Dan Feehan's argument that big corporations are getting priority over small businesses in the Paycheck Protection Program's payout disbursement is misconstrued. Although there is some validity to this argument, one has to consider why this was the outcome.

It is crucial to consider that about a month ago there was a bipartisan bill in the process of being drafted in the Senate. It was two pages and around 20 lines — very short. It simply stated that Congress was going to continue to fund the program in an effort to support companies both large and small.

However, in the eleventh hour, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the congressional Democrats threatened to stop the bill in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives. She then muscled all the Senate Democrats to rescind their original support of the bill. Instead of simply adding more money, they wanted to add policy changes to entitlements and set aside funding for research into racial inequities in medical responses to the current pandemic.

The simple matter is that they don't belong in a bill intended to protect and aid small businesses.

By demanding these policy changes, it makes the bailout controversial.

When there is contention in Congress, there needs to be debates. When debates are being held, large corporations with deep pocketbooks will use lobbying firms to influence politicians on both sides to put things they want into the law.

Making small bills that are uncontroversial in nature cuts down on the time these giant firms have to get their way.

Feehan will certainly struggle to find any support in the rural southern Minnesota district if he continues to side with people in his party like Pelosi.

Dianne Schmidt

Mankato

React to this story:

React to this story:

1
0
0
0
0

Recommended for you