Sen. Warren Explains Why She Voted Against Stimulus Plan, ULTRAVIOLET CORONAVIRUS BAILOUT ALERT, Sen. Elizabeth Warren On The Standoff Over Stimulus Bill | Stephanie Ruhle | MSNBC 23MAR20

SOCIAL DISTANCING: SIX FEET APART IS BETTER THAN SIX FEET UNDER!

THE PRC CORONAVIRUS FLAG IS A REMINDER OF THE PRC GOVERNMENT WHO UNLEASHED THIS PANDEMIC ON THE REST OF THE WORLD

SEN mitch mcconnell (r moscow) with U.S. Treasury Sec steve mnuchin, the drumpf / trump-pence administration and the gop / greed over people republican party are waging class warfare against the poor, working and middle classes through a dishonest, deceptive and manipulative propaganda campaign against congressional Democrats blaming them for not passing a coronavirus / Covid 19 pandemic stimulus plan. The truth is the plan Moscow mitch and the republicans want passed is another give away to the 1% and corporate America ( like the drumpf / trump-pence gop republican tax cut ) that leaves most Americans wallowing in financial and medical neglect. These from NPR  and UltraViolet and MSNBC outline the drumpf / trump-pence gop / greed over people republican fraudulent stimulus plan. If you can e mail or call your Senators and Representative and tell them to pass a stimulus plan that includes the Democrats rules, regulations and restrictions and provides funding for the poor, working and middle classes, not the 1%, ceo and corporate board salaries and  stock buy backs.

Sen. Warren Explains Why She Voted Against Stimulus Plan

March 23, 20205:10 AM ET

Heard on Morning Edition

CLICK THE HEADER TO LISTEN TO THIS STORY

5-Minute Listen

• Download
• Transcript

NPR's Steve Inskeep talks to Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren about the trillion dollar stimulus plan to counter the effects of the coronavirus that Democrats rejected in the Senate on Sunday.

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

President Trump expressed an opinion yesterday about how companies would use the money from the aid bill.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I do not want stock buybacks. I don't want to give a bailout to a company and then have somebody go out and use that money to buy back stock in the company and raise the price and then get a bonus.

INSKEEP: In this, the president sounds a little like Democrats, including Senator Elizabeth Warren. The former presidential candidate is back at work and called us yesterday to say she is among those urging stricter controls in the bill.

ELIZABETH WARREN: You can't just take $450 billion, hand it over to the secretary of treasury and, say, hand it out to your closest friends on a no-strings-attached basis. No, there has to be strings. The taxpayer has a right to know that if the Trump administration wants to hand out $450 billion in a bailout to giant corporations, then by golly, they have a right to know that that money is going to help workers, not to increase executives' compensation or to boost returns to shareholders. That's a big difference.

INSKEEP: If I'm not mistaken, you're referring to a fund to help distressed companies. And of course, just about every company is, in some way or another, distressed at this point. The bill has changed so much in the past couple of days that I'm not sure many members of the public understand what's in it. How is that fund structured now, as best you understand - and how should it be structured?

WARREN: Well, the fund, as it stands right now, has no meaningful requirement that companies maintain payroll or benefits for their employees, no serious restrictions on stock buybacks, no requirements to reduce executive pay and no ongoing oversight. You know, in fact, as you read this, it sounds like Trump hotel properties, like Mar-a-Lago, could receive huge bags of cash and then fire their workers if Steve Mnuchin decides he wants to do a real solid for his boss using taxpayer dollars.

So look - I saw up close and personal what the consequences were in 2008 when Congress didn't put enough restrictions on bailout money. And the current Trump proposal is far worse than the worst critique of Bush's 2008 bank bailout.

INSKEEP: Is this circumstance, Senator, a little different than the financial crisis, though, in that in 2008, lawmakers were voting to bailout companies that could be blamed for the crisis? It's hard to argue that corporations are to blame for the rescue that they need now.

WARREN: Oh, fair enough. I don't think anyone thinks that the airline industry, for example, is to blame for what has happened. But on the other hand, if they want to get taxpayer dollars, then we need to know that those taxpayer dollars are going to be spent in a way that helps the economy generally instead of a handful of executives and investors.

So I put out a list of things that we should see before we invest taxpayer dollars, like that companies must maintain their payrolls and use the funds to either keep people working or help keep them on payroll, and that companies will be prohibited from engaging in share repurchases or that they'll be prohibited from paying out dividends or executive bonuses while receiving any relief for three - the time during they have the money and three years after that. You know, collective bargaining agreements should stay in place. In other words, we need to make sure the money is going to help workers.

INSKEEP: If you don't get those provisions, Senator, are you willing to go so far as to say, better to have no bill at all, better to have the economy go down in flames?

WARREN: Look - that is not the alternative. I think you put this in - it's a false choice. The alternative is to say to the Republicans, if you really want to give Treasury a half a trillion dollars nearly to be able to hand out to giant corporations, then the American taxpayer has a right to know where that money goes.

INSKEEP: On some level, Senator, that is the alternative, though, right? If you have a question of power here - of one side backing down or the other, do you need to be willing to make that statement, that you're willing to have the bill fail entirely unless you have these provisions - that you consider them that vital?

WARREN: Well, I see it the other way around. Why would Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump be so resistant to saying that executives can't dip into taxpayer dollars in order to enrich themselves with bonuses and high salaries? Why would they be so resistant to that?

INSKEEP: Senator Elizabeth Warren, always a pleasure talking with you. Thank you so much.

WARREN: Always good to talk to you, too.

Copyright © 2020 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

ULTRAVIOLET CORONAVIRUS BAILOUT ALERT

23 MAR 20

Right now, the U.S. Senate is debating a coronavirus relief bill that hands hundreds of billions to big corporations like the airline and cruise ship industries while giving low-income people almost nothing.

Under Senator Mitch McConnell's proposal, the lowest-income workers would get as little as $600. And single moms are especially short-changed. Believe it or not, a married couple with no kids may receive more help from this bill than a single mom with two kids.¹

The details in this bill are changing fast, but it's obvious that we need to send a message loud and clear to Congress that they need to focus on people, not big corporations.

Will you rush an emergency donation to turn up the heat on Congress? We'll use your money to help flood Congress with phone calls and run digital ads telling members of Congress that they must take action to protect women and low-income people during this pandemic.

As proposed, the newest relief legislation would give the most vulnerable--people already experiencing severe economic insecurity--a one-time payment of just $600. A single person making $75,000 a year would get twice as much as someone scraping by on $20,000 a year or less.²

And there's nothing in the bill focusing on the fact that women are suffering the most. With schools and daycare centers closed, single moms are desperately scrambling to keep their heads above water.

But Sen. McConnell and Donald Trump only care about big corporations, not everyday people.

Not only does this bill shortchange women and low-income people and give billions to corporations, it does almost nothing to hold corporations accountable. According to Senator Elizabeth Warren, the latest version of the bill includes no requirement that companies maintain payroll or benefits, no serious restrictions on stock buybacks, no reductions on executive pay, and no ongoing oversight.³

This bill could pass by the end of the day today. Our elected representatives in Washington need to know that we demand that they support policy that helps all their constituents weather this pandemic as best we can.

If we can flood Congress with phone calls and target members with ads, we can make sure they know they will be held accountable if they do not value our lives, health, and futures. That's the kind of pressure that can get even the most corrupt Republican to demand help for their constituents, not just corporate donors.

Donate now to help launch an urgent push to stop the corporate bailouts and demand the help that low-income people and single moms desperately need in this crisis.

--Shaunna, Kat, Kathy, Anathea, Sonja, Melody, Lindsay, Pam, Maria, Kimberly, and Katie, the UltraViolet Action team

CONTRIBUTE

Sources:

1. Senate Republicans’ cash assistance plan is far too limited, Vox, March 20, 2020

2. Ibid.

3. Elizabeth Warren, Twitter, March 22, 2020

Sen. Elizabeth Warren On The Standoff Over Stimulus Bill | Stephanie Ruhle | MSNBC

Watch Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren join Stephanie Ruhle to share her stance on the Senate's standoff over the stimulus bill and what lawmakers hope to get done as the effects of coronavirus continue to spread. Aired on 3/23/2020.