.R. 133, instituted by congressional leaders, is alone sufficient justification for a  “nay” vote.  Yet the content of both pieces provided further justification.  Both the level and purpose of the funding for the four in this division demand a “nay” vote. There is enough bad in the consolidated package for responsible representatives to vote “nay” and thus demand separation.

The most egregious is the funding for the Department of Homeland Security.  We have just seen the further evolution of this dangerous federalization of the nation’s police power in a federal police force that can be deployed in our cities, solely at the whim of any sitting president.  And from the Department’s inception in response to the terrorist attacks of 9-11-2001, it was apparent that architects of the Department intended for it eventually to support a centralized, militarized police state under presidential control.

Congressional Research Services Summary:
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (09/22/2020)
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act 
This bill provides continuing FY2021 appropriations to federal agencies through December 11, 2020, and extends several programs.

It is known as a continuing resolution (CR) and prevents a government shutdown that would otherwise occur if the FY2021 appropriations bills have not been enacted when FY2021 begins on October 1, 2020.

The CR funds most programs and activities at the FY2020 levels with several exceptions that provide funding flexibility and additional appropriations to various programs.

In addition, the bill extends several authorities and programs, including

• surface transportation programs;
• public health, Medicare, and Medicaid authorities and programs;
• several authorities related to veterans benefits;
• authorities to waive certain requirements for nutrition programs;
• the National Flood Insurance Program;
• the Appalachian Regional Commission;
• the U.S. Parole Commission;
• the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; and
• several authorities related to immigration.

The bill also includes provisions that

• accelerate reimbursements to the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for net realized losses to allow the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to continue making certain payments to farmers,
• prohibit USDA from using CCC funds to provide payments or support to fossil fuel refiners and importers,
• expand nutrition assistance programs,
• increase and expand U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services fees for providing premium processing services for certain immigration-related applications, and
• reauthorize a program that provides incentives (e.g., limitations on civil liability) for corporations to self-report antitrust violations to the Department of Justice.

FFS Analysis:  Although tough action is needed to curtail deficit spending and most significantly to begin rolling back unconstitutional programs, 10 GOP senators were unwilling to extend government spending via this short-term Continuing Resolution (CR).  For an analysis of the CR, please see our analysis of the House vote (House Roll Call 198, 9-22-20).

There was virtually no debate in the Senate on H.R. 8337.  As reported by Roll Call (9-30-20):  “Passage was ensured after congressional leaders struck a bipartisan agreement last week that resolved a partisan dispute over farm payments.”

Nevertheless, the measure would occupy a major spot on Senate floor business on three different days:  On 9-24-20, Senate Vote 195 — Motion to Proceed;  On 9-29-20, Senate Vote 196 — on Cloture; and finally on 9-30-20, this vote, on Passage, the very last day of the Fiscal Year necessary to prevent shutdowns.

Congressional Research Services Summary:
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (09/22/2020)
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act 
This bill provides continuing FY2021 appropriations to federal agencies through December 11, 2020, and extends several programs.

It is known as a continuing resolution (CR) and prevents a government shutdown that would otherwise occur if the FY2021 appropriations bills have not been enacted when FY2021 begins on October 1, 2020.

The CR funds most programs and activities at the FY2020 levels with several exceptions that provide funding flexibility and additional appropriations to various programs.

In addition, the bill extends several authorities and programs, including

• surface transportation programs;
• public health, Medicare, and Medicaid authorities and programs;
• several authorities related to veterans benefits;
• authorities to waive certain requirements for nutrition programs;
• the National Flood Insurance Program;
• the Appalachian Regional Commission;
• the U.S. Parole Commission;
• the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; and
• several authorities related to immigration.

The bill also includes provisions that

• accelerate reimbursements to the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for net realized losses to allow the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to continue making certain payments to farmers,
• prohibit USDA from using CCC funds to provide payments or support to fossil fuel refiners and importers,
• expand nutrition assistance programs,
• increase and expand U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services fees for providing premium processing services for certain immigration-related applications, and
• reauthorize a program that provides incentives (e.g., limitations on civil liability) for corporations to self-report antitrust violations to the Department of Justice.

Freedom First Society Analysis: Although tough action is needed to curtail deficit spending and most significantly to begin rolling back unconstitutional programs, even many conservative representatives are willing to extend government spending via a short-term Continuing Resolution (CR), rather than support a shutdown.

Yet, in this case, 56 Republicans (and 1 Independent) voted against the CR.  Representative Glenn Grothman (R-Wisconsin) explained why in a press release the following day (September 23):

Today, Congressman Glenn Grothman (WI-06) released the following statement after voting no on H.R. 8337, a continuing resolution bill that will fund the government through December 11, 2020. The bill passed the House of Representatives on September 22, 2020 by a vote of 359-57.

“There are some people who feel Congress is broken and last night we saw another example of why,” said Grothman. “The House, hastily and without enough time to review the legislation, passed a government funding bill, known as a continuing resolution, that will keep the government open from October 1 to December 11, 2020. I am against government shutdowns and would normally vote for such a bill.

“On Monday, September 21, a continuing resolution package, with only Democratic support, was added to the House floor calendar for Tuesday, September 22….  Tuesday morning the continuing resolution package was suddenly removed from the calendar for the day and we were told negotiations were continuing with the Senate and White House.

“There was no word on negotiations all day Tuesday. Suddenly, at 6:55 p.m. ET, we were told we would have to vote on a 115-page bill in 35 minutes. The roll call was actually called in 25 minutes.

“I feel it was insulting to hold a vote on such a significant bill without being able to discern the details. I can say that as a former state legislator, there is no way state senators or state representatives would accept such high-handed tactics from their leadership – Democrat or Republican.

“By now, most congressmen have become dispirited and just vote yes on these bills, assuming that the people who negotiated it did a good job. Therefore, the bill passed 359-57. Every Democrat voted for the bill as did, to my surprise and dismay, most Republicans. There were just 57 of us who voted no….

“There is no reason that this vote could not have been taken on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday after we had a chance to responsibly review the bill. I am dismayed that Democrats, some of whom are my friends, allowed Speaker Pelosi to ask them to vote for a bill with so little time to review it….”

Indeed, this vote was forced on the House so fast that the floor debate was even more than its usual sham.  Leaders from the Appropriations Committee for each party were given 20 minutes for their own and party-member statements.   The two representative leaders were Peter J. Visclosky (D-Indiana) and  John R. Moolenaar (R-Michigan).

At one point, Representative Visclosky stated:  “Madam Speaker, I do have requests for time, but no one is here, so I reserve the balance of my time at this moment.”  Eventually a couple Democrats showed up to make statements.

With the Republicans, it was worse.  After his short opening statement supporting the measure, Rep. Moolenaar reserved the balance of his time, which eventually expired without his calling on any other Republican.

Constitutional and Other Issues
Even Rep. Visclosky, the Democratic leader supporting the CR, complained (during the “debate”):

This is a terrible way to govern the United States of America. I regret that I believe most of my colleagues here feel that a continuing resolution does no damage. It does serious damage to the agencies, to the budgeting process, and to fiscal discipline.

We should be having consideration today of 12 [House-Senate] conference reports 8 days away from the beginning of the next fiscal year.

However, the House had passed only 10 of the 12 for Senate consideration.  The two appropriation bills for the Homeland Security Department and the Legislative branch were not brought before the full House.

And the 10 bills that were passed were combined into two minibuses of four bills (passed on July 24) and 6 more (passed on July 31).  Regular order requires individual floor votes on each of the 12 regular appropriations bills.  Combining them into minibuses or an omnibus reduces congressional accountability, encouraging congressmen to accept the bad with the good.  Since there has been no strong public objection, this corrupt practice has become commonplace.  It has nothing to do with saving time on a crowded congressional calendar, when appropriations are a prime responsibility of Congress.

Joining the “debate,” Steny Hoyer, the House Majority Leader, blamed the Senate for neglecting to consider any of the  appropriations and for not presenting anything to conference committees — a reasonable criticism:

The Senate has not marked up a single bill in committee. There is no bill out of committee, and there are no bills on the floor, which means the Senate has essentially abandoned the appropriations process. Madam Speaker, that is not the way that the Congress of the United States ought to work….

What, Madam Speaker, I would urge is every one of us would from now until hopefully before December 11— that is a Friday, we are scheduled to break for Christmas and the holidays — I am hopeful that everyone will put their heads together to get the appropriations process done.

But even Rep. Hoyer, a leader of the Democrats, acknowledges:

We will probably do it in an omnibus, not single appropriations bills, which is not a good way to do it either.

What an admission!  Then why do it that way?  There are clearly corrupt pressures at work in the absence of sufficient pressure from an informed and aroused public.

We must also observe that it is irresponsible to give the appropriations responsibility to a lame-duck Congress.  A lame-duck Congress will be even less accountable to the American people than normal.

National Flood Insurance
This CR is not just an extension of appropriations and programs thru December 11.  It also locks in policy for many programs for the entire new fiscal year.  As House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) boasted during the debate:

This C.R. includes funding for highway and transit programs and the National Flood Insurance Program for another year.

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is an entrenched unconstitutional federal program, originating in 1968.  At various times, the NFIP has been challenged with calls for reform. But it needs to be phased out completely, not reformed.  See our explanation of the origins of the program in our scoring of one of several NFIP extension votes in 2018: S. 1182, House Roll Call 373 (7-25-18).

Federal unconstitutional spending has many tragic consequences, as does deficit spending.  Indeed, our very freedom is at stake.  Already the states have become dependent on Washington, a reversal of the founding relationship.

If left alone, Congress will continue its destructive path of building and nourishing the federal monster.  That course can be changed, but only by an informed and aroused public.  The first step of a much better informed public must be to regain its authority over Congress by cleaning house. The leadership for that informed and aroused public is what Freedom First Society is offering.

Congressional Research Services Summary:
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (09/22/2020)
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act 
This bill provides continuing FY2021 appropriations to federal agencies through December 11, 2020, and extends several programs.

It is known as a continuing resolution (CR) and prevents a government shutdown that would otherwise occur if the FY2021 appropriations bills have not been enacted when FY2021 begins on October 1, 2020.

The CR funds most programs and activities at the FY2020 levels with several exceptions that provide funding flexibility and additional appropriations to various programs.

In addition, the bill extends several authorities and programs, including

• surface transportation programs;
• public health, Medicare, and Medicaid authorities and programs;
• several authorities related to veterans benefits;
• authorities to waive certain requirements for nutrition programs;
• the National Flood Insurance Program;
• the Appalachian Regional Commission;
• the U.S. Parole Commission;
• the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; and
• several authorities related to immigration.

The bill also includes provisions that

• accelerate reimbursements to the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for net realized losses to allow the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to continue making certain payments to farmers,
• prohibit USDA from using CCC funds to provide payments or support to fossil fuel refiners and importers,
• expand nutrition assistance programs,
• increase and expand U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services fees for providing premium processing services for certain immigration-related applications, and
• reauthorize a program that provides incentives (e.g., limitations on civil liability) for corporations to self-report antitrust violations to the Department of Justice.

FFS Analysis:  Although tough action is needed to curtail deficit spending and most significantly to begin rolling back unconstitutional programs, 10 GOP senators were unwilling to extend government spending via this short-term Continuing Resolution (CR).  For an analysis of the CR, please see our analysis of the House vote (House Roll Call 198, 9-22-20).

There was virtually no debate in the Senate on H.R. 8337.  As reported by Roll Call (9-30-20):  “Passage was ensured after congressional leaders struck a bipartisan agreement last week that resolved a partisan dispute over farm payments.”

Nevertheless, the measure would occupy a major spot on Senate floor business on three different days:  On 9-24-20, Senate Vote 195 — Motion to Proceed;  On 9-29-20, Senate Vote 196 — on Cloture; and finally on 9-30-20, this vote, on Passage, the very last day of the Fiscal Year necessary to prevent shutdowns.

Congressional Research Services Summary:
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (09/22/2020)
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act 
This bill provides continuing FY2021 appropriations to federal agencies through December 11, 2020, and extends several programs.

It is known as a continuing resolution (CR) and prevents a government shutdown that would otherwise occur if the FY2021 appropriations bills have not been enacted when FY2021 begins on October 1, 2020.

The CR funds most programs and activities at the FY2020 levels with several exceptions that provide funding flexibility and additional appropriations to various programs.

In addition, the bill extends several authorities and programs, including

• surface transportation programs;
• public health, Medicare, and Medicaid authorities and programs;
• several authorities related to veterans benefits;
• authorities to waive certain requirements for nutrition programs;
• the National Flood Insurance Program;
• the Appalachian Regional Commission;
• the U.S. Parole Commission;
• the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; and
• several authorities related to immigration.

The bill also includes provisions that

• accelerate reimbursements to the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for net realized losses to allow the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to continue making certain payments to farmers,
• prohibit USDA from using CCC funds to provide payments or support to fossil fuel refiners and importers,
• expand nutrition assistance programs,
• increase and expand U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services fees for providing premium processing services for certain immigration-related applications, and
• reauthorize a program that provides incentives (e.g., limitations on civil liability) for corporations to self-report antitrust violations to the Department of Justice.

Freedom First Society Analysis: Although tough action is needed to curtail deficit spending and most significantly to begin rolling back unconstitutional programs, even many conservative representatives are willing to extend government spending via a short-term Continuing Resolution (CR), rather than support a shutdown.

Yet, in this case, 56 Republicans (and 1 Independent) voted against the CR.  Representative Glenn Grothman (R-Wisconsin) explained why in a press release the following day (September 23):

Today, Congressman Glenn Grothman (WI-06) released the following statement after voting no on H.R. 8337, a continuing resolution bill that will fund the government through December 11, 2020. The bill passed the House of Representatives on September 22, 2020 by a vote of 359-57.

“There are some people who feel Congress is broken and last night we saw another example of why,” said Grothman. “The House, hastily and without enough time to review the legislation, passed a government funding bill, known as a continuing resolution, that will keep the government open from October 1 to December 11, 2020. I am against government shutdowns and would normally vote for such a bill.

“On Monday, September 21, a continuing resolution package, with only Democratic support, was added to the House floor calendar for Tuesday, September 22….  Tuesday morning the continuing resolution package was suddenly removed from the calendar for the day and we were told negotiations were continuing with the Senate and White House.

“There was no word on negotiations all day Tuesday. Suddenly, at 6:55 p.m. ET, we were told we would have to vote on a 115-page bill in 35 minutes. The roll call was actually called in 25 minutes.

“I feel it was insulting to hold a vote on such a significant bill without being able to discern the details. I can say that as a former state legislator, there is no way state senators or state representatives would accept such high-handed tactics from their leadership – Democrat or Republican.

“By now, most congressmen have become dispirited and just vote yes on these bills, assuming that the people who negotiated it did a good job. Therefore, the bill passed 359-57. Every Democrat voted for the bill as did, to my surprise and dismay, most Republicans. There were just 57 of us who voted no….

“There is no reason that this vote could not have been taken on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday after we had a chance to responsibly review the bill. I am dismayed that Democrats, some of whom are my friends, allowed Speaker Pelosi to ask them to vote for a bill with so little time to review it….”

Indeed, this vote was forced on the House so fast that the floor debate was even more than its usual sham.  Leaders from the Appropriations Committee for each party were given 20 minutes for their own and party-member statements.   The two representative leaders were Peter J. Visclosky (D-Indiana) and  John R. Moolenaar (R-Michigan).

At one point, Representative Visclosky stated:  “Madam Speaker, I do have requests for time, but no one is here, so I reserve the balance of my time at this moment.”  Eventually a couple Democrats showed up to make statements.

With the Republicans, it was worse.  After his short opening statement supporting the measure, Rep. Moolenaar reserved the balance of his time, which eventually expired without his calling on any other Republican.

Constitutional and Other Issues
Even Rep. Visclosky, the Democratic leader supporting the CR, complained (during the “debate”):

This is a terrible way to govern the United States of America. I regret that I believe most of my colleagues here feel that a continuing resolution does no damage. It does serious damage to the agencies, to the budgeting process, and to fiscal discipline.

We should be having consideration today of 12 [House-Senate] conference reports 8 days away from the beginning of the next fiscal year.

However, the House had passed only 10 of the 12 for Senate consideration.  The two appropriation bills for the Homeland Security Department and the Legislative branch were not brought before the full House.

And the 10 bills that were passed were combined into two minibuses of four bills (passed on July 24) and 6 more (passed on July 31).  Regular order requires individual floor votes on each of the 12 regular appropriations bills.  Combining them into minibuses or an omnibus reduces congressional accountability, encouraging congressmen to accept the bad with the good.  Since there has been no strong public objection, this corrupt practice has become commonplace.  It has nothing to do with saving time on a crowded congressional calendar, when appropriations are a prime responsibility of Congress.

Joining the “debate,” Steny Hoyer, the House Majority Leader, blamed the Senate for neglecting to consider any of the  appropriations and for not presenting anything to conference committees — a reasonable criticism:

The Senate has not marked up a single bill in committee. There is no bill out of committee, and there are no bills on the floor, which means the Senate has essentially abandoned the appropriations process. Madam Speaker, that is not the way that the Congress of the United States ought to work….

What, Madam Speaker, I would urge is every one of us would from now until hopefully before December 11— that is a Friday, we are scheduled to break for Christmas and the holidays — I am hopeful that everyone will put their heads together to get the appropriations process done.

But even Rep. Hoyer, a leader of the Democrats, acknowledges:

We will probably do it in an omnibus, not single appropriations bills, which is not a good way to do it either.

What an admission!  Then why do it that way?  There are clearly corrupt pressures at work in the absence of sufficient pressure from an informed and aroused public.

We must also observe that it is irresponsible to give the appropriations responsibility to a lame-duck Congress.  A lame-duck Congress will be even less accountable to the American people than normal.

National Flood Insurance
This CR is not just an extension of appropriations and programs thru December 11.  It also locks in policy for many programs for the entire new fiscal year.  As House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) boasted during the debate:

This C.R. includes funding for highway and transit programs and the National Flood Insurance Program for another year.

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is an entrenched unconstitutional federal program, originating in 1968.  At various times, the NFIP has been challenged with calls for reform. But it needs to be phased out completely, not reformed.  See our explanation of the origins of the program in our scoring of one of several NFIP extension votes in 2018: S. 1182, House Roll Call 373 (7-25-18).

Federal unconstitutional spending has many tragic consequences, as does deficit spending.  Indeed, our very freedom is at stake.  Already the states have become dependent on Washington, a reversal of the founding relationship.

If left alone, Congress will continue its destructive path of building and nourishing the federal monster.  That course can be changed, but only by an informed and aroused public.  The first step of a much better informed public must be to regain its authority over Congress by cleaning house. The leadership for that informed and aroused public is what Freedom First Society is offering.

Bill Summary:  According to Roll Call (9-10-20):

“Key features of the smaller GOP bill include a $300 boost in weekly unemployment insurance benefits through Dec. 27, and a revamped Paycheck Protection Program offering a ‘second draw’ of loans for hard hit businesses.

Other provisions of the Senate GOP relief bill include:

• A revamped Paycheck Protection Program taking back unspent Small Business Administration funds and offering “second draw” loans, capped at $2 million each, to firms with 300 or fewer workers that have seen revenue drop at least 35 percent year-over-year. The new program is estimated to cost nearly $258 billion, but the net cost drops to about $112 billion after rescinding unspent SBA funds.
• $105 billion for K-12 schools and colleges and universities, along with the new scholarship programs intended to promote school choice. There’s also $15 billion to help working parents find accessible child care options.
• $20 billion for farmers and ranchers who’ve been hurt by pandemic-induced losses, and $500 million for fishing and seafood industries.
• $31 billion for development and distribution of vaccines, drugs and other medical supplies, and $16 billion for testing and contact tracing.
• $10 billion worth of loan forgiveness for the U.S. Postal Service if the agency falls below certain cash thresholds.
• Liability protections for businesses, schools and health care providers.
• An expanded charitable deduction for 2020 contributions made by taxpayers who claim the standard deduction and aren’t eligible to claim charitable deductions.”

Freedom First Society Analysis:  The federal government’s money tree is a destructive deception (see our post “The Federal  Money Tree”).  What the government gives to some, it must ultimately take from others.  But that reality is disguised by Federal Reserve financing of deficits (creating new money, which eventually devalues the currency) or by “temporary” foreign purchases of U.S. debt.  (Public borrowing of such enormous sums is not an option as that raises interest rates and kills private investment.)

Two wrongs don’t make a right!  The reaction of governments to an ostensible coronavirus crisis is responsible for the major economic stress imposed on businesses (including bankruptcies) and the people (e.g., increased unemployment).  But “printing” more money does not substitute for production.  And unconstitutional government handouts of money does not cure the problem either.

If the government were really interested in protecting the public, which it’s not, government should have weighed the unavoidable economic consequences of the shutdown against the health benefits of an unprecedented quarantine of an entire, mostly heathy population.

What federal and state governments did to create the recession and why is what needs to be address, not the symptoms.  But it is not our purpose here to show that governments had an agenda far different from protecting the people.  (Consider just the financial incentives provided to hospitals for inflating coronavirus statistics – example, someone who died in a motorcycle accident becomes a “coronavirus death” if the body tests positive for the virus.)

A Purely Political Vote
Leaders of both parties knew the “skinny” coronavirus aid bill wouldn’t pass the Senate.  But Senator McConnell reportedly argued that a unified GOP vote supporting some level of socialist aid would accomplish two things: 1) It would strengthen GOP bargaining power with the Democrats for a compromise bill; and 2) The vote would help some Republican Senators facing tough election challenges from Democrats.

Regarding #1, McConnell was successful in winning the support of almost all of the Republican Senators (except Senator Rand Paul) by scaling down the amount of unconstitutional aid.

If #2 is true, it is a sad commentary that a vote for government handouts aids GOP reelections.

The Compromise Fraud
Any compromise that follows in the footsteps of recent aid bills is bad.  Political compromise that violates the Constitution is not hallowed. And when socialist Republicans compromise with socialist Democrats, the result is clearly further destruction of our Republic.

The solution to America’s ills must be for an informed and activated electorate to clean house in Congress and to insist that Congress begin rolling back unconstitutional programs and departments.  It’s a big task – but anything else will not avert disaster.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has been leading the White House Covid-19 relief negotiations with the Democrats (along with chief of staff Mark Meadow).  On September 14, he told CNBC that he was still willing to work with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to come up with a compromise deal.  Mnuchin argued that “lawmakers should not allow fears over the size of the nation’s deficit or the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet to delay additional Covid-19 relief” to address the recession.

Mnuchin’s position is not surprising considering his background.  Mnuchin spent 17 years with the Insider firm of Goldman Sachs, where he became a partner.  Mnuchin is not himself currently a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, but The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. is a Corporate “Founding” member.

When Mnuchin left Goldman Sachs in 2002, he launched an investment fund together with billionaire George Soros (CFR), a Hillary Clinton supporter.  Although Mnuchin served as the national finance chairman for Trump’s campaign, Mnuchin had a long-time history as a Democratic donor, having previously supported both Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s campaigns.

Use of Unrelated Vehicles
We also have a standing objection to the lack of transparency in votes by Congress.  Congress continues to make it nearly impossible for the public to understand what it’s doing, as reflected on government websites.  And this in the age of the Internet!

Continued use of unrelated vehicles is inexcusable.  This one (S. 178), amended by the House in 2019, was titled “A bill to condemn gross human rights violations of ethnic Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang, and calling for an end to arbitrary detention, torture, and harassment of these communities inside and outside China.”

Moreover, the cloture vote on Senate Amdt 2652 to the House amended S. 178 was not identified as a vote on a“Skinny Coronavirus Relief Bill.”  Even trying to determine what the amendment was about was a chore. Fortunately, the news media told us the day and the outcome of the vote, so there was only one possibility.