Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Coronavirus

Trump Wants $2 Trillion, Pelosi Wants $1 Trillion, for Next Coronavirus Spending Bill

President Donald Trump, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi all agree that a fourth spending bill will happen in April but are haggling over the cost.

Nick Gillespie | 4.7.2020 11:55 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
upiphotostwo717163 | STEFANI REYNOLDS/UPI/Newscom
(STEFANI REYNOLDS/UPI/Newscom)

Less than two weeks ago, President Donald Trump signed the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act into law. It's the single-largest spending bill passed in United States history and even though its funds haven't been disbursed, elected officials are already calling for yet more tax dollars to be spent to prop up the economy during an extended lockdown.

Last week, Trump said he wants another $2 trillion in spending, to be devoted to infrastructure, as phase four of the federal response to the pandemic. "It should be VERY BIG & BOLD, Two Trillion Dollars, and be focused solely on jobs and rebuilding the once great infrastructure of our Country!" announced the president via Twitter. For those keeping score, the president has been promising "infrastrcture week" since at least 2017 and Trump's ritualized invocation of shoveling massive amounts of money at roads, bridges, airports, and the like even has its own entry at Urban Dictionary.

With interest rates for the United States being at ZERO, this is the time to do our decades long awaited Infrastructure Bill. It should be VERY BIG & BOLD, Two Trillion Dollars, and be focused solely on jobs and rebuilding the once great infrastructure of our Country! Phase 4

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 31, 2020

Yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) announced plans to push for at least another $1 trillion in new spending. From the Associated Press:

On an afternoon conference call with House Democrats, Pelosi told lawmakers at least another $1 trillion would be needed, according to a person unauthorized to discuss the call and granted anonymity.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) has told A.P. "that there will be another package and health care must be at the 'top of the list.'"

Early indicators about the efficacy of the CARES Act and federal efforts to prop up the economy are not promising. On Friday, the Small Business Administration (SBA) botched the online rollout of a loan program and early responses to various bailouts are not heartening. In order to maximize payouts from the government, airlines are flying empty planes and the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., notoriously fired 100 musicians "just hours after President Trump signed a $25 million taxpayer bailout for the cultural center."

With Congress adjourned for most of April, it's not clear exactly when the next coronavirus spending bill will be passed, though A.P. says Pelosi has pledged to vote on a new package before the end of the month.

A week ago, I spoke with Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.), a critic of the CARES Act who warned that Congress would soon be voting to spend trillions of dollars more. Watch here:

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Lincoln Chafee Quits Race for Libertarian Party Presidential Nomination

Nick Gillespie is an editor at large at Reason and host of The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie.

CoronavirusDonald TrumpNancy PelosiMitch McConnellEconomicsThomas MassieGovernment Spending
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (60)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. StackOfCoins   5 years ago

    The sooner the federal government proceeds to insolvency the sooner libertarians can annex a state and bring about the real great society.

    1. CryHavok   5 years ago

      I like your style.

    2. Junia   5 years ago

      Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week. No Experience Needed, No Boss Over Your Shoulder... Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open...
      Find out how HERE......
      More here

    3. Leo Kovalensky II   5 years ago

      At most we'll get a gulch in Colorado or a town in New Hampshire.

    4. JFree   5 years ago

      Libertarians could render the entire thing a charade by letting go of the dollar and all (or most) of its intermediaries

      Unfortunately, the libertarians who seem to understand that, all seem to believe that if only everyone picks the 'money' (bitcoin) currently owned by libertarians/ancaps that everything will be solved. Which is basically just a different Top Man fantasy.

  2. Brandybuck   5 years ago

    For the NEXT one?!?!?

    Sorry, just spit my coffee all over my screen. Do they mean to say we've already spent the first trillion? What did we get out of it? Anything? Anything?

    1. sarcasmic   5 years ago

      We get assurances that well-connected corporations can use free money to pay their employees to do nothing.

    2. Cynical Asshole   5 years ago

      What did we get out of it?

      A giant dick in our asses?

      1. Rich   5 years ago

        "Thank you, Sir! May I have another?"

    3. De Oppresso Liber   5 years ago

      I can tell you that the $300 odd billion in SBA programs for small businesses is pretty much guaranteed to run out before all applications are even looked at. Right now it is first come first serve for your trump bux. I've applied everywhere I can, but cannot get a response from lenders still. https://qz.com/1833472/paycheck-protection-program-could-run-out-of-money/

      And the stock market is melting up daily on low trade volume and suspicious buy orders placed well over ask price. I guess when the Fed has committed to buying almost $600B in assets per week, asset prices simply cannot fall. Had to go long on BRK-B week before last, but not before learning my lesson with a nice haircut on my puts' profits.

      This stimulus is unlike anything in history. I don't know and can't see what the end game is for the fed and the US dollar here. I guess everything works as long as everyone keeps pretending it does.

      1. ElvisIsReal   5 years ago

        Currency reset? Global currency incoming?

  3. Ken Shultz   5 years ago

    I'm against both o them, but I'm not about to say they're both as bad as each other or that one is worse than the other because it costs more--until I see what they do. The package that helps states like California, Illinois, and New York replenish their out of control pension systems the most, that's the one I oppose the most. The coronavirus should not be used as an excuse for states to continue to make outrageous pension commitments.

    If an economic collapse isn't enough to entice to Albany, Sacramento, and Springfield to address the man made catastrophe that is their state employee pension systems, then what will? There will never be a time when those states are so flush with taxpayer revenue that they make cuts to their pension system. The only solution is to leave them to twist in the wind, and that is what we should do.

    1. Leo Kovalensky II   5 years ago

      In the comments over the previous bill you assured us that it was preferable because it wasn't Keynesian.

      Now Trump is allegedly pitching more traditional Keynesian "stimulus" by spending on infrastructure.

    2. wearingit   5 years ago

      How about we leave red state takers to twist in the wind? Cali is a net donor and that's even with their high taxes. Imagine if they kept more of their money and could spend it on their pensions or whatever other thing they wanted.

      The real catch is to finally tell red state morons that THEY are the moochers, not the "welfare queens" in cities in blue states.

      1. Vince Smith   5 years ago

        Libertarians believe in less taking, whether by red or blue states.

      2. Vince Smith   5 years ago

        People should get to keep more of their money, and there should be less government spending in every state, especially California.

  4. SIV   5 years ago

    Is Nancy Pelosi fiscally conservative and socially liberal enough to get called "libertarian-leaning" in Reason-speak now?

    1. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   5 years ago

      Longtime libertarian activist Michael Hihn would undoubtedly welcome her in our coalition.

      #LibertariansForPelosi

  5. Fats of Fury   5 years ago

    Chances are they'll compromise and the bill will be for 4 trillion.

    1. Jerryskids   5 years ago

      Don't be silly, I'd be willing to bet it's no more than $3.6T.

  6. Dillinger   5 years ago

    do I get another $1200 lol?

    1. StackOfCoins   5 years ago

      I could see them passing another bill with no direct payments to taxpayers. Why bother? The last one had a mere 1/16th earmarked for direct payments, and that sailed through Congress. I suspect people will be getting their checks just as Congress prepares to vote on the next one. It's the perfect time to be cronyist in the extreme. Then each side can accuse the other of blocking relief to people and get to work on a third stimulus.

      1. Dillinger   5 years ago

        shocked they deigned us worthy of our own money back the first time

        1. Leo Kovalensky II   5 years ago

          It wasn't our money back. It was a new, unfunded liability.

          1. StackOfCoins   5 years ago

            If you consider taxes theft, than any sort of payment from the government is a restitution up to the amount they seized.

            1. Leo Kovalensky II   5 years ago

              I consider taxes as theft.

              However, all spending is a tax. Government can't create wealth by passing a bill. It's either paid through revenue now (current taxes), revenue in the future (future taxes), or inflation (taxes on our savings).

              1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   5 years ago

                Yes yes yes -- all government spending is theft, not just the taxation.

              2. Ride 'Em   5 years ago

                The government counts on inflation. It makes it easier to pay off debt with cheaper dollars based on higher income. It is a two pronged hit to the earner, he/she is less able to pay for items and pays higher taxes.

                1. ElvisIsReal   5 years ago

                  As I like to say, inflation favors those in debt, and nobody is in more in debt than the USG.

          2. Fat Mike's Drug Habit   5 years ago

            If the government is just going to invent money out of thin air I don't see why I should only get $1200. If $1200 was good, $12,000 would be 10x as good.

            1. Dillinger   5 years ago

              soon we'll be back to $500 ounces dammit.

        2. ElvisIsReal   5 years ago

          It's an anti-revolution check, plain and simple. Here's $1200 to sit down shut up.

    2. MikeT1986   5 years ago

      At the cost of this they could have given me back all my 2019 taxes. We're looking at 3.3 Trillion dollars from these bills.

      Fiscal Year| Revenue
      FY 2017 | $3.32 trillion

      1. Dillinger   5 years ago

        i like your idea.

  7. Adans smith   5 years ago

    Seeing that pic I now know Trump has caught Democrat cooties. Their is no cure.

    1. Butler T. Reynolds   5 years ago

      Caught it? He always had it.

      1. ElvisIsReal   5 years ago

        To be honest, we're VERY lucky that the Democrats didn't realize sooner they could get everything they wanted by just kissing his ass.

  8. Rich   5 years ago

    haggling over the cost.

    Sounds like the punchline of a joke.

  9. Longtobefree   5 years ago

    What the hell? Go for three. It ain't real money.
    Just demand Trump explain where all these skilled infrastructure workers are going to come from. Maybe retrain the laid off waitresses, and hope the roads stay flat?

    1. Leo Kovalensky II   5 years ago

      We could pay them below minimum wage and then they could stop every car that passes by for tips?

  10. JFree   5 years ago

    As long as everyone can agree that the top priority needs to be infrastructure, small business, big business, hospitals, everyone in lockdown, banks, homeowners, renters, and that guy sitting on the bench over there, I'm pretty sure we can keep the next spending bill under $10 trillion or so.

    1. Leo Kovalensky II   5 years ago

      It's tough to say for sure. This is an election year.

      1. Ride 'Em   5 years ago

        ^^this 100%

    2. Jerryskids   5 years ago

      You forgot about the children, the college students, those with children or college students, the elderly, the unemployed, the under-employed, and the heroes who still have jobs.

      1. Rich   5 years ago

        *** meekly raises hand ***

        What about bonuses for the medical and economic leaders?

        1. ElvisIsReal   5 years ago

          You've got my vote, patriot!

  11. Butler T. Reynolds   5 years ago

    The usual Trump-humpers are a little more quiet today.

    1. De Oppresso Liber   5 years ago

      Well, it's pretty difficult, even for total hypocrites, to defend Trump busying himself with massive bail outs and removing oversight from said bailouts.

    2. Eric   5 years ago

      Give it time. We’ll get the “All spending starts in the HOUSE!” excuse soon enough.

  12. Billak   5 years ago

    Based on very bad computer models - which the government has doubled down on while knowing their very inaccurate - our economy is trashed. After killing the economy government tax revenues plummet. Then, In response to a government contrived emergency, the feds proceed to accelerate the speed at which the government approaches insolvency. Ultimately this out of control reckless spending falls back on the blank check the government was given with the passage of the 16th Amendment combined with central bank stealing value from the US dollars. Our founders warned us against direct taxation and central banks for precisely these reasons.

    1. ElvisIsReal   5 years ago

      The $100,000 question is this: was it standard government incompetence, or a deliberate attempt to "reset" the currency and effectively wipe away all the bad debt, while turning over the rest to the bankers via funny money loans to people forcibly kept from working?

      The net economic result of this is a HUGE transfer of wealth upward, as small businesses go under and huge corporations step in with bailout cash to buy the wreckage. Socialism in action.

  13. TJJ2000   5 years ago

    OMG!!!! Trump is making Obama look conservative.... This is RIDICULOUS!!!

  14. n00bdragon   5 years ago

    A trillion here, a trillion there. Soon we'll be talking about real money.

    1. TJJ2000   5 years ago

      August 2019 shows 130-million Americans work full-time.
      $4T is $30,770/EACH working person.

  15. Vince Smith   5 years ago

    This is why I don't care if Trump loses to Biden. He wants to spend MORE than Pelosi. Most libertarian president indeed. And what the hell is his Keynesian obsession with infrastructure? He's like an FDR style Democrat.

  16. Vince Smith   5 years ago

    Any and all infrastructure spending should be paid for by USER FEES aka gas taxes or tolls.

  17. Vince Smith   5 years ago

    #CancelTheClownShow.

  18. Chmeee   5 years ago

    See! They don't need Bernie to get all of the goodies the progressives want, we only needed to have a good, juicy pandemic to get all of the socialist options on the table, from BOTH parties

    :-/

  19. Brad Nayles   5 years ago

    But how are they gonna pay for it? Where is all this money coming from? How much more is there? Golly.

  20. BigGiveNotBigGov   5 years ago

    Suspicion confirmed.

    Trump is even a worse big(ger) government prog and autocrat, than is San Fran Nan.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

RFK Jr. Denigrates Privately Funded Medical Research

Joe Lancaster | 5.28.2025 3:55 PM

Can Trump Yank Harvard's Remaining Federal Funding?

Emma Camp | 5.28.2025 3:30 PM

A Federal Judge Lists 8 Ways That Trump Violated the Constitution by Punishing a Disfavored Law Firm

Jacob Sullum | 5.28.2025 3:15 PM

Elon Musk Is Right. The 'Big Beautiful Bill' Is a Bad Deal.

Eric Boehm | 5.28.2025 1:00 PM

Is Buying OnlyFans Content Now Illegal in Sweden?

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 5.28.2025 12:18 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!