"Tucked Into..."

Whenever you read about a provision "tucked into" a large bill, it ain't a bedtime story.

At Politico, Maggie Severns and Victoria Guida report:

Tucked into the recent recovery bill was a provision granting the Federal Reserve the right to set up a $450 billion bailout plan without following key provisions of the federal open meetings law, including announcing its meetings or keeping most records about them, according to a POLITICO review of the legislation.

The provision further calls into question the transparency and oversight for the biggest bailout law ever passed by Congress. President Donald Trump has indicated he does not plan to comply with another part of the new law intended to boost Congress’ oversight powers of the bailout funds. And earlier this week, Trump dismissed the government official chosen as the chief watchdog for the stimulus package.

The changes at the central bank – which appear to have been inserted into the 880-page bill by sympathetic senators during the scramble to get it approved -- would address a complaint that the Fed faced during the 2008 financial crisis, when board members couldn’t easily hold group conversations to address the fast-moving economic turmoil.

Pro Forma Sessions

What is a pro forma session?  CRS:

The Constitution provides that neither chamber may adjourn for three days or more without the consent of the other. The two houses consent to each other’s sine die adjournment by adopting a concurrent resolution, called an “adjournment resolution.” They use a similar vehicle to allow each other to suspend their daily sessions for three days or more without terminating their annual session. Such a suspension is called a “recess of the session,” an intrasession recess, or, more formally, an “adjournment for more than three days” within a session. To avoid the need for a concurrent resolution, a chamber may hold pro forma sessions on such a schedule that no break of three days or more occurs.  

Father Conroy is a CMC alum:

Today in US House during coronavirus pandemic. https://t.co/HnYJ6GyEZS

— Craig Caplan (@CraigCaplan) April 10, 2020

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) wearing a face mask and gloves presided over this morning's House pro forma session during the coronavirus pandemic. pic.twitter.com/8ruPbowW5m

— Craig Caplan (@CraigCaplan) April 10, 2020

Doing Congressional Business Remotely

Laurie Kellman at Associated Press:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Thursday that she’s concerned about the health of Congress’ lawmakers. But any changes to voting procedure, she cautioned, aren’t going to happen soon, at least in the House.

“We aren’t there yet, and we’re not going to be there no matter how many letters somebody sends in,” Pelosi, 80, said by telephone from her home in San Francisco. “There are some technologies that you might think are workable but they might not be secure.”

Committees of Congress are rethinking how to move legislation forward without holding old-fashioned “paper hearings,” in person. The Senate Armed Services committee, for example, said Tuesday that key hearings on the annual National Defense Authorization Act are being postponed while consideration is given to unspecified “alternative hearing processes.”

The last time Congress met, the Senate slowed down its roll call to thin out the number of members sharing the chamber at any one time. The House on March 27 spread its members from the floor into the empty visitors gallery overhead, filling every other seat, to pass the $2.2 trillion bill.
...
“At this point we’re trying to figure out logistics of doing hearings, and we’re looking into whether we can do virtual or Zoom hearings,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

From the House Rules Committee:

The constitutionality of remote voting is an untested principle. As a threshold question, this uncertainty should give the House pause from transitioning wholesale to any remote voting or “virtual presence” scheme of conducting business. If challenged, remote voting would be a novel question for a court and there is no guarantee of a favorable ruling affirming its constitutionality. Engaging in an untested practice, especially when considering complex and critical legislation in response to an historic pandemic, presents risks.

Article I of the Constitution mentions in various places the need to bring Members together to conduct business. The Constitution speaks of “meeting” (Art. I, Sec. 4, Cl. 2), “assembling” (Art. I, Sec. 3, Cl. 2), and “attendance” (Art. I, Sec. 5, Cl. 1) in describing how Congress would conduct its business. Yet, the Constitution also explicitly provides each house with the ability to make its own rules (Art. I, Sec. 5, Cl. 2).

Given this uncertainty and the risk of pursuing a novel mode of voting on legislation, working within the current rules and practices of the House – such as passing legislation via unanimous consent or voice vote – is preferable. However, should the situation deteriorate in such a way that remote voting becomes necessary, any changes to current House rules must be as analogous to the current in-person voting practices as possible and must have appropriate safeguards in place to ensure transparency, fairness, and legitimacy.

Domestic Policy, Coronavirus, and Congress

Politico:

ON THE AIRWAVES — Democratic dark money group House Majority Forward is out with a TV spot touting House Democrats' work to pass a $2 trillion coronavirus relief package that "put American families first." The spot is, however, backed by a small buy: high five-figures, running in markets across the country.

Policy in General

• Policy windows (Davidson 400):  just before the shutdown, we considered the issue-attention cycle
• Professor Rose on the BIG federal-state program

Public Health and Coronavirus

• Disease surveillance
• There is some precedent at the CDC

Stimulus

• How to get stimulus money
• Alas, most college students won't get the $1200 check.
• How can they spend all that money?  The magic word is emergency

The articles indicate the policy reasons for the exclusion.  Here is the political reason:






Voting

Election processes

The Constitution very clearly gives Congress the power to set procedures for federal elections.  Article I, section 4, clause 1: "The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators."


Congressional Procedure'

• Remote voting?  Constitutional questions

Higher Education Relief in the CARES Act

Since we are talking about the CARES Act and Emergency Relief as it pertains to the budget today in class, I want to highlight the relief bill's higher education provision. My understanding is that relief for higher education was not in the original plan of the CARES Act, let alone for private institutions. Nevertheless, $14.6 billion in the relief bill goes to Higher Education. That it went from 0 to $14.6 billion is remarkable -- and will directly affect our further experiences at CMC. According to the bill, the amount each college receives depends on a handful of metrics including the number of Pell Grant recipients in each institution. Based off these formulas, CMC is estimated to receive $843,000. According to the higher education relief provision, 50 percent of the relief must go to students and the other 50 percent can be used for other administrative expenses. I am curious to see how CMC will determine how its relief is spent! Does anybody have any thoughts on how it will be spent? Or thoughts on how the crisis has affected college students in general?

Markey Missing the Mark

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/07/metro/ed-markey-short-signatures-ahead-may-deadline/

Senator Markey has roughly 7,000 of the 10,000 signatures he needs to qualify for Massachusetts' September primary. Meanwhile, his challenger, Joe Kennedy III, has already submitted 15,000.  Though the campaign insists they are not worried, this could be a troubling sign for the progressive senator as he goes up against the younger, more moderate member of the Kennedy dynasty, especially given the changes in campaign strategy necessitated by the coronavirus outbreak. 

"...it is going to take a lot more work — and money — to collect the remaining signatures than it typically would, thanks to the coronavirus outbreak. No longer can his field organizers and volunteers head out to supermarkets and town meetings armed with clipboards and pens, as the Markey campaign planned along with numerous other candidates down the ballot. Concern about the virus forced the state Democratic party to cancel more than 100 local caucuses at which Markey and others planned to collect signatures, too.

Now, the Markey campaign is asking supporters to visit a website and fill out a form so the campaign can mail them a paper copy of a Markey’s nomination papers. After signing the papers, people must them mail them back to the campaign in the prepaid, preaddressed envelope provided by the campaign...

...The fact that Markey, who has served in Washington for more than four decades, didn’t yet have the necessary signatures to get on the ballot raised some eyebrows in political circles."

Bernie Sanders ends his presidential campaign