Republican attorneys general threaten action on stimulus

[JohnSJ]

"Republican attorneys general in more than a dozen states are threatening legal action against the Biden administration over the newly signed $1.9 trillion coronavirus economic relief package, a measure they say is unconstitutional.

In a seven-page letter sent to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Tuesday, the Republican officials argue that the relief package, specifically the $350 billion included within to help states and counties offset the cost of dealing with the pandemic, limits those governments' ability to lower taxes for citizens should they want to.

"Absent a more sensible interpretation from your department, this provision would amount to an unprecedented and unconstitutional intrusion on the separate sovereignty of the States through federal usurpation of essentially one half of the State’s fiscal ledgers," they wrote to Yellen. "We ask that you confirm that the American Rescue Plan Act does not prohibit States from generally providing tax relief through the kinds of measures listed and discussed above and other, similar measures, but at most precludes express use of the funds provided under the Act for direct tax cuts rather than for the purposes specified by the Act."

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/543559-republican-attorneys-general-threaten-action-on-stimulus

[Demsrule86]

1. Then don't take the money...the feds have had requirements for federal money for years. This is

targeted relief for Covid, you greedy grifters.

[Elessar Zappa]

4. No kidding.

Let’s see what their voters think when they block relief in their states. I think they’re bluffing.

[Demsrule86]

8. I am sure people would be pissed.

[nykym]

2. They are pissed that

they cannot use the money for another wealthy only tax cut.

[Zoonart]

3. HAHA... bye bye GQP AG's

[CurtEastPoint]

5. That is just hateful and petty. Well: Republican. Attorney. I'm being redundant. Fuck'em

[JohnSJ]

11. +++

[getagrip_already]

6. wtf does this statement even mean?

within to help states and counties offset the cost of dealing with the pandemic, limits those governments' ability to lower taxes for citizens should they want to.

That isn't even circular logic. It makes no sense whatsoever. How does reducing the financial burden of cities and states impede their ability to reduce taxes or govern in any way? They aren't negatively connected.

If anything, it makes it easier to reduce taxes locally.

What are they smoking? Pure sulphur?

[ScratchCat]

7. It means if they take the money

They can't lower taxes for the wealthy and then use these funds in place of the lost tax revenue. The Red State plan is to just funnel the money to business owners and the upper class and not the employees and lower class.

[getagrip_already]

9. still does not compute....

Money is fungible. If they get money for even specific uses, it will either free up the money the state would have spent on those uses or pay for them if the state wasn't going to do them. It doesn't take money out of state treasuries, which is what would be required to block tax decreases.

[ScratchCat]

12. Let me try again

Everyone knows that we will eventually have to raise taxes on the top 5% to pay for this. Republicans don't like taxes being raised on the top 5%. Further, the Top 5% wont be receiving the bulk of this assistance. Thus, these dolts want to pass the stimulus money on to the top 5% to "reimburse" them for the tax increase they are going to get. This money, as far as I am aware, has specific strings attached that doesn't allow States to decrease taxes in certain ways, and still get this money. Therefore, they are being prevented from passing on funds to people who a)aren't eligible and b)will be paying for it later with minor tax increases.

[getagrip_already]

13. I understand what you are saying, just that it doesn't make sense....

There are lots of examples of federal funding that is earmarked for specific purposes by states and which cannot be used to directly provide tax credits for the wealthy. Some of these are education, highway funds, police funds, etc.

They are free to not accept any of that money. But if they do, it has to be used in very specific ways, and they are fine with that.

That's why this doesn't make sense. It's a disjointed argument that isn't backed up in any way.

[marmar]

10. Translation: They know it's going to work and and be a massive success.