Daily Archives: April 24, 2020

WASHINGTON In January 2018, Senate Democrats took a politically risky stand, shutting down the government to insist on protections for hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants. Gleeful Republicans saw the obstruction strategy as a huge blunder and pounded the Democrats, who caved after only a few days of sharp attacks and cut a deal to reopen.

Times and circumstances have changed.

Democrats have now blocked two consecutive coronavirus rescue packages pushed by Republicans and withstood withering criticism to win concessions and hundreds of billions of dollars they said were vital. At nearly $500 billion, the latest measure to move through Congress this week ended up being almost twice the size and much broader in scope than the original bill Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, tried to ram through two weeks earlier without negotiations.

It was a potentially dangerous strategy for Democrats, particularly in an election year, that left them open to accusations from President Trump and congressional Republicans that they were denying desperately needed money at a crucial moment for businesses trying to survive in the face of the pandemic. It may have also reduced their leverage in the next fight over a much larger stimulus measure that is likely to top $1 trillion.

But their willingness to take on those risks reflects Democrats confidence that the terrain of the current debate a public health crisis and economic disaster that will require the broadest government relief effort since the post-World War II era plays to their core strengths as a party. It is also based in part on their belief that Mr. Trump, whose re-election hopes are likely to rise or fall based on the public perception of his administrations response to the pandemic, has a strong incentive to compromise with them.

We think we are right, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said in an interview explaining his partys stance. People were just united that this was a serious crisis, and it was sort of obvious what McConnell was trying to do.

The same was true last month, when Democrats twice voted to block a sweeping economic stimulus package that contained jobless aid, direct payments to Americans and business bailouts while they held out for their priorities, including stricter oversight requirements over how the Trump administration would spend the vast amounts of money. That $2.2 trillion measure passed unanimously.

My overall observation is its pretty hard to win a spending contest with a Democrat, Mr. McConnell said in a brief interview on Tuesday. They always want to spend more on everything.

Mr. McConnell has evidently had enough of a dynamic that seems to be empowering Democrats. After the latest aid bill passed the Senate on Tuesday, he cited mounting deficit spending Congress has now appropriated more than $2.7 trillion in only seven weeks to confront the pandemic and declared that Republicans would entertain no more coronavirus rescue packages until all lawmakers were back in Washington for a normal Senate session. That scenario could delay additional aid while allowing a fuller debate on emerging proposals, rather than negotiation and approval by a handful of top lawmakers in a nearly empty Capitol.

The Republican leader also sought to play down Democratic gains in the bill, emphasizing that they had failed to secure additional aid to state and local governments that they had aggressively sought.

Its unfortunate that it took our Democratic colleagues 12 days to agree to a deal that contains essentially nothing that Republicans ever opposed, Mr. McConnell said.

But the measure did contain multiple things that Mr. McConnell initially rejected as he sought approval of a bare-bones infusion of $250 billion into a small-business loan program that had quickly run dry of funds. Instead, that program got $320 billion in new funds, including $60 billion secured by Democrats to be funneled through smaller community lenders to reach businesses that can struggle to get loans from big banks.

Also included were $60 billion to replenish exhausted Small Business Administration disaster relief accounts, $75 billion for hospitals and $25 billion for Covid-19 testing, plus a mandate that the Trump administration establish a strategy to help states vastly step up the deployment of tests throughout the country a move Republicans had opposed.

Of the four major things we pushed for, we got three over Republican resistance, Mr. Schumer said. But they knew they needed us.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who early on warned Mr. McConnell that his proposal would not clear the Democratically controlled House, called the outcome a clear win for her partys priorities. She said the legislation would not have been delayed at all if Republicans had accepted a Democratic counteroffer two weeks ago.

They like to say, Oh, we held up, Ms. Pelosi told reporters. No, we didnt hold it up. They held up. And now we have prevailed.

We needed to make sure they were working for everybody, not just the most-connected businesses, said Senator Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, who said the business owners he consulted wanted Democrats to institute changes in the loan effort, not rush to inject more funding into a flawed program.

Even after the final agreement was struck, Republicans continued to slam Democrats for the delay. Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the chambers No. 3 Republican, called it disgraceful.

For Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to hold up that money for these people and hold them all hostage to create leverage is unconscionable to me, he said. They seemed to have no sense of urgency or sense of the crisis that is hitting this country.

The Trump campaign released a scathing ad on Monday attacking Ms. Pelosi for blocking the funding, juxtaposing footage of poor Americans struggling in the pandemic with clips of an appearance the speaker made on late-night TV in which she showed off her favorite ice creams. Nancy Antoinette, it called her.

Even as congressional Democrats were celebrating their gains in the legislation, they were under fire from progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups who saw the package as insufficient. Some on the left faulted Democrats for not extracting more from the Republicans, particularly for states and cities that are being pushed to the financial brink by the pandemic, or winning more direct aid for beleaguered Americans wondering how to pay rent when they cannot expect another check from the government.

This is a win for McConnell and Trump, said Ezra Levin, an executive director of the group Indivisible. This Covid 3.5 package is nothing close to what families and workers need right now.

Mr. Schumer and Ms. Pelosi disputed that notion and promised a robust Phase 4 of the pandemic relief effort. They noted that the Trump administration was also already mapping plans for another bill that would include infrastructure investments and aid for states. Democrats said that action would become inevitable as states and cities face decisions on laying off emergency workers and cutting other services and as the public clamors for help.

Mr. McConnell appears to be digging in, telling the conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on Wednesday that he wanted to push the pause button on coronavirus relief legislation, and that this whole business of additional assistance for state and local governments needs to be thoroughly evaluated.

But with the pandemic continuing to roil the economy and facing intense pressure to respond from Democrats, the White House, governors of both parties and some of his own lawmakers, Mr. McConnell may once again find himself in the unusual position of struggling to hold the line.

Emily Cochrane contributed reporting.

Continue reading here:

Risky Strategy Has Produced Wins for Democrats in Fights Over Pandemic Aid - The New York Times

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez questions Acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan as he testifies before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, July 18, 2019. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the $484 billion coronavirus relief package to replenish the depleted small business loan program, with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) being the only Democrat in both the House or Senate to oppose the bill.

The House passed the bill, which includes $310 billion for the governments phase-three Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), by a 388-5 margin sending it to President Trumps desk after the Senate passed the bill on Tuesday. Four House Republicans Andy Biggs of Arizona, Ken Buck of Colorado, Jody Hice of Georgia, and Thomas Massie of Kentucky along with former Republican Justin Amash (I., Mich.) joined Ocasio-Cortez in voting against the bill.

Speaking to CNNs Manu Raju, Ocasio-Cortez explained that her problem with the bill was giving Republicans what they want.

McConnell is already talking about the deficit the moment we talk about getting people relief, she said. . . . That to me is a signal that Republicans are done.

The new funding includes $60 billion $50 billion in loans and $10 billion in grants for companies with less than $50 billion in total assets, with $30 billion of that for firms with less than $10 billion. The bill also includes $75 billion in additional funding for hospitals and health care providers, and $25 billion to help fund the nationwide effort to expand coronavirus testing.

Republicans and Democrats have sparred over the draining of SBA funding, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) saying Wednesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) delayed the bill, but admitted that Democrats did reject a simple reauthorization proposed by Republicans.

Democrats should never have made the Paycheck Protection Program lapse. The House must follow the Senates lead and vote today to re-open it, McConnell tweeted ahead of the House vote Thursday.

Ocasio-Cortez drew criticism earlier this week for tweeting, and then deleting, praise over the U.S. oil market reaching negative territory for the first time ever. Over four million Americans applied for unemployment last week, according to data released Thursday, bringing the number of coronavirus jobless claims to over 26 million since last month.

See original here:

AOC Only Democrat to Vote Against $484 Billion Coronavirus Relief Package - National Review

The Democratic Party still expects to hold an in-person convention to nominate Joe Biden for president.

The event is currently scheduled to take place in Milwaukee during the week of Aug. 17. Exact dates are unclear since party brass scrapped the original plans to host the convention from July 13-16.

We expect to hold an in-person convention in Milwaukee. We are planning for that, Democratic Party Chairman Tom Perez told reporters Thursday. At the same time, we do not put our public health heads in the sand. We dont do that right now. We wont do that in the run-up.

Perez left open the idea that part of the convention would be conducted virtually but was hopeful that it will be safe to congregate at the designated venue, the Milwaukee Bucks basketball arena, by August.

Wisconsin has confirmed more than 5,000 coronavirus cases and more than 250 related deaths, with stay-at-home order running until May 26 under Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.

Biden has been less optimistic, speculating the entire event might have to be virtual.

Party conventions can draw tens of thousands over the course of several days. Some Democrats have suggested that a limited crowd could attend, while the roughly 4,700 delegates would stick to an online gathering.

I am hopeful that we can have a very exciting convention in Milwaukee where we can highlight the vice president and his history-making running mate, whoever she turns out to be, Perez said, referring to Bidens pledge to select a woman running mate.

Republicans, meanwhile, have projected much more confidence that they will be able to host their party convention just a week later in Charlotte, North Carolina, from Aug. 24-27.

With Post wires

View original post here:

Democratic Party still hopes to hold 'in-person' convention in August - New York Post

Amazon disputed the accuracy of the Journal's account and said it did not offer "intentionally misleading" testimony, but said it would conduct an internal investigation into the report.

The committee's leaders vowed Thursday evening to press the company for answers.

"At best, Amazons witness appears to have misrepresented key aspects of Amazons business practices while omitting important details in response to pointed questioning," said Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), chairman of House Judiciary's antitrust subcommittee. "At worst, the witness Amazon sent to speak on its behalf may have lied to Congress.

Rep. David Cicilline. | Patrick Semansky/AP Photo

Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said the panel plans "to seek clarification from Amazon in short order, in light of this troubling report."

The Journal's story, based on documents and interviews with former workers, said Amazon employees have used data about independent sellers on the companys platform to develop competing products, even though that goes against both the companys stated policies and past pledges by its executives. The revelation immediately reignited long-standing concerns, previously expressed by regulators in Europe, that Amazon has used the vast reams of data it collects from third parties on its marketplace to unfairly benefit its own business.

The report comes as big tech companies increasingly face accusations of abuses of power ranging from predatory pricing to failing to protect user privacy. While Amazon has become a key supplier to homebound Americans during the coronavirus pandemic, the outbreak has also increased scrutiny of the company's worker safety conditions and the way it presents third-party products on its website.

At a hearing on antitrust concerns in July, Amazon associate general counsel Nate Sutton testified before Cicilline's subcommittee that the company does not "use individual seller data to directly compete with them. Suttons testimony at the hearing later drew scrutiny from Cicilline, who questioned the veracity of his remarks regarding third-party sellers.

Amazon said Thursday in a statement that it prohibits employees from using non-public, seller-specific data to determine which private label products to launch.

While we dont believe these claims are accurate, we take these allegations very seriously and have launched an internal investigation, the statement said.

The company also rejected Warren's characterization of its statements to Congress.

"Its simply incorrect to say that Amazon was intentionally misleading in our testimony," Amazon spokesperson Maxine Tagay said.

POLITICO NEWSLETTERS

Technology news from Washington and Silicon Valley weekday mornings, in your inbox.

But the Journal's report quickly prompted condemnation from an array of antitrust hawks.

The Committee should make a criminal referral for perjury, and the Department of Justice should investigate what Mr. Sutton knew and when he knew it," said Sarah Miller, executive director for the American Economic Liberties Project, a group that champions more stringent antitrust enforcement.

The House Judiciary Committee needs to call Jeff Bezos to testify, said Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the libertarian-leaning chairman of the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee, said in a statement that he expects the DOJ and the FTC to look into the allegations as part of their ongoing tech investigations.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who sits on the subcommittee, joined Warren in accusing Amazon of misleading Congress, calling the Journal's revelation "damning" proof that Amazon has been "blatantly exploiting third-party sellers."

Warren last year called for Amazon and other tech giants to be broken up as part of her presidential campaign platform. She said she wanted to roll back Amazon's acquisition of Whole Foods and split apart business arms like Amazon Marketplace and AmazonBasics.

Leah Nylen contributed to this report.

Read this article:

Democrats demand answers on whether Amazon 'lied' about data tactics - POLITICO

WASHINGTON Republican members of Congress were noticeably reluctant to wear masks on the House floor Thursday, sparking a sharp debate with Democrats, who readily accepted the federal guidance.

As lawmakers gathered for a morning debate on creating a coronavirus stimulus oversight committee, the GOP side of the chamber largely left their mouths and noses uncovered, while some Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, dropped their coverings while speaking.

Democrats nearly all entered the chamber wearing either bandannas or masks of many colors. At least two were orange. One wore a mask embroidered with a sparkly sequin American flag.

The sole Democratic exception asof mid-afternoon was recovered coronavirus patientRep. Joe Cunningham of South Carolina. He later put on a mask after The Post contacted his staff for comment. His aides did not comment.

House Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) lashed into his Republican colleagues who chose not to cover up after Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) spoke. Jordan, who coughed repeatedly while awaiting his turn to speak, did not wear a mask while seated on the floor, or at the lectern.

People can do what they want to do, McGovern scolded. But while we all want to show how fearless we are, we should be mindful of the people that are surrounding us. And so until Im advised otherwise, Im going to keep my mask on.

While face coverings are not mandatory, they are certainly recommended, McGovern said. The Office of the Attending Physician has also advised that a face cover will produce a minimal reduction in sound when using a microphone. The face covering is most useful in reducing viral spread while speaking.

Meanwhile, Republicans argued against the proposed new oversight committee, saying it would be a politicized weapon to attack President Trump. Later Thursday, lawmakers will vote on a half-trillion-dollar package of small-business loans, hospital aid and testing funds.

The House gathering was the first since March 27, when masks were rare or non-existent on the floor, as US health officials said at the time that masks were ineffective for the public to protect against the virus. The health guidance about-faced this month, with federal officials advising face coverings as an optional measure to prevent spread of the virus.

In several Asian countries, authorities credit universal mask wearing with preventing major outbreaks of COVID-19. In Taiwan, which has a larger population than New York, there are about 400 cases of the coronavirus after early widespread mask wearing.

Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) andMinority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) arrived on the House floor without masks, as did many GOP peers.

Nice mask! a colleague told Scalise.

Thanks! I wear it for Halloween, too! the second-ranking Republican said, laughing uproariously.

Those who did not wear masks included Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.), Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), James Comer (R-Ky.), Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), Jody Hice (R-Ga.), David Kustoff (R-Tenn.), Michael McCaul (R-Texas), Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas).

Some Republicans did wear masks, and the number who did increased around noon when lawmakers pivoted to debating the fourth large coronavirus bill.

GOP Reps. Kevin Brady of Texas, Steve Chabot of Ohio, Tom Cole of Oklahoma, Debbie Lasko of Arizona and Thomas Massie of Kentucky were among those who wore masks.

Aside from Cunningham, the closest to an unmasked Democrat was Rep. Richard Neal of Massachusetts, who wore a mask tied around his neck. It did not appear that Neal ever raised the mask onto his face.

During House votes last month, many New York Democrats ignored guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which urged a 14-day self-quarantine for people recently in the New York metro area.

Read the rest here:

House Republicans anger Democrats by refusing to wear protective masks - New York Post

Democrats are pushing Joe BidenJoe BidenThe Hill's Campaign Report: States divided over when to reopen amid pandemic Poll: 62 percent of 18-34-year-olds support Sanders' endorsement of Biden Ex-Sanders campaign aide Nina Turner on why ideology is more important than race for Biden VP pick MORE to select his running mate sooner rather than later, saying this would give him more time to raise funds and unite the Democratic Party ahead of the general election fight against President TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Mexico governor extends stay-at-home order: 'We're not ready to ease up' Coronavirus culture war over reopening economy hits Capitol Hill Challenge China and the WHObut not while the pandemic rages MORE.

Presumptive Democratic nominees typically announce their pick before the partys convention.But with the coronavirus pandemic sidelining the campaign and pushing back the Democratic convention from July to August, Democrats say an early pick could boost Biden.

Democratic strategist Michael Trujillo said hes all for an early announcement because it would give the Biden campaign an infusion of campaign donations and double the campaign teams power.

She can help raise more money, get activists engaged, do one-on-one interviews in key media markets and build more enthusiasm for the ticket immediately, Trujillo said of Bidens potential running mate, who the former vice president has said will be a woman.

Democratic strategist Adam Parkhomenko, who served as an aide on Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonEXCLUSIVE: Voters in swing states trust governors over Trump on reopening economy, poll finds Biden holds wide lead over Trump in New Jersey: poll The Memo: Trump shores up base amid crisis MOREs 2016 presidential campaign, said it makes a lot of sense to go earlier than later.

People keep saying theyre not hearing from the Biden campaign lately, Parkhomenko said. This is something they could do to help break through.

He stressed that the Biden campaign is going to have to be creative in how they roll out a vice presidential pick to make sureit does providea needed boost to his campaign.

In an appearance on CBSs "The Late Late Show with James Corden" early Wednesday morning, Biden predicted the selection process for his running mate will take until sometime in July to winnow the process down to the one, two, three people.

Sources close to the campaign say the process is in the early stages, noting that advisers are not in the same room and that people are working remotely to set up a secure vetting process.

Not every Democrat thinks Biden needs to worry about moving fast with a VP pick.

The Vice President is doing pretty damn well under the circumstances, so what needs to be fixed? asked Philippe Reines, a longtime adviser to Clinton.

If Biden were to pick a superstar online fundraiser such as Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenWhat you need to know today on the coronavirus: House passes huge funding bill Poll: 62 percent of 18-34-year-olds support Sanders' endorsement of Biden Maxine Waters dedicates legislation to sister dying of coronavirus MORE (Mass.), that would be a reason to go early with the pick, Reines said. Trump has a big fundraising edge on Biden as things stand, and many do not believe the former vice president can catch up.

He needs money, one Democratic bundler said. And he needs a lot of it. Anything that helps move the needle is valuable. And the more time, the more money.

Democratic strategist Eddie Vale said he would lean toward a traditional approach. But he conceded that if the coronavirus pandemic stretches into the summer or pushes the convention online, it would be a reason for Biden to go early withthe VP selection.

[It] could be worth thinking about trying to do a slightly earlier and different digital VP rollout to try and get some more coverage to make up for a lack of convention, he said.

Democraticstrategist Chris Lehane, who served as a campaign aide to both Al GoreAlbert (Al) Arnold GoreThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - House set to pass 3B COVID bill; Lawmakers jockey over next package The Hill's Campaign Report: Florida in play as Biden takes lead in poll OVERNIGHT ENERGY: Trump says national parks to start reopening | Oil prices begin recovery amid pressure to finance struggling industry | Al Gore endorses Biden MORE and John KerryJohn Forbes KerryDemocrats want Biden to go early with VP pick Earth Day goes online amid coronavirus pandemic Sanders's fate sealed by the over 40 crowd MORE during their presidential bids, said he would be pushing to announce the pick sooner.

For starters, he said, it moves the dial because this is going to be a time where voters will value the presidential decision making differently by discerning whether this is a pick who makes the team materially better in terms of dealing with a historic crisis.

Lehane also said it would be a way for Biden to get media coverage.

I would produce this like it was a 10 episode Netflix series with surround sound on social media that allows Biden to really occupy media real estate and drive the message, create momentum [and] generate interest, said Lehane, who referenced ESPNs 10-part documentary on Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls.

In a world devoid of live entertainment where people are shut in their homes and desperate for information, there is a huge opportunity to take something and rethink about how it could be adapted and deployed for the current times, he said. If there was ever a time to rethink the approach so as to help define and animate the candidacy, electorally position the campaign, and own the conversation by generating ratings, it is now.

Biden could even call this The First Dance, he quipped.

Go here to see the original:

Democrats want Biden to go early with VP pick | TheHill - The Hill

If you cant win, change the rules thats what we were taught in grade school, right? The political left certainly seems to think so.

Democrats are using voting rights litigation to secure through unelected courts a partisan advantage that theyve failed to achieve through politically accountable legislatures. They create standards they pronounce to be unassailably fair and demand election administrators disregard the rules and procedures agreed to through the compromise of the legislative process. Their latest endeavor was a lawsuit that threw Wisconsins April election into chaos and now theyre bringing the act to Nevada.

In Wisconsin, the Democratic Party asked a judge to blow past the deadlines to register to vote and to request and return an absentee ballot; to disregard critical voter ID requirements for absentee ballot requests; and to ignore Wisconsin state law requiring witness verification of absentee ballot voters. Whats the saying about never allowing a crisis to go to waste?

This lawsuit was filed less than three weeks before Election Day, forcing judges to make quick decisions about things they dont really know much about such as administering elections in a fair and secure manner. Wisconsin voters were left confused by the legal whiplash.

Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske finds herself the Democrats next target. They demand more in-person early voting locations, potentially putting poll workers and voters at increased risk of coronavirus infection. They demand that ballots be sent to all registered voters, not just active voters, knowing full well this will result in undeliverable ballots washing around the postal service. In Nevada, a voter becomes inactive if a postcard the Election Department sends is undeliverable to the voter at the address on file. Why should they send a ballot to an address where they know a voter doesnt receive mail? Wisconsins recent election was full of examples of voters who requested ballots but never received them. Then tubs of ballots appeared at local post offices, after Election Day, undelivered and unreturned.

In Nevada, Cegavske is a veteran public servant who knows how to properly administer a fair and secure election even an election impacted by unprecedented circumstances. While in the legislature, Cegavske chaired the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. She was the states top election official during the 2016 election that saw over 1 million Nevadans cast ballots. Nevadans re-elected Secretary Cegavske in 2018 and for good reason.

Nevadas voters know the plan to conduct the 2020 primary election as an all-mail contest has the support of Nevadas election officials. The liberal lawsuit isnt designed to benefit the voters; its designed to help the Democrats.

Democratic lawyers are trying to overturn the will of the people across the country, as expressed by their politically accountable legislatures, for partisan gain. We all know thats what this is really about: defeating President Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Mexico governor extends stay-at-home order: 'We're not ready to ease up' Coronavirus culture war over reopening economy hits Capitol Hill Challenge China and the WHObut not while the pandemic rages MORE. And if they can wreak havoc with state election laws from now until November, thats just an added benefit.

Austin Chambers is the president of the Republican State Leadership Committee. Prior to joining the RSLC, Chambers served as the consultant for several successful gubernatorial campaigns. You can follow him on Twitter @achambersgop.

Andrew Wynne leads the Republican State Leadership Committees Judicial Fairness Initiative. He has managed successful voter education campaigns to elect rule of law justices to the State Supreme Court in several states.

Read the original here:

Democrats wreaked havoc in Wisconsin's elections now they've set their sights on Nevada | TheHill - The Hill

Three Democratic senators on Friday urged the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to strengthen its fraud protections amid reports of scammers targeting coronavirus relief checks.

"These scams often involve criminals impersonating the IRS or suggesting that they can help get individuals their stimulus payments faster," Finance Committee members Sens.Maggie HassanMargaret (Maggie) HassanDemocrats urge Treasury to ensure Social Security recipients quickly receive full coronavirus rebates Tensions flare as Democrats press Pence over coronavirus testing The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump turns to lawmakers to advise on reopening MORE (D-N.H.), Tom CarperThomas (Tom) Richard CarperEPA is abandoning those suffering from toxic PFAS pollution Infrastructure investments have never been so good Bipartisan senators announce .5B water infrastructure proposal MORE (D-Del.) and Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenFree-flowing rivers help ecosystems, wildlife, people and the economy Key Democrat presses Mnuchin about Trump's name on coronavirus checks Bipartisan Senate report reaffirms intelligence findings that Russia meddled in 2016 elections MORE (D-Ore.) wrote to agency Commissioner Charles Rettig.

"Criminals ask for personal information in order to steal personal identities and stimulus payments," the senators explained.

Under the $2 trillion coronavirus relief packagePresident TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Mexico governor extends stay-at-home order: 'We're not ready to ease up' Coronavirus culture war over reopening economy hits Capitol Hill Challenge China and the WHObut not while the pandemic rages MOREsigned late last month, known as the CARES Act, mosthouseholds will receive direct payments of up to $1,200 per adult and $500 per child.

Scammers have taken advantage of the payments, redirecting the needed stimulus to themselves, according to multiple reports.

In Friday's letter, the Democratic lawmakers urged the IRS to boost fraud protections for online tools related to the checks.

They also called on the agency to work with the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission to educate Americans on how to spot and avoid scams.

The IRS's watchdog warned earlier this month that people should be vigilant about scams relating to the checks because criminals have long devised schemes targeting government aid programs.

The agency itself has also issuedwarnings about coronavirus-related scams, saying that retirees in particular may be targeted.

View post:

Democratic senators urge IRS to strengthen fraud protections | TheHill - The Hill

Rigas is holding down two jobs at the moment: He also was named late last month as the acting deputy director of management at the Office of Management and Budget.

Since taking charge, Rigas has put his stamp on OPMs front office and is bringing George Nesterczuk on board as a senior adviser, according to two people familiar with the matter. He previously did organizational and HR consulting for government contractors and management consulting firms.

Nesterczuk had been Trumps first choice to head up OPM but withdrew in August 2017 after criticism from federal employee unions who didnt like the role he played in trying to enact a pay system based on performance at the Defense Department and raised questions about his work for the Ukranian government. He served two stints at OPM during both the Reagan and George W. Bush administrations and has also worked on Capitol Hill and at the Departments of Transportation and Defense.

Rigas has told colleagues that he questions the constitutionality of the 1883 Pendleton Act, which codifies using merit to pick government officials, and believes that all executive branch employees should be political appointees, according to a person who has discussed the matter with him.

The arrival of Rigas comes amid a push by McEntee and his allies to install other Trump loyalists across the executive branch.

McEntee is working in concert with Paul Dans, OPMs new White House liaison and senior adviser, whose rapid efforts to consolidate his control over other agency appointees has irritated some officials.

Dans has also castigated other OPM officials for relying on career employees he suspects are Democrats, according to two people familiar with the interactions. He also has been asking how many policy jobs the government can shift from career officials to political appointees, a line of inquiry the people saw as an effort to install Trump loyalists in key posts.

Dans had no comment, but an OPM spokesperson said: "All employees in the executive branch have an obligation to carry out administration policy at the direction of the president, who is elected by the American people."

Other recent conversations inside the personnel office have raised further hackles. For instance, the Trump administration has had discussions on creating a new schedule, which regulates how agencies hire people, so they could make more jobs excepted service to make it easier to hire and fire people who are involved in policy jobs.

PPO is also trying to assert more control over who gets hired into political appointee jobs at some Cabinet departments, including the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services and a number of defense agencies, according to a former Trump administration official. Depending on the position, Cabinet agencies have typically had more latitude in choosing lower-ranking political hires.

But starting a few weeks ago, before some agencies fill a job, they now have to submit the opening to PPO to see if the White House has someone to place into the position. If they dont have anyone, only then can the agency submit a name, the former official said. The result has left the personnel office much stronger than they ever have been before, this person said.

With greater authority has come a new round of clashes between various parts of the executive branches over personnel, with veteran officials in Cabinet agencies accusing McEntee of installing unqualified appointees in key posts.

Go here to see the original:

Democrats blast Trump team's handling of federal workers in coronavirus crisis - POLITICO