Scotch Tape & Paperclips

At this point, you have to laugh.

Clearly, the macabre context (i.e., a deadly epidemic that’s killing an average of ~1,500 Americans each day) is the furthest thing from funny. But Mitch McConnell’s commitment to obstinance on the price tag for more fiscal stimulus is truly something to behold.

Here’s what’s so astounding. McConnell’s demeanor admits of nothing in the way of self-awareness when it comes to how steadfastly stubborn he’s been for the past four months. But Mitch is self-aware. He knows exactly what he’s doing. And yet, his deadpan cadence and unswerving commitment to what many argue is underspending on the next virus relief bill, would make someone who didn’t know any better believe he’s actually that obtuse.

Consider what McConnell said on the Senate floor Thursday, for example:

Compromise is within reach. We know where we agree. We can do this. The solution to this impasse has been in plain sight for a long time now for anyone willing to see it.

This situation is the very definition of “fluid,” and McConnell spoke to Nancy Pelosi at 12:45 in Washington, so things could change. But when McConnell uttered those words, there was still no indication that he was willing to budge from a price tag in the neighborhood of $500 billion.

That has been his price tag since September. With allowances for oscillations up to, say, $650 billion, the figure hasn’t changed despite Democrats coming down from $3.4 trillion in May to $2.4 trillion in October to now $908 billion as part of an effort to support a bipartisan plan floated earlier this week.

So, Mitch is right. “The solution to this impasse has been in plain sight for a long time now for anyone willing to see it.” That solution: Meet me halfway between $500 billion and $3.4 trillion, where “halfway” means $500 billion.

[Insert sitcom laugh track]

Again, it’s so ridiculous that only McConnell could continue to float it with a straight face. The media understands this. “McConnell said that it was ‘heartening’ that Democrats have embraced a smaller price tag for a stimulus package but gave no indication he was willing to raise his own offer to get a deal,” Bloomberg wrote Thursday. His floor comments “suggest[ed] no fundamental shift in his own stance,” the same article reads.

For his part, Trump says he’d support a deal. “I believe they’re getting very close,” he said, in remarks to reporters at the White House Thursday. The president hasn’t played an active role in post-election negotiations, and Steve Mnuchin is just starting to get involved again.

It’s possible (I guess) for lawmakers to use Scotch Tape and paperclips to attach stimulus to the omnibus bill which needs to be passed by the 11th. We’re right back to the same, old brinksmanship on that. Here’s Roll Call with a quick summary:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told fellow Democrats on a conference call Thursday he wants an omnibus spending deal reached by midnight on Saturday to avoid a partial government shutdown next week.

In theory, that timeline would give lawmakers and staff time to put the text into legislative form and post it publicly, in advance of a House floor vote no later than next Thursday. That would give the Senate a day to process it before current stopgap funding runs dry after 11:59 p.m. on December 11.

Timely passage of an omnibus bill is difficult because of a push to attach emergency relief for the COVID-19 pandemic. McConnell said Tuesday that any coronavirus aid would likely need to ride on the year-end appropriations package because of limited floor time before the coming holiday recess.

This is not how effective government is supposed to work, folks. I assume that’s clear.

Kevin McCarthy, whose opinion doesn’t really count for that much, told Fox on Thursday that he “stand[s] with McConnell and Mnuchin,” which just means he favors the $500 billion bill versus the bipartisan $908 billion package.

Admittedly, it’s hard to know with precision exactly who supports what, but you’d be forgiven for conceptualizing of this situation as McConnell and a curmudgeonly gang of Senate GOPers tossing pennies at the homeless, even as other Republicans are asking for nickels and Democrats have come all the way down from asking for $20 bills to settling for dimes.

For what it’s worth, some analysts think the bipartisan proposal is a sufficient bridge. “We noted back in October that focusing on extending UI benefits and more PPP money to aid businesses struggling with renewed shutdowns was paramount,” RBC’s Tom Porcelli said, adding that “we are glad there is bipartisan support for the main two pillars of aid that should be more than enough to get the US economy through the next few months.”

Mitt Romney, speaking to reporters Thursday, said “we’re getting more and more support from Republicans and Democrats.” He noted that while it’s possible to attach some of the stimulus initiatives to a broader spending bill, “we’re continuing to negotiate an entire package that includes the full $908 billion that deals with state and local and extending the PPP program.” Apparently, the bill includes funding for airlines, mass transit, and “bus companies.” Romney added that McConnell, in a meeting, reiterated the need for liability protections — that’s been a constant, unswerving position, and it’s not obvious that Mitch is willing to accept any kind of common sense constraints on it.

What’s clear, to me anyway, is that barring an unlikely Democratic sweep in the Georgia runoffs, the public cannot depend on Congress to provide anything other than the bare minimum amount of additional stimulus. I’ll grant that perhaps $1 trillion would be “enough” for now, but what does that even mean, really? “Enough” for what? Retail sales are back to pre-pandemic levels. If you extend extra federal unemployment subsidies, that will ensure consumption doesn’t just plunge out of the blue.

But ultimately, the pandemic should have ushered in a real sea change in the way Congress thinks about spending and the economy. It certainly has ushered in that kind of change in thinking at the Fed, but that won’t matter without a shift in attitudes around fiscal policy.

At least we’ve got the vaccine — two of them, actually. “Even with only two vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna), nearly 50% of the US population will be protected by mid-2021, and nearly 80% will be protected by end-2021,” UBS projected.

“We could see a precipitous decline in virus cases starting Q2 2021 [and] markets are likely to look through the growth weakness into this period,” the bank added, in their analysis.

On Thursday, Anthony Fauci criticized the UK for approving Pfizer’s shot too quickly.

“You know I love the Brits, they’re great, they’re good scientists,” Fauci began. “But they just took the data from Pfizer and instead of scrutinizing it really, really carefully, they said ‘OK, let’s approve it, that’s it,’ and they went with it.”

Just minutes before the closing bell on Wall Street, Dow Jones reported that Pfizer cut its expected COVID-19 vaccine shipments for 2020 in half citing supply-chain problems. “Scaling up the raw material supply chain took longer than expected and it’s important to highlight that the outcome of the clinical trial was somewhat later than the initial projection,” a company spokeswoman said.

Pfizer still plans to distribute in excess of a billion doses in 2021.