alternet--2020-10-31--The Fed saved the economy -- but is threatening trillions of dollars worth of middle-class retiremen

The Fed saved the economy -- but is threatening trillions of dollars worth of middle-class retirement

The Federal Reserve , which these days seems to be the only major part of the federal government capable of operating drama-free , has done a lot to help keep our economy afloat .
It has cut interest rates to unprecedented low levels , bought billions of dollars of corporate IOUs , helped stabilize the debt markets and helped rescue a stock market that had begun falling sharply in mid-February when the COVID-19 recession started and that seemed headed for a crash .
In the process , the Fed has indirectly provided support to house prices and to the vital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest rates to all-time lows of about 3 % .
Given that home equity is a major asset for many middle-class Americans , supporting home prices is especially important .
As is supporting the home construction industry , which is a major source of blue-collar jobs .
But if you dig deeper , you 'll see that the Fed is unintentionally worsening economic inequality by providing the most help to Americans who are least in need of it .
And it 's also putting stress on the middle class ' most important asset @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are great for people ( including me ) who own a lot of stocks , but those people are primarily the top 10 % of the country , in terms of wealth .
According to Fed statistics , more than half of stocks — 52 % — are owned by the wealthiest 1 % of Americans , and 88 % are owned by the top 10 % .
To show you a different aspect of helping the upper class but not the working class , the Fed 's securities purchases include buying debt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers while paying substantial dividends to shareholders .
And for some imprudent or troubled corporate borrowers , the Fed 's moves have been hugely helpful .
But those moves are hurting prudent savers of modest means by greatly reducing the income they can earn on Treasury securities and other no-risk investments such as bank certificates of deposit .
That tends to drive people seeking income into the stock market , where their capital is at risk .
By contrast , if you buy a Treasury security , you 're sure of getting your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even though the security 's market value will fluctuate both up and down while you hold it .
Interest rates are so low that they 've largely erased the key benefit — income — Treasury bonds are theoretically supposed to provide over stocks .
If you own a low-cost Standard & Poor 's 500 index fund , you 're getting much more income from dividends than the interest you 'd earn having the same amount invested in a 10-year Treasury note .
For example , the dividend yield ( a year 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ market price ) on Admiral shares of Vanguard 's S & P 500 fund is more than double the interest yield of a 10-year Treasury .
It 's even higher than the yield on a 30-year Treasury bond , something that you rarely see .
The yield on the Vanguard fund was 1.65 % as of Sept. 30 , the most recent available date .
As I write this , the yield on a 10-year Treasury , the security it generally makes the most sense for a retail investor to buy and hold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The yield on the 30-year Treasury was 1.56 % .
Despite its good intentions , the Fed is setting the stage for huge problems down the road for pension funds and , therefore , for potential pension recipients .
There are also going to be problems for insurance companies and for other firms onto which many corporate employers have offloaded their pension obligations in order to clean up their balance sheets and minimize their future financial risks .
The firms that have assumed the responsibility for paying these pensions typically own bond-heavy portfolios @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because interest rates have fallen — I 'll explain how that works some other day — rates seem much more likely to rise from their current low levels in the future than to fall even lower .
And when rates rise , it will decrease the market value of the bonds held by the firms that have assumed responsibility for paying pensions .
What it all adds up to : The Fed is trying to salvage the present by pumping trillions of dollars into the U.S. and world financial systems but in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk .
“ We 're bailing out the present and making the future pay for it , '' said Gene Steuerle , a co-founder of the Tax Policy Center .
Please note that I 'm not blaming the Fed for what it 's doing .
It 's trying to fulfill its mandate to keep employment high , inflation relatively low , the dollar reasonably stable and interest rates at what it considers an appropriate level .
The Fed 's job , which is already difficult in strange and uncertain economic times like these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lack of new economic stimulus packages from Congress and the White House .
These packages , as we saw when they were in effect earlier this year , not only help individuals but also stimulate the economy when recipients spend the money they 've gotten .
The Fed , by contrast , can help the financial markets and the economy but ca n't directly help individual people .
Now , let me show you how the Fed 's near-zero rates , the culmination of a dozen years of ultralow rates and which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indefinitely , are undermining the long-range future of the U.S. retirement system .
This matters — a lot — because Fed statistics show that retirement benefits ( not including Social Security ) are hugely important to the middle class .
Prof. Edward Wolff of New York University , who specializes in studying income and wealth inequality , told me that Fed statistics show that pension wealth accounts for 70.3 % of the net worth of the middle class , which he defines as people ranking in the 20^th^ through 80^th^ percentiles in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , retirement benefits are only 2.2 % of the upper class ' wealth .
This makes the middle class particularly vulnerable to rising rates in the future .
Let 's take this piece by piece .
For starters , near-zero rates are making the financial problems of the already-stressed Social Security system worse than they would otherwise be by sharply reducing the interest that Social Security can earn on its $ 2.9 trillion trust fund .
That trust fund consists entirely of Treasury securities and is legally barred from owning stocks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ yield is falling and it 's not benefiting from the 50 % rise in stock prices since the market bottomed on March 23 .
The near-zero rates also affect private pensions .
David Zion of Zion Research estimates that the pension funds of the Standard & Poor 's 500 companies , which he says were underfunded by a total of $ 279 billion at the end of 2019 , were underfunded by $ 407 billion as of June 30 .
“ The main driver of the increase is lower interest rates , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the math behind lower rates raising pensions ' underfunding in a bit . )
Large as it is , the S & P companies ' total shortfall is only a fraction of the underfunding afflicting state and local government pension funds .
Keith Brainard , director of research for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators , estimates that the 5,332 retirement funds sponsored by state and local governments were $ 1.96 trillion underwater as of June 30 , the most recent available number , up from $ 1.90 trillion as of year-end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , even though the funds ' assets totaled about $ 4.65 trillion , an all-time high .
What 's more , if you use dispassionate math rather than the generous accounting principles that public pension funds are allowed to use , you see that lower long-term interest rates are doing much more damage to these funds ' financial status than the numbers from Brainard 's organization suggest .
For instance , Steve Church of Piscataqua Research estimates that the shortfalls of the 127 public pension funds that he follows , which have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of assets , are about $ 7.44 trillion .
That 's more than quadruple the funds ' reported $ 1.53 trillion shortfall .
This huge difference stems mostly from different assumptions about interest rates and different ways of calculating how much money a fund needs to have on hand today to meet a future obligation .
A public pension fund comes up with how much it needs to have on hand today based on the income it expects to earn on its portfolio .
Corporate pension funds engage in the same process , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less optimistic assumptions .
They have to set aside enough money to meet that obligation if the money were invested at the interest rate on high quality , long-term risk-free bonds .
Let me give you one example of the difference .
If a pension fund expects to pay someone $ 10,000 in 10 years and anticipates it will earn 7 % a year , compounded , today 's cost of that benefit — what numbers crunchers call its “ present value '' — shows up on its books as a liability of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fund predicts it will receive 3 % per year , which is about the rate that corporate pension funds use these days , the fund would need to set aside $ 7,441 .
All of this is leading private and public pension funds to take on more risk .
“ When yields are low , you go looking for income somewhere else , '' Zion told me .
That means putting money into stocks and various aggressive ( and high-cost ) Wall Street schemes such as private equity and venture capital funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funds are borrowing money to try to earn what financial types call “ spread income '' by investing the borrowed money in assets whose returns exceed the funds ' borrowing costs .
“ When the risk-free rate is zero and you need seven , that 's what prompts plans to move outside their traditional comfort zones , '' Steve Foresti , chief investment officer of Wilshire Consulting , said .
Foresti , who advises numerous public pension funds , says that the use of borrowed money , alternative investments and such began getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That 's about when the Fed knocked rates to near zero and has pretty much kept them there .
One prominent example of a fund trying to borrow its way out of trouble is the California Public Employees ' Retirement System ( CalPERS ) , the nation 's largest government pension fund .
It 's considering borrowing up to $ 55 billion more than it has already borrowed , hoping that its return on the assets it will buy with that borrowed money exceeds what it will pay in interest .
The fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 25 billion of borrowed money for which it 's paying an average interest rate of 0.18 % , now has authority to borrow up to 20 % of its assets .
That 's roughly $ 80 billion .
CalPERS says borrowing has helped it because it 's been earning more on the assets it bought with the borrowed money than the interest it 's paying .
“ It 's a moderate use of leverage .
We will do it opportunistically and gradually , '' Marcie Frost , CalPERS ' chief executive , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up our capital for a long time .
…We are able to be opportunistic . ''
However , as Frost readily acknowledges , “ Leverage can exacerbate your losses . ''
Or let 's look at another big fund , the Teacher Retirement System of Texas , which last year lowered the assumed rate of return on its investment portfolio to 7.25 % from the previous 8 % .
Among other things , that lower assumption is indirectly responsible for teachers , school districts and the state of Texas having to increase their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ avoid the fund having to slash future benefits .
Jase Auby , TRS ' chief investment officer , says the fund has been borrowing 4 % of its assets for about a year .
The idea , he said , is “ to diversify away from equity risk '' — the danger that stock prices will fall — caused by low interest rates .
“ Equity risk is greater because interest rates are low , '' he said .
The fund says its borrowing cost is currently about 0.25 % a year .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ financed by its borrowings , but it 's ahead so far because its total fund return has exceeded its borrowing costs .
If , however , the value of the assets bought with the borrowed money goes down , the fund obviously will be worse off than if it had n't borrowed the money .
By forcing bond yields down sharply and helping drive up stock prices , the Fed 's low-interest rate regime has made 401 ( k ) and 403 ( b ) and other individual retirement accounts more valuable — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ values of both stocks and bonds .
However , these low rates are now exposing those individual accounts to considerably more risk than if stock prices were lower and bond yields higher .
Why do I say this ?
Because high stock prices can fall — we 've had two 50 % market drops in the past 20 years — and low-yielding Treasury securities will lose value if interest rates move higher .
How can U.S. Treasury securities lose value , given that the federal government can create as many dollars as it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Let 's say that you spend $ 10,000 to buy a 10-year Treasury note yielding 0.76 % , the current rate .
You 'd collect $ 76 in interest a year , $ 760 over the issue 's lifetime , before getting your $ 10,000 back in 2030 .
But let 's say that a year from now , despite Fed Chair Powell 's predictions , the rate on such a security has risen to 1.76 % , around where it was for parts of last year .
The market value of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 9,174 , according to my handy-dandy online bond calculator .
That $ 826 decline in value is more than the total interest you stand to collect over the Treasury note 's lifetime .
You can take your loss directly by selling your security , or you can take it indirectly by collecting $ 76 of annual interest for 9 years rather than the $ 176 that holders of market-rate securities would be getting .
I 'd love to be able to quote Fed people to give you the Fed 's side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the people I 've talked with or approached , some of whom I 've known for years , are willing to be quoted by name .
Privately , various Fedniks past and present readily agree that there are serious downsides to what the Fed has been doing since then-chair Ben Bernanke ( who declined , through a spokeswoman , to talk with me ) first cut rates to near zero in 2008 and successfully ended the stock market meltdown and financial panic .
These Fedniks are also familiar with the risks that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the impact these rates have on economic inequality by sharply raising the values of financial assets , which are owned disproportionately by high-net-worth people , while doing relatively little for the less well off .
But they wo n't talk about it publicly .
Still , the issue needs to be recognized .
If we do n't do something to offset the damage to our retirement system , today 's problems could end up looking like a rounding error compared to what the future holds .

The Federal Reserve, which these days seems to be the only major part of the federal government capable of operating drama-free, has done a lot to help keep our economy afloat. It has cut interest rates to unprecedented low levels, bought billions of dollars of corporate IOUs, helped stabilize the debt markets and helped rescue a stock market that had begun falling sharply in mid-February when the COVID-19 recession started and that seemed headed for a crash.
In the process, the Fed has indirectly provided support to house prices and to the vital home construction business by forcing down mortgage interest rates to all-time lows of about 3%. Given that home equity is a major asset for many middle-class Americans, supporting home prices is especially important. As is supporting the home construction industry, which is a major source of blue-collar jobs.
But if you dig deeper, you'll see that the Fed is unintentionally worsening economic inequality by providing the most help to Americans who are least in need of it. And it's also putting stress on the middle class' most important asset: retirement benefits.
Higher stock prices are great for people (including me) who own a lot of stocks, but those people are primarily the top 10% of the country, in terms of wealth. According to Fed statistics, more than half of stocks — 52% — are owned by the wealthiest 1% of Americans, and 88% are owned by the top 10%.
To show you a different aspect of helping the upper class but not the working class, the Fed's securities purchases include buying debt issued by firms that are laying off workers while paying substantial dividends to shareholders. And for some imprudent or troubled corporate borrowers, the Fed's moves have been hugely helpful.
But those moves are hurting prudent savers of modest means by greatly reducing the income they can earn on Treasury securities and other no-risk investments such as bank certificates of deposit. That tends to drive people seeking income into the stock market, where their capital is at risk. By contrast, if you buy a Treasury security, you're sure of getting your money back when the security comes due, even though the security's market value will fluctuate both up and down while you hold it.
Interest rates are so low that they've largely erased the key benefit — income — Treasury bonds are theoretically supposed to provide over stocks. If you own a low-cost Standard & Poor's 500 index fund, you're getting much more income from dividends than the interest you'd earn having the same amount invested in a 10-year Treasury note. For example, the dividend yield (a year's worth of dividends divided by the current market price) on Admiral shares of Vanguard's S&P 500 fund is more than double the interest yield of a 10-year Treasury. It's even higher than the yield on a 30-year Treasury bond, something that you rarely see.
The yield on the Vanguard fund was 1.65% as of Sept. 30, the most recent available date. As I write this, the yield on a 10-year Treasury, the security it generally makes the most sense for a retail investor to buy and hold to maturity, was 0.76%. The yield on the 30-year Treasury was 1.56%.
Despite its good intentions, the Fed is setting the stage for huge problems down the road for pension funds and, therefore, for potential pension recipients. There are also going to be problems for insurance companies and for other firms onto which many corporate employers have offloaded their pension obligations in order to clean up their balance sheets and minimize their future financial risks.
The firms that have assumed the responsibility for paying these pensions typically own bond-heavy portfolios. And while bond prices have risen because interest rates have fallen — I'll explain how that works some other day — rates seem much more likely to rise from their current low levels in the future than to fall even lower. And when rates rise, it will decrease the market value of the bonds held by the firms that have assumed responsibility for paying pensions.
What it all adds up to: The Fed is trying to salvage the present by pumping trillions of dollars into the U.S. and world financial systems but in the process is putting our economic future at risk. “We're bailing out the present and making the future pay for it," said Gene Steuerle, a co-founder of the Tax Policy Center.
Please note that I'm not blaming the Fed for what it's doing. It's trying to fulfill its mandate to keep employment high, inflation relatively low, the dollar reasonably stable and interest rates at what it considers an appropriate level. The Fed's job, which is already difficult in strange and uncertain economic times like these, is being made much harder by the lack of new economic stimulus packages from Congress and the White House. These packages, as we saw when they were in effect earlier this year, not only help individuals but also stimulate the economy when recipients spend the money they've gotten.
The Fed, by contrast, can help the financial markets and the economy but can't directly help individual people.
Now, let me show you how the Fed's near-zero rates, the culmination of a dozen years of ultralow rates and which Fed Chair Jerome Powell says will continue indefinitely, are undermining the long-range future of the U.S. retirement system. This matters — a lot — because Fed statistics show that retirement benefits (not including Social Security) are hugely important to the middle class.
Prof. Edward Wolff of New York University, who specializes in studying income and wealth inequality, told me that Fed statistics show that pension wealth accounts for 70.3% of the net worth of the middle class, which he defines as people ranking in the 20^th^ through 80^th^ percentiles in terms of wealth. By contrast, he said, retirement benefits are only 2.2% of the upper class' wealth.
This makes the middle class particularly vulnerable to rising rates in the future. Let's take this piece by piece.
For starters, near-zero rates are making the financial problems of the already-stressed Social Security system worse than they would otherwise be by sharply reducing the interest that Social Security can earn on its $2.9 trillion trust fund. That trust fund consists entirely of Treasury securities and is legally barred from owning stocks. That means that the fund's interest yield is falling and it's not benefiting from the 50% rise in stock prices since the market bottomed on March 23.
The near-zero rates also affect private pensions. David Zion of Zion Research estimates that the pension funds of the Standard & Poor's 500 companies, which he says were underfunded by a total of $279 billion at the end of 2019, were underfunded by $407 billion as of June 30. “The main driver of the increase is lower interest rates," he said. (I'll explain the math behind lower rates raising pensions' underfunding in a bit.)
Large as it is, the S&P companies' total shortfall is only a fraction of the underfunding afflicting state and local government pension funds. Keith Brainard, director of research for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators, estimates that the 5,332 retirement funds sponsored by state and local governments were $1.96 trillion underwater as of June 30, the most recent available number, up from $1.90 trillion as of year-end 2019. This has happened, he said, even though the funds' assets totaled about $4.65 trillion, an all-time high.
What's more, if you use dispassionate math rather than the generous accounting principles that public pension funds are allowed to use, you see that lower long-term interest rates are doing much more damage to these funds' financial status than the numbers from Brainard's organization suggest. For instance, Steve Church of Piscataqua Research estimates that the shortfalls of the 127 public pension funds that he follows, which have a total of about $4 trillion of assets, are about $7.44 trillion. That's more than quadruple the funds' reported $1.53 trillion shortfall.
This huge difference stems mostly from different assumptions about interest rates and different ways of calculating how much money a fund needs to have on hand today to meet a future obligation. A public pension fund comes up with how much it needs to have on hand today based on the income it expects to earn on its portfolio. Corporate pension funds engage in the same process, but they are required to make far less optimistic assumptions. They have to set aside enough money to meet that obligation if the money were invested at the interest rate on high quality, long-term risk-free bonds.
Let me give you one example of the difference. If a pension fund expects to pay someone $10,000 in 10 years and anticipates it will earn 7% a year, compounded, today's cost of that benefit — what numbers crunchers call its “present value" — shows up on its books as a liability of $5,083. If, however, the fund predicts it will receive 3% per year, which is about the rate that corporate pension funds use these days, the fund would need to set aside $7,441.
All of this is leading private and public pension funds to take on more risk. “When yields are low, you go looking for income somewhere else," Zion told me.
That means putting money into stocks and various aggressive (and high-cost) Wall Street schemes such as private equity and venture capital funds.
In addition, some public pension funds are borrowing money to try to earn what financial types call “spread income" by investing the borrowed money in assets whose returns exceed the funds' borrowing costs. “When the risk-free rate is zero and you need seven, that's what prompts plans to move outside their traditional comfort zones," Steve Foresti, chief investment officer of Wilshire Consulting, said.
Foresti, who advises numerous public pension funds, says that the use of borrowed money, alternative investments and such began getting more popular about a decade ago. That's about when the Fed knocked rates to near zero and has pretty much kept them there.
One prominent example of a fund trying to borrow its way out of trouble is the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), the nation's largest government pension fund. It's considering borrowing up to $55 billion more than it has already borrowed, hoping that its return on the assets it will buy with that borrowed money exceeds what it will pay in interest.
The fund, which says it currently has about $25 billion of borrowed money for which it's paying an average interest rate of 0.18%, now has authority to borrow up to 20% of its assets. That's roughly $80 billion. CalPERS says borrowing has helped it because it's been earning more on the assets it bought with the borrowed money than the interest it's paying.
“It's a moderate use of leverage. We will do it opportunistically and gradually," Marcie Frost, CalPERS' chief executive, told me. “We can tie up our capital for a long time. …We are able to be opportunistic." However, as Frost readily acknowledges, “Leverage can exacerbate your losses."
Or let's look at another big fund, the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, which last year lowered the assumed rate of return on its investment portfolio to 7.25% from the previous 8%. Among other things, that lower assumption is indirectly responsible for teachers, school districts and the state of Texas having to increase their future contributions to the pension fund to avoid the fund having to slash future benefits.
Jase Auby, TRS' chief investment officer, says the fund has been borrowing 4% of its assets for about a year. The idea, he said, is “to diversify away from equity risk" — the danger that stock prices will fall — caused by low interest rates. “Equity risk is greater because interest rates are low," he said.
The fund says its borrowing cost is currently about 0.25% a year. TRS says there were no specific assets financed by its borrowings, but it's ahead so far because its total fund return has exceeded its borrowing costs. If, however, the value of the assets bought with the borrowed money goes down, the fund obviously will be worse off than if it hadn't borrowed the money.
By forcing bond yields down sharply and helping drive up stock prices, the Fed's low-interest rate regime has made 401(k) and 403(b) and other individual retirement accounts more valuable — for now — by boosting the market values of both stocks and bonds.
However, these low rates are now exposing those individual accounts to considerably more risk than if stock prices were lower and bond yields higher.
Why do I say this? Because high stock prices can fall — we've had two 50% market drops in the past 20 years — and low-yielding Treasury securities will lose value if interest rates move higher.
How can U.S. Treasury securities lose value, given that the federal government can create as many dollars as it needs in order to redeem its obligations? Let's say that you spend $10,000 to buy a 10-year Treasury note yielding 0.76%, the current rate. You'd collect $76 in interest a year, $760 over the issue's lifetime, before getting your $10,000 back in 2030.
But let's say that a year from now, despite Fed Chair Powell's predictions, the rate on such a security has risen to 1.76%, around where it was for parts of last year. The market value of your now-nine-year security would be only about $9,174, according to my handy-dandy online bond calculator. That $826 decline in value is more than the total interest you stand to collect over the Treasury note's lifetime. You can take your loss directly by selling your security, or you can take it indirectly by collecting $76 of annual interest for 9 years rather than the $176 that holders of market-rate securities would be getting.
I'd love to be able to quote Fed people to give you the Fed's side of all of this. Alas, none of the people I've talked with or approached, some of whom I've known for years, are willing to be quoted by name.
Privately, various Fedniks past and present readily agree that there are serious downsides to what the Fed has been doing since then-chair Ben Bernanke (who declined, through a spokeswoman, to talk with me) first cut rates to near zero in 2008 and successfully ended the stock market meltdown and financial panic.
These Fedniks are also familiar with the risks that ultralow rates pose to the retirement system and the impact these rates have on economic inequality by sharply raising the values of financial assets, which are owned disproportionately by high-net-worth people, while doing relatively little for the less well off.
But they won't talk about it publicly.
Still, the issue needs to be recognized. If we don't do something to offset the damage to our retirement system, today's problems could end up looking like a rounding error compared to what the future holds.


alternet--2020-10-31--House to subpoena records on discipline related to secret border patrol Facebook group

In a blistering 17-page letter , the head of a congressional committee on Friday accused federal officials of improperly withholding information on Border Patrol agents ' misconduct in a secret Facebook group from congressional investigators .
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney , chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform , said in the letter that she plans to subpoena internal Border Patrol documents detailing misconduct related to the Facebook group , which included some 9,500 current and former agents .
First exposed by ProPublica in July 2019 , the social media community called “ I 'm 10-15 '' was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including an image of President Donald Trump sexually assaulting Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez .
The dispute that prompted Maloney 's letter centers on the refusal of the Border Patrol 's parent organization , Customs and Border Protection , to turn over documents identifying by name , rank .and geographic location the agents who were disciplined or fired for making offensive posts in the Facebook group .
CBP has also failed to provide congressional investigators with any details about specific incidents that led to agents being punished or fired .
The records that CBP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ redacted , according to Maloney .
“ While I did not come to the decision to subpoena the CBP lightly , it is necessary , '' said Maloney , a New York Democrat , in a statement to ProPublica .
“ The Committee needs these unredacted documents to oversee whether CBP is properly disciplining its employees and whether employees who CBP found to have committed misconduct are still working directly with immigrant women , children , and babies . ''
CBP has long insisted that it is barred by federal law from disclosing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the names of employees who 've faced discipline for violating the agency 's policies .
In the letter , however , Maloney called CBP 's refusal to turn over the unredacted disciplinary records as “ legally baseless '' and asserted that her committee “ has direct jurisdiction over federal employees and agency disciplinary procedures . ''
CBP has said publicly that it investigated 136 employees in connection to the “ I 'm 10-15 '' group and another Facebook group , and that the probe led to the firing of four agents and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others .
Still , the agency has kept most other facts about the investigation confidential , declining to share information with the committee or issue a public report .
“ To date , CBP has provided a significant volume of documents on the matter , some of which were publicly released by the Committee without CBP 's consent , in addition to providing numerous briefings on the matter , '' a CBP official said in an emailed statement .
“ Since the beginning of this investigation , CBP 's primary goal has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health and safety of our personnel , given the high degree of social unrest and the potential hostile targeting of employees for the nature of their employment . ''
The official said the agency is aware of Maloney 's intent to subpoena the documents .
Her letter states that the documents CBP has already turned over show that the agency “ reduced penalties for numerous employees '' who engaged in misconduct ; three agents who were slated to be fired had their punishments reduced to suspensions from work , while 19 others had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The committee is seeking further information about an agent identified only as “ Fired Agent # 1 '' in the letter .
ProPublica 's reporting indicates that this is Thomas Hendricks , who served as a supervisory agent in Calexico , California , until he was ousted from the Border Patrol in October 2019 because of his offensive posts in the Facebook group .
It was Hendricks who posted the image of Ocasio-Cortez being assaulted .
According to Maloney 's letter , Hendricks told internal affairs investigators that his postings were “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them as “ good natured . ''
Hendricks appealed his firing , but in a decision handed down last month a federal appeals board denied his request to be reinstated .
The decision shows that the agent made offensive Facebook posts demeaning women and gay men while working .
“ It 's not a big deal to post a meme on duty , '' Hendricks told investigators .
His attorney , Joel Kirkpatrick , did not return requests for comment .

In a blistering 17-page letter, the head of a congressional committee on Friday accused federal officials of improperly withholding information on Border Patrol agents' misconduct in a secret Facebook group from congressional investigators.
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, said in the letter that she plans to subpoena internal Border Patrol documents detailing misconduct related to the Facebook group, which included some 9,500 current and former agents. First exposed by ProPublica in July 2019, the social media community called “I'm 10-15" was rife with dehumanizing and misogynistic postings, including an image of President Donald Trump sexually assaulting Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The dispute that prompted Maloney's letter centers on the refusal of the Border Patrol's parent organization, Customs and Border Protection, to turn over documents identifying by name, rank .and geographic location the agents who were disciplined or fired for making offensive posts in the Facebook group. CBP has also failed to provide congressional investigators with any details about specific incidents that led to agents being punished or fired. The records that CBP has provided to the committee are heavily redacted, according to Maloney.
“While I did not come to the decision to subpoena the CBP lightly, it is necessary," said Maloney, a New York Democrat, in a statement to ProPublica. “The Committee needs these unredacted documents to oversee whether CBP is properly disciplining its employees and whether employees who CBP found to have committed misconduct are still working directly with immigrant women, children, and babies."
CBP has long insisted that it is barred by federal law from disclosing key details about its disciplinary process, including the names of employees who've faced discipline for violating the agency's policies.
In the letter, however, Maloney called CBP's refusal to turn over the unredacted disciplinary records as “legally baseless" and asserted that her committee “has direct jurisdiction over federal employees and agency disciplinary procedures."
CBP has said publicly that it investigated 136 employees in connection to the “I'm 10-15" group and another Facebook group, and that the probe led to the firing of four agents and the suspension of more than three dozen others. Still, the agency has kept most other facts about the investigation confidential, declining to share information with the committee or issue a public report.
“To date, CBP has provided a significant volume of documents on the matter, some of which were publicly released by the Committee without CBP's consent, in addition to providing numerous briefings on the matter," a CBP official said in an emailed statement. “Since the beginning of this investigation, CBP's primary goal has been to provide transparency while still protecting the health and safety of our personnel, given the high degree of social unrest and the potential hostile targeting of employees for the nature of their employment." The official said the agency is aware of Maloney's intent to subpoena the documents.
Her letter states that the documents CBP has already turned over show that the agency “reduced penalties for numerous employees" who engaged in misconduct; three agents who were slated to be fired had their punishments reduced to suspensions from work, while 19 others had the length of their suspensions cut down.
The committee is seeking further information about an agent identified only as “Fired Agent #1" in the letter. ProPublica's reporting indicates that this is Thomas Hendricks, who served as a supervisory agent in Calexico, California, until he was ousted from the Border Patrol in October 2019 because of his offensive posts in the Facebook group. It was Hendricks who posted the image of Ocasio-Cortez being assaulted.
According to Maloney's letter, Hendricks told internal affairs investigators that his postings were “just having fun" and later described them as “good natured."
Hendricks appealed his firing, but in a decision handed down last month a federal appeals board denied his request to be reinstated. The decision shows that the agent made offensive Facebook posts demeaning women and gay men while working. “It's not a big deal to post a meme on duty," Hendricks told investigators.
His attorney, Joel Kirkpatrick, did not return requests for comment.


alternet--2020-10-31--Millions still haven't gotten their stimulus checks -- including many who need them most

It 's been 217 days since Congress instructed the IRS to send $ 1,200 stimulus checks to every citizen below a certain income threshold .
And yet , it 's likely as many as 12 million people — including those who most need a financial boost — never got the cash .
The reasons include confusion about how the complex program works , IRS missteps , technical snafus and Treasury Department policy decisions that cut out large groups of people altogether .
Those who fell through the cracks have until Nov. 21 to claim the money or risk losing out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which Congress has been negotiating for months .
“ Out of what should be an incredibly positive story , [ the IRS ] just kept getting black eye after black eye after black eye , '' said Nina Olson , who served as the IRS ' taxpayer advocate until last year and is now director of the Center for Taxpayer Rights .
“ And that 's coming partly from the IRS just being overwhelmed , but also not doing the planning and strategic thinking that they really should have once it became @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a 60-day flu . ''
In a response to detailed questions , the IRS said that it is “ deeply committed to getting EIP payments to all who are eligible , including the difficult to reach community of individuals who are not required and do not file tax returns . ''
“ Factors involving time , staffing , IT resources and other components affected our decisions , but there is no question the IRS went to great lengths to deliver this program in record time to help more than 160 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
People who have n't received payments fall into two basic groups : First , those who were entitled to the money but did n't receive it automatically because their income was so low they did n't file tax returns , and they either have n't applied or tried to but failed .
Second , those who were left out by intentional policy choices — namely , the spouses and children of undocumented immigrants and approximately 2 million inmates of prisons and jails .
Justifying its decisions to omit these groups , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prisoners are not entitled to payments , and that certain categories of people may be excluded in order to meet Congress ' desire that money be dispensed as quickly as possible .
While the IRS expeditiously sent payments to more than 160 million households under extremely trying circumstances , taxpayer advocates contend that the agency lost enthusiasm for solving problems as the months dragged on , and that people who could n't figure out why they had not received payments received little help .
Now , groups representing low-income people , prisoners and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals hooked into the system as possible in advance of the deadline , which has already been moved back as obstacles arose .
As recently as September , the IRS said that 9 million people , mostly those who earn too little to file tax returns , had not applied to receive the benefit , and the agency has not disclosed how many of those it has heard from since .
At least an additional 3 million people have missed out because they were deliberately excluded .
The federal government also tried to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basic needs and stimulate the economy during the 2008 recession .
In that go-around , Congress instructed the IRS to do almost exactly the same thing — send checks to single people who made less than $ 75,000 the previous year or couples with income under $ 150,000 , with the amounts tapering off above that .
In some ways , the current round is more generous : The $ 1,200 payments are twice the amount dispensed in 2008 .
Congress no longer required that stimulus checks go toward a recipient 's outstanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent directly to people who already received government benefits through Social Security and the Department of Veterans Affairs , even if they had n't filed tax returns .
Back in 2008 , however , the IRS had more resources to draw upon .
Its budget has shrunk 20 % since 2010 , limiting its ability to quickly fix problems .
While the agency set up a portal for nonfilers in April — built by the tax software company Intuit — its glitches often discouraged users .
Getting help requires spending hours on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the power to correct any issues .
“ The IRS simply does not have the resources necessary to make a manual case-by-case adjustment in potentially several million cases , '' Erin Collins , the sitting national taxpayer advocate , said at a House Oversight hearing in early October .
That 's something that Penelope Protheroe , who runs the homelessness outreach nonprofit Angel Resource Connection , has struggled with for months .
Her service area covers a four-county area that includes Seattle , and like many such groups around the country , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people signed up through the portal .
Absent a large-scale federal public relations campaign , she had to spread the news through word of mouth that homeless people were eligible .
“ The main problem is that they did n't even know that they qualified , so why try ? ''
Protheroe said .
“ They thought the stimulus check was connected with people who pay taxes . ''
( The IRS noted that it worked with thousands of organizations to spread awareness , but that it was limited in its efforts because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or advertising budget like some federal agencies . ''
) Once people know they qualify , they face several obstacles : Many homeless people do n't have identification , like driver 's licenses , and the offices that issue such IDs have been closed .
Homeless people tend not to have permanent addresses , and organizations that might have received checks for them were reluctant to do so because of liability issues .
The portal for nonfilers does n't work on mobile phones , so homeless people must find desktop computers to sign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places they would normally go to do so , like public libraries , have been closed .
That 's why Angel Resource Connection has set up outdoor laptops in four locations at least a dozen times to help homeless people through the process .
Each case requires about 20 minutes of one-on-one attention , forcing people to wait in lines for hours until they can get to a volunteer .
There are various ways the process can trip up applicants .
Leaving a blank field instead of inserting a zero , for example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ form without explanation .
Protheroe relayed her concerns to the IRS , which fixed many glitches and started sending out debit cards that can be used without a bank account .
The money can be transformative , she said .
Homeless recipients have used their stimulus checks to buy cars that provide shelter or equipment to start a small business .
But as the deadline nears and days grow colder , it 's getting harder to find volunteers .
“ Everybody thinks , 'OK , we did it , ' '' Protheroe said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people power to sign people up .
So if you have a table , with just a couple volunteers now , you still have a tremendous line . ''
Perhaps the most important improvement made by the IRS was automatically distributing money to people already receiving benefits through Social Security or the VA .
But the rollout was rocky , and the IRS only fixed some problems after being sued .
After automatically sending payments to federal beneficiaries , the IRS realized that it had n't factored in dependent children , for whom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 500 .
In April , the IRS issued a press release notifying Social Security recipients that they had all of two days to file to receive money for their dependents , which almost no one likely acted upon .
“ It just seemed like they made the wrong decision there , and it really was n't feasible for people to comply , '' said Christine Speidel , who runs a tax clinic at Villanova University that helps low-income taxpayers .
In mid-August , after she partnered with Community Legal Services of Philadelphia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IRS ' decision discriminated against the disabled , the IRS granted beneficiaries an additional 45 days to add their dependents .
Still , problems abound .
The IRS has refused to make stimulus payments based on amended tax returns , which people can file to correct errors in their initial filings .
It has n't taken into account 2019 tax returns filed after the original April 15 deadline — but before the new deadline of July 15 — that might have shown income low enough to qualify for a stimulus check , although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ qualify while filing their 2020 taxes .
And the agency is still trying to reissue checks to people whose payments were mistakenly redirected to pay child support owed by their spouses .
All of this , Speidel said , would be easier to navigate if the IRS offered better support for people having trouble .
Instead , its phone lines have been overburdened and are generally unhelpful , since the stimulus payment task was contracted out to customer service agents who have no access to individual accounts .
Also , even after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centers in June , it still is n't accepting paper returns there , cutting off another support avenue for people who have trouble navigating computers .
“ The IRS has got to put resources back into the local offices if this is going to be equitable , '' Speidel said .
ProPublica has received messages from hundreds of people who have n't been able to navigate the portal and were given no explanation for why their attempt did not work .
Take Josee Davis , a 23-year-old house cleaner who rents a trailer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She lost work during the pandemic , since most of her clients are elderly and do not want to risk infection .
She was never able to receive unemployment benefits , despite the fact that independent contractors were supposed to have been included in the extra assistance provided by the CARES Act .
She did n't make enough money in 2019 to file taxes , but when she tried to apply for a stimulus payment , it did not go through .
After hours on the phone trying to reach the IRS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ showed that she had checked the wrong box — saying she could be claimed as a dependent , which would disqualify her .
She does n't remember checking the box .
“ They had no way to fix it , is what they told me , '' Davis said .
Now she 's filling out job applications because her fiance 's income as a truck mechanic barely covers the bills .
“ I feel as though every day is a breaking point , but you keep on going , '' she said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ IRS find more eligible people like Davis would have been to also automatically distribute payments to those who receive benefits through state-administered programs , like food stamps and Medicaid .
But so far the agency has not done so .
All of those complications just arose in the course of reaching people whom the IRS wants to reach .
The agency thinks that millions more are n't entitled to its help .
One group entirely excluded from the stimulus program was the approximately 2 million inmates of prisons and jails .
Incarcerated people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the CARES Act did n't carve them out , so initially the IRS issued their checks .
But in early May , the Treasury Department reversed the decision and said prisoners should n't get payments after all .
The IRS then moved to pull back the 85,000 payments that had already gone out .
It took until August for prisoners and their families to link up with lawyers from the San Francisco-based firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein , and put together a class-action lawsuit .
Treasury 's lawyers argued in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't entitle any particular individual to a stimulus payment , and prisoners are “ more insulated from the economic effects of the pandemic than many others because their basic needs such as food , shelter , and health care are already being provided for by the state and paid for by taxpayers . ''
But the coalition of groups involved in the lawsuit argued that is n't the case : Prisoners must pay for a wide range of daily needs , from hygienic items to education , entertainment , internet usage and phone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their families , who are disproportionately low-income people of color — a demographic that has been hit hard by the pandemic 's economic fallout .
At the end of September , a circuit court judge in the Northern District of California ruled in favor of inmates and later ordered the IRS to move back its deadline for filing paper returns to Nov. 4 .
The agency must also send paper forms out to every state and federal prisoner in the country and post notices in prisons about the payments .
Julie Anderson is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an Illinois nonprofit that works with the families of prisoners .
She runs a support group for mothers of inmates , and her son , Eric , is serving a 30-year sentence for a double homicide he was involved in at age 15 .
He told her about the mood in the prison when the news circulated that they would be getting $ 1,200 stimulus payments — more money than many had seen in years .
After months of lockdowns and no outside visits to control the coronavirus , it was a breath @ @ @ @ @ @ @ families , so the stimulus check might mean that they 're able to send the money so their kids could get Christmas gifts , '' Anderson said .
Those who are getting out soon could use the money to get back on their feet , perhaps reducing the likelihood that they 'll reoffend and end up back in jail .
“ I 'm overwhelmed just thinking about the difference it 's going to make in people 's lives . ''
But the IRS is appealing , and the agency 's guidance about what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Currently , it 's unclear how widespread awareness is among prisoners that they 're supposed to get stimulus payments .
On Oct. 8 , Robert Hastings , an inmate at Fort Dix federal correctional institution in New Jersey , asked a judge to extend the deadline because so few prisoners knew they needed to file .
He said he only found out about the order through a family member , and that at first his unit supervisor refused to give him the forms .
Some inmates ca n't read or write , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We have to depend on prison staff to provide us with our legal help , '' Hastings wrote in neat handwriting .
“ If they do not help us there is nothing we can do except what I am doing now . ''
Alan Mills , the director of the Uptown People 's Law Center in Chicago , facilitated the distribution of tax forms to state prisons in Illinois .
When his organization picked them up , thousands were missing .
He thinks that might be partly because prisoners do n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and would have to ask corrections officers for help in locating them .
Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesman Jeremy Desel said that prison staff is distributing forms to inmates who request them .
But he said that the handful of checks received so far are being held pending further IRS guidance .
Helping approximately 121,000 prisoners across 101 compounds get their payments is also not something the agency wants to spend much time on .
“ In the midst of a global pandemic , '' Desel said , “ ultimately this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
With prisons focused on following the IRS ' directions , the logistical task of helping millions of prisoners sign up for stimulus payments has fallen largely to prison outreach groups , which are unevenly distributed throughout the country .
Institutions near urban areas — like San Quentin in San Francisco — have more outside programming .
“ My guess is that they 're acting faster not because of the IRS , but because there are vigilant volunteers that care about Individuals inside those institutions , '' said Sonja Tonneson-Casalegno , deputy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a California nonprofit that works with the families of incarcerated people and runs a legal hotline for inmates .
“ In other prisons , people are still like , 'nobody knows about this , can you tell us about this . '
'' As awareness has spread , the court has been flooded with letters from prisoners asking for assistance .
On Thursday , in response to reports that some prisons had been hesitant to distribute the forms , Judge Phyllis Hamilton ordered that the IRS send prisons another notice directing them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group to be excluded from the stimulus program are U.S. citizens married to undocumented immigrants , at least 1.2 million people .
The CARES Act forbids payments to people filing with Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers , used by people without Social Security numbers to pay taxes .
As a consequence , it also excludes spouses who have filed jointly with such people — which is considered an important factor in evaluating eligibility for green cards and eventual naturalization , putting these couples in a Catch-22 .
That was the confusing situation facing Round @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whose Peruvian wife , Julissa , earned money doing household work and babysitting .
In 2018 , they filed using his Social Security number and her ITIN .
She obtained her permanent residency in 2019 and the couple filed jointly using her new Social Security number , but they never received their stimulus payment , which they otherwise would have gotten automatically .
Since Julissa lost most of her income during the pandemic , getting by on Hash 's salary as an IT director has meant cutting down on discretionary spending for their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , no date nights , '' Hash said .
“ Compared to a number of people we 're better off , because I was able to keep my job , but we 've had to tighten our belts . ''
This was also the case in the 2008 round of payments .
But the sharpness of this recession — and its disproportionate impact on the Latinx community , which includes the majority of couples with mixed immigration status — sparked a class-action lawsuit alleging that excluding citizens from the stimulus program on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There are currently at least five cases making their way through various courts around the country .
In the furthest along , in the Central District of California , a judge sided with the government .
The plaintiffs have appealed and anticipate taking the matter to the Supreme Court .
The last group excluded by the IRS — people who died before the stimulus payment reached them — may not seem sympathetic .
But they were included in the 2008 stimulus if they had filed taxes the previous year , and the IRS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sympathy for surviving spouses .
“ We know that surviving spouses have a really hard time , '' said Olson , the former National Taxpayer Advocate .
“ And you have the income cutoff anyway , so it 's not like it 's rich dead people .
It 's people who are struggling . ''
This time , according to a June Government Accountability Office report , IRS started out doing the same thing .
But after reporters and members of Congress questioned why payments were going to decedents , the Treasury Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its frequently asked questions page that people who received checks that were for deceased relatives should return them .
To Gabriel Zucker , a public interest technology fellow at the New America Foundation who has studied the rollout of the stimulus payments , getting money to people who need it during an emergency depends on commitment and the resources necessary to fix problems as they inevitably arise .
“ After that first round , I started to get the sense that they felt they had done a lot , which they had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with their lives , '' Zucker said .
“ That meant that if they did something that accidentally screwed something else up , there was n't a ton of willingness to correct for it . ''
Longer term , however , Zucker thinks that improving stimulus programs may require bringing more people into the tax system — whether or not they owe taxes .
The earned income tax credit program , a subsidy for people who do n't make enough to pay income taxes , could be expanded to make it worth it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That would allow the IRS to connect with more Americans automatically , rather than having to hunt them down whenever Congress decides to get cash in peoples ' hands quickly .
Ultimately , it 's a change in the IRS ' mission toward redistribution , not just raising revenue .
To facilitate easier transfers of cash , others have proposed connecting more people to the financial system through using post offices as public banks , skipping the IRS entirely .
“ The IRS does n't see its job as giving money to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It sees it as taking money from people . ''

It's been 217 days since Congress instructed the IRS to send $1,200 stimulus checks to every citizen below a certain income threshold. And yet, it's likely as many as 12 million people — including those who most need a financial boost — never got the cash.
The reasons include confusion about how the complex program works, IRS missteps, technical snafus and Treasury Department policy decisions that cut out large groups of people altogether. Those who fell through the cracks have until Nov. 21 to claim the money or risk losing out on any second round of stimulus payments, which Congress has been negotiating for months.
“Out of what should be an incredibly positive story, [the IRS] just kept getting black eye after black eye after black eye," said Nina Olson, who served as the IRS' taxpayer advocate until last year and is now director of the Center for Taxpayer Rights. “And that's coming partly from the IRS just being overwhelmed, but also not doing the planning and strategic thinking that they really should have once it became clear that the pandemic wasn't going to be a 60-day flu."
In a response to detailed questions, the IRS said that it is “deeply committed to getting EIP payments to all who are eligible, including the difficult to reach community of individuals who are not required and do not file tax returns."
“Factors involving time, staffing, IT resources and other components affected our decisions, but there is no question the IRS went to great lengths to deliver this program in record time to help more than 160 million households in need," the agency said.
People who haven't received payments fall into two basic groups: First, those who were entitled to the money but didn't receive it automatically because their income was so low they didn't file tax returns, and they either haven't applied or tried to but failed. Second, those who were left out by intentional policy choices — namely, the spouses and children of undocumented immigrants and approximately 2 million inmates of prisons and jails.
Justifying its decisions to omit these groups, Treasury has said in legal filings that prisoners are not entitled to payments, and that certain categories of people may be excluded in order to meet Congress' desire that money be dispensed as quickly as possible.
While the IRS expeditiously sent payments to more than 160 million households under extremely trying circumstances, taxpayer advocates contend that the agency lost enthusiasm for solving problems as the months dragged on, and that people who couldn't figure out why they had not received payments received little help.
Now, groups representing low-income people, prisoners and immigrants are racing to get as many individuals hooked into the system as possible in advance of the deadline, which has already been moved back as obstacles arose. As recently as September, the IRS said that 9 million people, mostly those who earn too little to file tax returns, had not applied to receive the benefit, and the agency has not disclosed how many of those it has heard from since. At least an additional 3 million people have missed out because they were deliberately excluded.
The federal government also tried to give people money to help them meet basic needs and stimulate the economy during the 2008 recession. In that go-around, Congress instructed the IRS to do almost exactly the same thing — send checks to single people who made less than $75,000 the previous year or couples with income under $150,000, with the amounts tapering off above that.
In some ways, the current round is more generous: The $1,200 payments are twice the amount dispensed in 2008. Congress no longer required that stimulus checks go toward a recipient's outstanding tax debt. Also, payments were sent directly to people who already received government benefits through Social Security and the Department of Veterans Affairs, even if they hadn't filed tax returns.
Back in 2008, however, the IRS had more resources to draw upon. Its budget has shrunk 20% since 2010, limiting its ability to quickly fix problems. While the agency set up a portal for nonfilers in April — built by the tax software company Intuit — its glitches often discouraged users. Getting help requires spending hours on the phone waiting for an IRS agent with the power to correct any issues.
“The IRS simply does not have the resources necessary to make a manual case-by-case adjustment in potentially several million cases," Erin Collins, the sitting national taxpayer advocate, said at a House Oversight hearing in early October.
That's something that Penelope Protheroe, who runs the homelessness outreach nonprofit Angel Resource Connection, has struggled with for months. Her service area covers a four-county area that includes Seattle, and like many such groups around the country, she's worked since the spring to get people signed up through the portal. Absent a large-scale federal public relations campaign, she had to spread the news through word of mouth that homeless people were eligible.
“The main problem is that they didn't even know that they qualified, so why try?" Protheroe said. “They thought the stimulus check was connected with people who pay taxes." (The IRS noted that it worked with thousands of organizations to spread awareness, but that it was limited in its efforts because it does “not have a marketing or advertising budget like some federal agencies.")
Once people know they qualify, they face several obstacles: Many homeless people don't have identification, like driver's licenses, and the offices that issue such IDs have been closed. Homeless people tend not to have permanent addresses, and organizations that might have received checks for them were reluctant to do so because of liability issues. The portal for nonfilers doesn't work on mobile phones, so homeless people must find desktop computers to sign up. In some cases, the places they would normally go to do so, like public libraries, have been closed.
That's why Angel Resource Connection has set up outdoor laptops in four locations at least a dozen times to help homeless people through the process. Each case requires about 20 minutes of one-on-one attention, forcing people to wait in lines for hours until they can get to a volunteer. There are various ways the process can trip up applicants. Leaving a blank field instead of inserting a zero, for example, kicks a user out of the form without explanation.
Protheroe relayed her concerns to the IRS, which fixed many glitches and started sending out debit cards that can be used without a bank account. The money can be transformative, she said. Homeless recipients have used their stimulus checks to buy cars that provide shelter or equipment to start a small business. But as the deadline nears and days grow colder, it's getting harder to find volunteers.
“Everybody thinks, 'OK, we did it,'" Protheroe said. “You don't have the people power to sign people up. So if you have a table, with just a couple volunteers now, you still have a tremendous line."
Perhaps the most important improvement made by the IRS was automatically distributing money to people already receiving benefits through Social Security or the VA. But the rollout was rocky, and the IRS only fixed some problems after being sued.
After automatically sending payments to federal beneficiaries, the IRS realized that it hadn't factored in dependent children, for whom beneficiaries are supposed to receive an additional $500. In April, the IRS issued a press release notifying Social Security recipients that they had all of two days to file to receive money for their dependents, which almost no one likely acted upon.
“It just seemed like they made the wrong decision there, and it really wasn't feasible for people to comply," said Christine Speidel, who runs a tax clinic at Villanova University that helps low-income taxpayers. In mid-August, after she partnered with Community Legal Services of Philadelphia to file a lawsuit charging that the IRS' decision discriminated against the disabled, the IRS granted beneficiaries an additional 45 days to add their dependents.
Still, problems abound. The IRS has refused to make stimulus payments based on amended tax returns, which people can file to correct errors in their initial filings. It hasn't taken into account 2019 tax returns filed after the original April 15 deadline — but before the new deadline of July 15 — that might have shown income low enough to qualify for a stimulus check, although taxpayers can claim a credit if they qualify while filing their 2020 taxes. And the agency is still trying to reissue checks to people whose payments were mistakenly redirected to pay child support owed by their spouses.
All of this, Speidel said, would be easier to navigate if the IRS offered better support for people having trouble. Instead, its phone lines have been overburdened and are generally unhelpful, since the stimulus payment task was contracted out to customer service agents who have no access to individual accounts. Also, even after the IRS started re-opening its physical taxpayer assistance centers in June, it still isn't accepting paper returns there, cutting off another support avenue for people who have trouble navigating computers.
“The IRS has got to put resources back into the local offices if this is going to be equitable," Speidel said.
ProPublica has received messages from hundreds of people who haven't been able to navigate the portal and were given no explanation for why their attempt did not work.
Take Josee Davis, a 23-year-old house cleaner who rents a trailer with her fiance in Heidelberg, Mississippi. She lost work during the pandemic, since most of her clients are elderly and do not want to risk infection. She was never able to receive unemployment benefits, despite the fact that independent contractors were supposed to have been included in the extra assistance provided by the CARES Act. She didn't make enough money in 2019 to file taxes, but when she tried to apply for a stimulus payment, it did not go through.
After hours on the phone trying to reach the IRS, an agent told that her application showed that she had checked the wrong box — saying she could be claimed as a dependent, which would disqualify her. She doesn't remember checking the box.
“They had no way to fix it, is what they told me," Davis said. Now she's filling out job applications because her fiance's income as a truck mechanic barely covers the bills. “I feel as though every day is a breaking point, but you keep on going," she said.
One step that might have helped the IRS find more eligible people like Davis would have been to also automatically distribute payments to those who receive benefits through state-administered programs, like food stamps and Medicaid. But so far the agency has not done so.
All of those complications just arose in the course of reaching people whom the IRS wants to reach. The agency thinks that millions more aren't entitled to its help.
One group entirely excluded from the stimulus program was the approximately 2 million inmates of prisons and jails. Incarcerated people were included in the 2008 stimulus payments, and the CARES Act didn't carve them out, so initially the IRS issued their checks. But in early May, the Treasury Department reversed the decision and said prisoners shouldn't get payments after all. The IRS then moved to pull back the 85,000 payments that had already gone out.
It took until August for prisoners and their families to link up with lawyers from the San Francisco-based firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, and put together a class-action lawsuit. Treasury's lawyers argued in a filing that the CARES Act doesn't entitle any particular individual to a stimulus payment, and prisoners are “more insulated from the economic effects of the pandemic than many others because their basic needs such as food, shelter, and health care are already being provided for by the state and paid for by taxpayers."
But the coalition of groups involved in the lawsuit argued that isn't the case: Prisoners must pay for a wide range of daily needs, from hygienic items to education, entertainment, internet usage and phone calls. Generally they're supported by their families, who are disproportionately low-income people of color — a demographic that has been hit hard by the pandemic's economic fallout.
At the end of September, a circuit court judge in the Northern District of California ruled in favor of inmates and later ordered the IRS to move back its deadline for filing paper returns to Nov. 4. The agency must also send paper forms out to every state and federal prisoner in the country and post notices in prisons about the payments.
Julie Anderson is the outreach director at Restore Justice, an Illinois nonprofit that works with the families of prisoners. She runs a support group for mothers of inmates, and her son, Eric, is serving a 30-year sentence for a double homicide he was involved in at age 15. He told her about the mood in the prison when the news circulated that they would be getting $1,200 stimulus payments — more money than many had seen in years. After months of lockdowns and no outside visits to control the coronavirus, it was a breath of relief.
“They still have families, so the stimulus check might mean that they're able to send the money so their kids could get Christmas gifts," Anderson said. Those who are getting out soon could use the money to get back on their feet, perhaps reducing the likelihood that they'll reoffend and end up back in jail. “I'm overwhelmed just thinking about the difference it's going to make in people's lives."
But the IRS is appealing, and the agency's guidance about what is required has changed several times. Currently, it's unclear how widespread awareness is among prisoners that they're supposed to get stimulus payments.
On Oct. 8, Robert Hastings, an inmate at Fort Dix federal correctional institution in New Jersey, asked a judge to extend the deadline because so few prisoners knew they needed to file. He said he only found out about the order through a family member, and that at first his unit supervisor refused to give him the forms. Some inmates can't read or write, and they would need help to complete them.
“We have to depend on prison staff to provide us with our legal help," Hastings wrote in neat handwriting. “If they do not help us there is nothing we can do except what I am doing now."
Alan Mills, the director of the Uptown People's Law Center in Chicago, facilitated the distribution of tax forms to state prisons in Illinois. When his organization picked them up, thousands were missing. He thinks that might be partly because prisoners don't have their Social Security numbers handy, and would have to ask corrections officers for help in locating them.
Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesman Jeremy Desel said that prison staff is distributing forms to inmates who request them. But he said that the handful of checks received so far are being held pending further IRS guidance. Helping approximately 121,000 prisoners across 101 compounds get their payments is also not something the agency wants to spend much time on.
“In the midst of a global pandemic," Desel said, “ultimately this is not the highest priority of this agency."
With prisons focused on following the IRS' directions, the logistical task of helping millions of prisoners sign up for stimulus payments has fallen largely to prison outreach groups, which are unevenly distributed throughout the country. Institutions near urban areas — like San Quentin in San Francisco — have more outside programming.
“My guess is that they're acting faster not because of the IRS, but because there are vigilant volunteers that care about Individuals inside those institutions," said Sonja Tonneson-Casalegno, deputy director of programs at Root and Rebound, a California nonprofit that works with the families of incarcerated people and runs a legal hotline for inmates. “In other prisons, people are still like, 'nobody knows about this, can you tell us about this.'"
As awareness has spread, the court has been flooded with letters from prisoners asking for assistance. On Thursday, in response to reports that some prisons had been hesitant to distribute the forms, Judge Phyllis Hamilton ordered that the IRS send prisons another notice directing them to do so.
The second major group to be excluded from the stimulus program are U.S. citizens married to undocumented immigrants, at least 1.2 million people.
The CARES Act forbids payments to people filing with Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, used by people without Social Security numbers to pay taxes. As a consequence, it also excludes spouses who have filed jointly with such people — which is considered an important factor in evaluating eligibility for green cards and eventual naturalization, putting these couples in a Catch-22.
That was the confusing situation facing Round Rock, Texas resident Ron Hash, whose Peruvian wife, Julissa, earned money doing household work and babysitting. In 2018, they filed using his Social Security number and her ITIN. She obtained her permanent residency in 2019 and the couple filed jointly using her new Social Security number, but they never received their stimulus payment, which they otherwise would have gotten automatically. Since Julissa lost most of her income during the pandemic, getting by on Hash's salary as an IT director has meant cutting down on discretionary spending for their family of four.
“No vacations, no date nights," Hash said. “Compared to a number of people we're better off, because I was able to keep my job, but we've had to tighten our belts."
This was also the case in the 2008 round of payments. But the sharpness of this recession — and its disproportionate impact on the Latinx community, which includes the majority of couples with mixed immigration status — sparked a class-action lawsuit alleging that excluding citizens from the stimulus program on the basis of their marriages is unconstitutional.
There are currently at least five cases making their way through various courts around the country. In the furthest along, in the Central District of California, a judge sided with the government. The plaintiffs have appealed and anticipate taking the matter to the Supreme Court.
The last group excluded by the IRS — people who died before the stimulus payment reached them — may not seem sympathetic. But they were included in the 2008 stimulus if they had filed taxes the previous year, and the IRS decided to err on the side of sympathy for surviving spouses.
“We know that surviving spouses have a really hard time," said Olson, the former National Taxpayer Advocate. “And you have the income cutoff anyway, so it's not like it's rich dead people. It's people who are struggling."
This time, according to a June Government Accountability Office report, IRS started out doing the same thing. But after reporters and members of Congress questioned why payments were going to decedents, the Treasury Department decided that they were illegitimate and posted on its frequently asked questions page that people who received checks that were for deceased relatives should return them.
To Gabriel Zucker, a public interest technology fellow at the New America Foundation who has studied the rollout of the stimulus payments, getting money to people who need it during an emergency depends on commitment and the resources necessary to fix problems as they inevitably arise.
“After that first round, I started to get the sense that they felt they had done a lot, which they had, and then wanted to move on with their lives," Zucker said. “That meant that if they did something that accidentally screwed something else up, there wasn't a ton of willingness to correct for it."
Longer term, however, Zucker thinks that improving stimulus programs may require bringing more people into the tax system — whether or not they owe taxes. The earned income tax credit program, a subsidy for people who don't make enough to pay income taxes, could be expanded to make it worth it for more people to file a return. That would allow the IRS to connect with more Americans automatically, rather than having to hunt them down whenever Congress decides to get cash in peoples' hands quickly.
Ultimately, it's a change in the IRS' mission toward redistribution, not just raising revenue. To facilitate easier transfers of cash, others have proposed connecting more people to the financial system through using post offices as public banks, skipping the IRS entirely.
“The IRS doesn't see its job as giving money to people," Zucker said. “It sees it as taking money from people."


alternet--2020-10-31--The stock market is not the economy

The stock market is not the economy

Whatever happens to the economy – jobs , wages , the hardships so many are facing – the stock market seems to be in a world of its own .
Why ?
The primary answer is simple .
Stock values roughly reflect profits , especially anticipated profits .
When profits are expected to rise , stock prices trend upward .
But that only raises a deeper question : How can profits be trending upward when jobs and wages are doing so badly ?
Because of a disconnect in the American economy that began way before the pandemic – about 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the main driver of profits and the stock market was economic growth .
When the economy grew , profits and the stock market rose in tandem .
It was a virtuous cycle : Demand for goods and services generated more jobs and higher wages , which in turn stoked demand for more goods and services .
But since the late 1980s , the main way corporations get profits and stock prices up has been to keep payrolls down .
Corporations have done whatever they can to increase profits by cutting jobs and wages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to `` right-to-work '' states , outsourced abroad , reclassified workers as independent contractors , and turned to labor-saving automation .
Prior to 1989 , economic growth accounted for most of the stock market 's gains .
Since then , most of the gains have come from money that would otherwise have gone into the pockets of workers .
Meanwhile , corporations have used their profits and also gone deep into debt to buy back shares of their own stock , thereby pumping up share prices and creating an artificial sugar-high for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rich even richer .
The richest 1 percent of American households own 50 percent of the value of stocks held by American households .
The richest 10 percent own 92 percent .
But it 's had the opposite effect for everyone else .
More and more of the total economy is going into profits and high stock prices benefiting those at the top , while less and less is going into worker wages and salaries .
America 's CEOs and billionaires are happy as ever , because more and more of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the prices of their stock portfolios .
Meanwhile , the Fed has taken on the debts many corporations generated when they borrowed in order to buy back their shares of stock – in effect bailing them out , even as millions of Americans continue to struggle .
So the next time you hear someone say the stock market is a reflection of the economy , tell them that 's rubbish !
The real economy is jobs and wages .

Whatever happens to the economy – jobs, wages, the hardships so many are facing – the stock market seems to be in a world of its own. Why?
The primary answer is simple. Stock values roughly reflect profits, especially anticipated profits. When profits are expected to rise, stock prices trend upward.
But that only raises a deeper question: How can profits be trending upward when jobs and wages are doing so badly?
Because of a disconnect in the American economy that began way before the pandemic – about 30 years ago.
Before the 1980s, the main driver of profits and the stock market was economic growth. When the economy grew, profits and the stock market rose in tandem. It was a virtuous cycle: Demand for goods and services generated more jobs and higher wages, which in turn stoked demand for more goods and services.
But since the late 1980s, the main way corporations get profits and stock prices up has been to keep payrolls down. Corporations have done whatever they can to increase profits by cutting jobs and wages. They've busted unions, moved to "right-to-work" states, outsourced abroad, reclassified workers as independent contractors, and turned to labor-saving automation.
Prior to 1989, economic growth accounted for most of the stock market's gains. Since then, most of the gains have come from money that would otherwise have gone into the pockets of workers.
Meanwhile, corporations have used their profits and also gone deep into debt to buy back shares of their own stock, thereby pumping up share prices and creating an artificial sugar-high for the stock market.
All this has made the rich even richer. The richest 1 percent of American households own 50 percent of the value of stocks held by American households. The richest 10 percent own 92 percent.
But it's had the opposite effect for everyone else. More and more of the total economy is going into profits and high stock prices benefiting those at the top, while less and less is going into worker wages and salaries.
America's CEOs and billionaires are happy as ever, because more and more of their earnings come from capital gains – increases in the prices of their stock portfolios.
Meanwhile, the Fed has taken on the debts many corporations generated when they borrowed in order to buy back their shares of stock – in effect bailing them out, even as millions of Americans continue to struggle.
So the next time you hear someone say the stock market is a reflection of the economy, tell them that's rubbish! The real economy is jobs and wages.


alternet--2020-10-31--'Banking for the People': Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez unveil bill to foster creation of public banks acr

'Banking for the People': Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez unveil bill to foster creation of public banks across US

`` It 's long past time to open doors for people who have been systematically shut out and provide a better option for those grappling with the costs of simply trying to participate in an economy they have every right to—but has been rigged against them . ''
That 's according to Rep. Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) , who along with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) and a handful of other progressives in Congress introduced legislation on Friday they say `` would provide a much-needed financial lifeline to states and municipalities , as well as unbanked and underbanked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dire straits by the Covid-19 pandemic . ''
Specifically , as a joint statement from the congresswomen explains , the Public Banking Act ( pdf ) would enable `` the creation of state and locally administered public banks by establishing the Public Bank Grant program administered by the secretary of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board which would provide grants for the formation , chartering , and capitalization of public banks . ''
`` We spent $ 30 trillion in the global crisis from 2007-2009 propping up financial institutions that held the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Only $ 8 trillion dollars has been committed thus far in the Covid-19 pandemic , '' Tlaib noted .
`` These banks have been , are , and will continue to depend on the public dollar .
It is time for this relationship to be reciprocated and have the banks work for the people and not solely privatized profits wreaking havoc on communities of color . ''
In addition to allowing the Treasury secretary and the Fed 's board to give grants to public banks for `` bank formation , capitalization , developing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covering unexpected losses , and more without the requirement to provide matching funds , '' the bill : • Allows the Federal Reserve to charter and grant membership to public banks , and in conjunction with the appropriate federal agencies , establish a separate regulatory scheme with respect to these .
• Establishes public banking incubator program to provide technical assistance to public member banks to develop technologies , practices , and data that promote public welfare .
• Establishes new liquidity and credit facilities at the Federal Reserve to provide direct federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their communities ; Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez argue that public banks not only would benefit city and state governments and aspiring entrepreneurs due to lower interest rates and fees , but also could result in broader community benefits by , for example , funding public infrastructure projects .
Ocasio-Cortez called their legislation `` monumental . ''
`` Public banks are uniquely able to address the economic inequality and structural racism exacerbated by the banking industry 's discriminatory policies and predatory practices , '' she said .
`` The creation of public banks will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to construct a myriad of public goods including affordable housing and local renewable energy projects .
Public banks empower states and municipalities to establish new channels of public investment to help solve systemic crises . ''
The other half of the Squad—Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley ( D-Mass . )
and Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) —and Reps. Jesús G. `` Chuy '' García ( D-Ill. ) , Pramila Jayapal ( D-Wash. ) , Al Green ( D-Texas ) , Bennie G. Thompson ( D-Miss . )
, Earl Blumenauer ( D-Ore. ) , Barbara @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Schakowsky ( D-Ill. ) are backing the bill , as are 29 outside groups .
Organizations supporting the measure include the California Public Banking Alliance ( CBPA ) , Take on Wall Street , Americans for Financial Reform , Beneficial State Foundation , Communications Workers of America , Friends of the Earth , Food & Water Action , Americans for Financial Reform , California Reinvestment Coalition , Center for Popular Democracy , Community Change , Farm Aid , Institute for Policy Studies , Jobs With Justice , NJ Citizen Action , Oil Change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's Action , Strong Economy for All , UNITE HERE , Working Families Party , Democracy Collaborative , ACRE , and Public Citizen .
Climate Justice Alliance policy coordinator Anthony Rogers-Wright expressed excitement that `` our values regarding the need for a rapid Fossil Fuel phaseout '' are represented in the bill , highlighting evidence that economically , `` Big Oil is in big trouble and the people do n't want the money they keep in their banks utilized to bailout or finance an industry that 's killing people and planet . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ McConnell explained that her group supports the Public Banking Act `` because public banks can create jobs and boost the local economy , save cities and states money , and lend counter-cyclically to blunt the impact of Wall Street booms and busts . ''
`` As we learned recently from the Paycheck Protection Program , when you pay big Wall Street banks to provide public goods , they inevitably reward themselves and their friends at the expense of white , Black , and brown working families , '' McConnell said , referencing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress ' last Covid-19 relief measure .
`` We deserve a financial system for working families , not the big banks . ''

"It's long past time to open doors for people who have been systematically shut out and provide a better option for those grappling with the costs of simply trying to participate in an economy they have every right to—but has been rigged against them."
That's according to Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who along with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and a handful of other progressives in Congress introduced legislation on Friday they say "would provide a much-needed financial lifeline to states and municipalities, as well as unbanked and underbanked residents, that have been left in dire straits by the Covid-19 pandemic."
Specifically, as a joint statement from the congresswomen explains, the Public Banking Act (pdf) would enable "the creation of state and locally administered public banks by establishing the Public Bank Grant program administered by the secretary of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board which would provide grants for the formation, chartering, and capitalization of public banks."
"We spent $30 trillion in the global crisis from 2007-2009 propping up financial institutions that held the country hostage for their reckless behavior. Only $8 trillion dollars has been committed thus far in the Covid-19 pandemic," Tlaib noted. "These banks have been, are, and will continue to depend on the public dollar. It is time for this relationship to be reciprocated and have the banks work for the people and not solely privatized profits wreaking havoc on communities of color."
In addition to allowing the Treasury secretary and the Fed's board to give grants to public banks for "bank formation, capitalization, developing financial market infrastructure, supporter operations, covering unexpected losses, and more without the requirement to provide matching funds," the bill:
Allows the Federal Reserve to charter and grant membership to public banks, and in conjunction with the appropriate federal agencies, establish a separate regulatory scheme with respect to these.
Establishes public banking incubator program to provide technical assistance to public member banks to develop technologies, practices, and data that promote public welfare.
Establishes new liquidity and credit facilities at the Federal Reserve to provide direct federal support to state and local public banks and their communities;
Prohibits investment in fossil fuel projects.
Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez argue that public banks not only would benefit city and state governments and aspiring entrepreneurs due to lower interest rates and fees, but also could result in broader community benefits by, for example, funding public infrastructure projects. Ocasio-Cortez called their legislation "monumental."
"Public banks are uniquely able to address the economic inequality and structural racism exacerbated by the banking industry's discriminatory policies and predatory practices," she said. "The creation of public banks will also facilitate the use of public resources to construct a myriad of public goods including affordable housing and local renewable energy projects. Public banks empower states and municipalities to establish new channels of public investment to help solve systemic crises."
The other half of the Squad—Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—and Reps. Jesús G. "Chuy" García (D-Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Al Green (D-Texas), Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) are backing the bill, as are 29 outside groups.
Organizations supporting the measure include the California Public Banking Alliance (CBPA), Take on Wall Street, Americans for Financial Reform, Beneficial State Foundation, Communications Workers of America, Friends of the Earth, Food & Water Action, Americans for Financial Reform, California Reinvestment Coalition, Center for Popular Democracy, Community Change, Farm Aid, Institute for Policy Studies, Jobs With Justice, NJ Citizen Action, Oil Change International, Oil Change International, People's Action, Strong Economy for All, UNITE HERE, Working Families Party, Democracy Collaborative, ACRE, and Public Citizen.
Climate Justice Alliance policy coordinator Anthony Rogers-Wright expressed excitement that "our values regarding the need for a rapid Fossil Fuel phaseout" are represented in the bill, highlighting evidence that economically, "Big Oil is in big trouble and the people don't want the money they keep in their banks utilized to bailout or finance an industry that's killing people and planet."
Take on Wall Street campaign director Porter McConnell explained that her group supports the Public Banking Act "because public banks can create jobs and boost the local economy, save cities and states money, and lend counter-cyclically to blunt the impact of Wall Street booms and busts."
"As we learned recently from the Paycheck Protection Program, when you pay big Wall Street banks to provide public goods, they inevitably reward themselves and their friends at the expense of white, Black, and brown working families," McConnell said, referencing the business loan program established in March by Congress' last Covid-19 relief measure. "We deserve a financial system for working families, not the big banks."