After Near Financial System Collapse The Senate GOP Risks A New Depression If More Trillions Aren't Made Available NOW

Not too many people, I warrant, would have been aware how close the financial markets came to perdition on March 16.  They'd not have been aware of a "liquidity panic" in the municipal bond and commercial paper (money market funds) arenas or that the Choe Volatility Index - known as Wall Street's 'fear gauge' - closed at its highest level on record: 82.69.  Nor would people - certainly not Janice or myself (with investments in money market funds) have been aware that on March 16 investors ceased to believe these funds were cash equivalents, i.e. liquid enough to function like checking accounts to help firms  manage payroll, pay office leases and move cash to finance daily operations.

We didn't know any of this until the WSJ lead story, 'The Day The Markets Seized Up;, appeared on the front page on May 21. To be sure, the information and graphs shook us to our core, as they ought to have any American invested to any degree in the financial system.   Basically, as the piece noted:

"Investors lost faith in Americas public infrastructure. As schools and universities shut down and airports and public transit services emptied out, the market began to question what had previously been considered gold-plated bets on the core institutions that make up community life in the country."

And so (ibid.):

"Terrified investors ditched municipal debt at fire sale prices, underwriters canceled billions of dollars worth of deals, and new borrowing stopped. There was less issuance in the week of March 16 than at any point since the 2008 financial crisis, or the 2001 terrorist attacks.... The liquidity panic quickly leaked into the stock market."

In other words, we came about this (   )  close to another credit freeze financial calamity. According to one money manager in an email to The Journal (ibid.):

"I don't think anyone has experienced anything more violent"

Perhaps the most important line in the whole piece appeared earlier on, in the continued discussion on page A10:

"A barrage of government programs has since pulled the system back from collapse."

Note, it pulled it back from collapse, but that doesn't mean the threat of collapse is expired. Not by a long shot.   The reason is that the tight -fisted GOP Senate is not prepared to pass anything more, whether in financial infusions to the states, or more infusions of cash into citizens' pockets. They expect people to either get by going back to work (hardly possible for three quarters of workers as noted in the Denver Post (May 24) - given most jobs are now service-related and workers not able to even pay rent or get adequate food.   We further have learned ('More Borrowers Fall Behind In Payments', May 21, p. B10):

"Millions of people are behind on their credit card and auto loan payments, the latest sign of pandemic financial  devastation.  Lenders in April had nearly 15 million credit cards in financial hardship programs."

And still,  despite this havoc, there is no more money coming in for people, no thanks to the GOP's austerity hawks.   This is risking yet another liquidity panic which will make the one on March 16 look like a walk in the park. Especially as people with no $$$ coming in are  "tapping credit cards and auto loan at record levels."  But...at some point that money has to be paid up or the credit-lending markets will themselves collapse, with ordinary citizens' bank accounts.

Other bad news emerged in the WSJ piece, 'Workers Face A Long Road Back To Normal', May 9-10, p. B14, noting how the climb back to normal will be "slow and painful".  Indeed, subsequent WSJ articles have pointedly noted how many millions of workers currently furloughed will not get hired back.  That means they cannot contribute to purchasing goods or services, i.e. to aggregate demand. Aggregate demand is composed of two parts: 1) demand generated by consumers for goods and services, and 2) the demand for investment goods. When the level of aggregate demand is high, both these components are generally equally high, and the levels of production and employment are high. On the other hand, when aggregate demand is low - or even one of the components (e.g. (1)) is very  low, then levels of production  plummet.


'Powell Urges Policy Makers To Spend More'  (WSJ, April 30, p. A2)  showed the Fed Chairman Jay Powell is terrified of another liquidity crisis erupting.  He likely suspects it will be triggered by a massive drop in aggregate demand, especially consumer spending which supports 70 percent of GDP.  But with no more cash infusion, how can ordinary (not rich) citizens contribute?  How can an economy based mostly on ordinary consumption thrive? Well, it can't! People can't just live on air!  That includes state employees, local government workers.  We know, for example ('State, Local Budget Woes Threaten Recovery', WSJ, p. A2 today):

"When those (state) workers are laid off they have to cut back on spending. That reduces the income of others in the economy, which amplifies the initial cut."

This, according to Gabriel Chodorow-Reich, an economist at Harvard University who estimates that "every dollar in cuts cost the overall economy $1.50 to $2.00."  Hence, the imperative of  a badly needed cash infusion to the states.

As I made clear in my May 4 post, we desperately need not just a $1, 200 one off payment to each American, but a universal basic income (UBI) of at least $2,000/ month for the next 6 months.  (As policy analyst Heather McGee noted on 'All In' last week). So despite the caterwauling and gaslighting from the Repukes, it is clear we need a massive infusion of at least $800 b to help the states, and possibly another $2 trillion more by the end of the fiscal year.  This despite the endless austerity whining of the likes of The Wall Street Journal (e.g. 'The Government Economy',  April 30, p. A14) who bellyache the states "contributed only 0.2% to  the CARES Act".  Well, duh! That's because THEY took the brunt of the lockdown hit ("economy put into the equivalent of a medical coma"), and also they have laws that require balanced budgets -  so must cut if spending exceeds a certain threshold. Also they have no latitude to print money like the Federal Reserve.  

But this is the gist of the Republican penny-pinching strategy which -  if it succeeds - will see the U.S. end up in a 2nd Great Depression, not just a bad recession.   In fact, while the austerity -minded Repubs have resisted calls for additional funding, citing added debt burdens,  Jay Powell pointed out (ibid.):

"This is not the time to act on these concerns. This is the time to use the great fiscal power of the United States to get through this with as little damage to the longer run productive capacity of the economy as possible."   

As I wrote in my May 4 post:

"It's incredible that a Scrooge like Mitch McConnell don't grasp this, and would rather put us into another Depression but there it is.  They would rather be chintzy now - especially with the states, local governments-  and pay ten to fifty times later to dig out from the carnage.   Which is why it's good we didn't have these losers in power after the credit meltdown in 2008."

Incredibly, the WSJ's op -ed writers-  like Phil Gramm and Michael Solon-  continue to peddle their rubbish that no more money is needed, e.g. ('More Stimulus Would Crush The Recovery',  WSJ, April 15, p. 17) .   

What is their solution?  It's  "rely on private capital and initiative and our free enterprise system".   In other words, let the loafers waiting for new handouts get off their butts and figure out - using "initiative" - ways to enhance their cash flow without depending on gov't handouts.  Else, "all this new government borrowing will consume the very oxygen a powerful recovery will need,"

Not to be outdone,  WSJ op-ed contributor John Cochrane offered up this gem ( 'How to Treat the Financial Symptoms of COVID-19') .just over a month ago:

"Loans are better than gifts. Rather than give each of us $1,000, allow us to borrow a fraction of last year's income from the Internal Revenue Service  and repay it when we file our taxes."

Fortunately, the Senate at the time had the sense it was born with and didn't pay attention to this nonsense.  It delivered the CARES Act with a $1,200 cash infusion for each person- no strings, no owing anyone-  or begging 'forgiveness' for loans to be repaid in huge lump sums.  Just as well given even with that infusion and the extra unemployment ($600/week) some "840,000 personal loans were in deferment or some other type of financial hardship program in April" - according to the May 21 WSJ piece on more borrowers falling behind.  So good to know cockeyed loans schemes like Cochrane's didn't add even more hardship borrowers.

The answer then is clearly not loans, or asking for "forgiveness" for such, nor raiding Social Security in a payroll tax cut, or any of the other dumb right wing solutions proffered - usually in the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal.  But that's not to say all the offerings were drivel. Standing out for its sanity and reason was William Galston's May 19 piece 'Heed Powell's Call For Fiscal Stimulus', e.g.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/heed-powells-call-for-fiscal-stimulus-11589927206


Galston makes a compelling case for more 'no strings' cash infusions, echoing Jay Powell's call for more fiscal support  for citizens and small businesses alike given that:

"demand will remain depressed and unemployment elevated well into 2021.  Many households will struggle to pay for food, shelter and medical care. And many small businesses will shut their doors permanently."


And what is the GOP's and Trump administration's brilliant response? Well, it's to "adopt a wait and see stance".  But see citizens without money can't "wait and see" about their next meals or keeping a roof over their heads.  They need the money now, and as Galston points out "even delay isn't cost free"

As I wrote before, the hesitation in coughing up more money is largely due to the GOP's anti -statism posture. They simply don't believe the government should be "doling out" free money "at taxpayers' expense".  Never mind those suffering and waiting in bread lines ARE taxpayers, last time I checked.   But the conservos want limits. They want set dates after which they don't give any more money, not one cent. As one WSJ editorial ('The Fiscal Stimulus Panic', p. A16, March 18) howled:

"The checks no doubt will be popular....but they won't come cheap, running at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars for the first round.  What happens if the pandemic lasts into the summer?  The clamor will be for another round and then another."
:
And then the "clamor" must be met, but which I tend to think of more in terms of need.   But for the WSJ editors and their stable of tightwad hacks, it's the clamor for more money that must be quashed.   The Reepos in the Senate then channel these austerity messages and act in kind.  Hence the latest twist ('Republicans Seek Alternatives To Jobless Benefits', WSJ, p. A4) where we learn the GOP savants want the increased unemployment benefits cut out ("it's making too many reluctant to return to work")  and instead replaced with a 'stipend' paying $150 less. This the brainchild of Sen. Rob Portman of Wisconsin.  

Meanwhile,  workers across the board are struggling to make ends meet, and pay their just debts.  Lenders, credit sources are also being squeezed given the CARES Act "allowed homeowners to suspend mortgage payments for up to a year, but provided no way to pay for this."  (WSJ, p. A1 today) Thus saddling lenders with the burden and setting the stage for a ginormous credit crunch.  To fix ideas - and perspectives (ibid.): "As of last week 4.5 million households had filed:" for such suspensions, "representing about $1.04 trillion of unpaid principal" - according to Black Night.  Meanwhile, "markets froze for s-called jumbo loans" which are too large for gov't baking.  (Jumbo loans would be theoretically allowed should homeowners need to pay back a year's worth of mortgage payments at once.)

Well, if there is another depression you know who to blame, given just the "unintended consequences" of what could happen in the mortgage-lending market. . Clue one: think of an elephant.

See Also:

Economic Policy | Jobs

The Greater Depression, 2020—

by P.M. Carpenter | May 22, 2020 - 7:07am | permalink

And:

Economic Policy

If the Federal Government Won’t Fund the States’ Emergency Needs, There is Another Solution

And:

Covid-19 | Economic Policy | Mitch McConnell | Republicans

Unrest Bubbling up among Republicans Who Have to Fight McConnell to Act Again on Covid-19

And:

Covid-19 | Government

If Covid-19 Teaches Us Anything, It's That Government Should Not and Cannot Be Run like a Business

If The Fed's Powell Is Ready To 'Print Trillions' To Help The States, Tightwad GOP Should Let Him!

Fed chairman Jay Powell, makes an excellent case for providing a safety net to states, as well as corporations.

"Congress seems to be at war with the states. Only $150 billion of its nearly $3 trillion coronavirus relief package – a mere 5% – has been allocated to the 50 states; and they are not allowed to use it where they need it most, to plug the holes in their budgets caused by the mandatory shutdown. On April 22, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he was opposed to additional federal aid to the states, and that his preference was to allow states to go bankrupt"- Ellen Brown, today, 'Crushing The States, Saving The Banks', smirkingchimp.com blog


'Powell Urges Policy Makers To Spend More'  (WSJ, April 30, p. A2)  shows that Fed Chairman Jerome ('Jay') Powell has a much deeper appreciation of the financial straits the nation is in than the Repuke bean counters, Scrooges and austerity clowns. Right now, the greatest imperative is to get money to state and local governments, which the earlier CARES act omitted.  Why infuse  more $$$ for the states and local governments? Well, because they embody the essence of what government is about.   I mean, what citizen in his or her right might wants to see schools, law enforcement, fire departments and utilities shut down - because of lack of funding?  That way madness lies.   

To fix ideas, as reported in The Denver Post (p. 1A,  5/2) , Colorado's state government is now planning some $228 million in spending cuts that could affect everything from police departments, to schools, to health clinics to correctional facilities and even Medicaid.   In Maryland, the state we used to live (before coming to Colo. in December,  2000) 90 days of shelter in place orders are forecast to blow a $3 billion hole in its $90 b annual budget.   That will mean severe cutting of vital services. Other states are having to do the same with no federal lifelines in the pipeline.   Do people in these states really want to do without police, fire depts. and schools?

But this is the gist of the Republican penny-pinching strategy which -  if it succeeds - will see the U.S. end up in a 2nd Great Depression, not just a bad recession.   In fact, while the austerity -minded Repubs have resisted calls for additional funding, citing added debt burdens,  Jay Powell pointed out (ibid.):

"This is not the time to act on these concerns. This is the time to use the great fiscal power of the United States to get through this with as little damage to the longer run productive capacity of the economy as possible."

It's incredible that the Scrooge clones like Mitch McConnell don't grasp this, and would rather put us into another Depression but there it is.  They would rather be chintzy now - especially with the states, local governments-  and pay ten to fifty times later to dig out from the carnage.   Which is why it's good we didn't have these losers in power after the credit meltdown in 2008.

Across the country now there are  massive budget shortfalls  in state and local governments arising from cratering tax revenues. 21 states will have to fill budget gaps of at least ten percent to avoid furloughs of police, firemen and other critical service workers.  And don't even think the existing federal benefits are enough. For example, just applying for and renewing the SNAP (food stamps) requires overcoming a host of bureaucratic hurdles.  And even the fraction who qualify must also rely on food banks given the average monthly SNAP benefit amounts to $134.

In truth, we desperately need not just a $1, 200 one off payment to each American, but a universal basic income (UBI) of at least $2,000/ month for the next 6 months.  (As policy analyst Heather McGee noted on 'All In' last week). So despite the caterwauling and gaslighting from the Repukes, it is clear we need a massive infusion of at least $800 b to help the states, and possibly another $2 trillion more by the end of the fiscal year.  This despite the endless austerity whining of the likes of The Wall Street Journal (e.g. 'The Government Economy',  April 30, p. A14) who bellyache the states "contributed only 0.2% to  the CARES Act".  Well, duh! That's because THEY took the brunt of the lockdown hit ("economy put into the equivalent of a medical coma"), and also they have laws that require balanced budgets -  so must cut if spending exceeds a certain threshold. Also they have no latitude to print money like the Federal Reserve.

Playing into the WSJ editors' hands, Moscow Mitch and his sidekick in stupidity, Rick Scott, blame many blue states for "mismanagement" of their money to explain the predicament and having to cut services, furlough state employees. That is bollocks.  As  NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo  has acidly observed (according to Joe Conason), New York pays $116 billion more than it gets back annually, while Kentucky, the deadbeat home of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, gets $148 billion more than it pays each year. By that reckoning, New York has kicked in far more over the past few decades than any of the states whose Republican leaders criticize supposed liberal profligacy.

McConnell, meanwhile, doesn't get the dire straits states are in could lead to a true Depression era, and collapse of remaining demand.   The goober with the mouth of a drunken Guppy blabbed:

"We're not interested in borrowing money from future generations to send down to states to help them with bad decisions they've made in the past, unrelated to the coronavirus."

But this is horse manure. As economist Paul Krugman pointed out Friday on Morning Joe , there is no "borrowing from future generations" since we are  borrowing  internally and in our own currency - not from outside creditors like the IMF or other nations. The truth is there is almost no limit to what can be borrowed given we are borrowing  from ourselves, and also interest rates are effectively zero.   Other nations like Great Britain and Japan have done it, and the U.S. can do the same. As Krugman has recently  written in the WaPo:

"Deficit obsession was deeply destructive in the years that followed the global financial crisis, helping conservatives push for austerity measures that held back economic recovery for years." 

And on 'Morning Joe' last week Prof. Krugman made it clear deficit spending was the primary way to alleviate hardship for the 30 million now unemployed, as well as the states.  As he told Joe Scarborough, who mentioned his abiding concern over the deficit for 25 years and asked why we shouldn't be concerned now:  

"If  you ask what is the future burden on the budget by the borrowing we're doing now, it's negligible, a rounding error.  It's just not going to matter.   Yeah, the headline numbers will be large and debt as a percentage of GDP will be as larger or larger than during World War II.  But everything we know about advanced nations that borrow in their own currency - like Great Britain and Japan - shows they are able to carry very high debt loads without crisis.  Even when interest rates aren't as low as they are now they are consistently below the growth rate of the economy.  So the debt will erode over time relative to GDP so long as you aren't totally irresponsible.   

Yes, there must be some limit but looking at the historical record it's very hard to find it. Look at Japan, its debt is 200 percent of GDP and no problems.  We came out of World War Two with debt at 100 percent of GDP and which everyone thought was terrible, but it turned out to be no problem at all.  And by the way we never paid that debt back, we just grew out of it.  Britain had debt that was 270 percent of GDP and they grew out of it too, after a few years down to 50 percent of GDP.

If there is an upper limit it should be so far from where we are that it shouldn't  bear on our policy decisions now."

The  responses to deficit worries given above also comport with what Krugman wrote for the Guardian not long ago:

In such an economy (with zero interest rates) the government does everyone a service by running deficits and giving frustrated savers a chance to put their money to work. Nor does this borrowing compete with private investment. An economy where interest rates cannot go any lower is an economy awash in desired saving with no place to go, and deficit spending that expands the economy is, if anything, likely to lead to higher private investment than would otherwise materialize...  

Why does deficit obsession and pandering to austerity work, say in the public debate sphere? Krugman again:

"Part of the answer is that politicians were catering to a public that doesn’t understand the rationale for deficit spending, that tends to think of the government budget via analogies with family finances."


The point Krugman is making is that while family finances are limited by the family income, and hence a family cannot spend more than it earns (unless it uses credit cards and runs up debt and a greater likelihood of delinquency), the federal gov't can print as much money as it needs to. Yep, debt is generated but in its own currency.  Also the debtor here is also the creditor so there's no problem. But the family has to answer to outside banks, credit card issuers, collectors etc.  So the family debtors are not the same as the creditors.   Nor can the family just print money to pay off its outside obligations, whether an auto loan, mortgage or medical bill.


Bottom line? If we measured national debt and deficits in the standard ways other nations do, i.e. to external  nations, or agencies like the IMF (like Barbados, when it needs loans)  there wouldn't be  half the kerfuffle about it.  Rather than wasting time fretting over an increase in the national debt that amounts to a "rounding error" we need to help the states and 30 m suffering citizens get the money they need.  And in the process help the whole nation avoid an economic calamity.  

All the Fed needs is the green light from congress (namely the GOP run Senate), since it cannot lend or provide money to states on its own, only to businesses. 

   See also:

Economic Policy | Mitch McConnell

As McConnell Tries to Hold Aid to States and Cities Hostage, Mass Layoffs of Public Employees Begin

Excerpt:

"People like having their garbage collected, their roads plowed, and their 911 calls answered. They want their cities to function. They like their kids' teachers. They know all these people in their communities. That's the fire Mitch McConnell is playing with, and you can bet more than one vulnerable Republican senator recognizes that."

And:

Economic Policy

Republicans Are Indulging in a Nasty Gambit — but They Won’t like the Final Endgame

Barbaric Wisconsin GOP Forces Primary Voters To Make Deadly Choice - Can We Now Agree They Have The Moral Compass Of Nazis?

Voters in my hometown of Milwaukee - waiting to vote while the nation is in the grip of a pandemic.   All the Repukes who ordered this atrocity ought to be hung, drawn and quartered. Then the parts tossed into a bonfire.

"I have to come down here to put my life on the line to vote!" - Voter in Milwaukee at one of only 5 open polling stations

"Essentially the Wisconsin Republican Party decided that any deaths that might occur from this enterprise - holding an election in the middle of a pandemic - will have been worth it. "  - Chris Hayes, on 'All In' last night

Ok, let's get our heads around this, and why I assert the Wisconsin Republican party has the moral compass of Nazis.  They literally forced an open, in person primary election yesterday - on a day when 2,000 Americans died in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.   If that isn't enough to seal the deal then consider that Milwaukee (where the image above was captured) is currently the epicenter of the pandemic in Wisconsin - and was only able to open 5 polling places as result. This for a population of 600,00 that usually has at least 180 polling places open. 

As a native born son of Beer City, this was enough to make me puke, especially when common sense and even rudimentary intelligence, screamed out for mail ballots in these parlous times.  But we know the Reeps are firmly opposed to mail voting because they are convinced its prohibition (or limitation) helps them.  I.e. if an ongoing illness takes out the Big Bad Blue (read Lib) cities then what happens to Repub vote totals state wide? Well, they believe they will increase in the rural burgs and farm villages - making it easy to hold unearned power.  Thus, making those people in Milwaukee stand in line to vote is a perverse way for the WI  Reepo-Nazis to get more power. 

As we watched  these Wisconsin voters  lined up  (all sporting face masks)  to go to the polls on Tuesday, Janice summed up the situation in her own inimitable way:  "These Republicans are VERMIN! Making people either risk their lives or lose their voting rights!" I replied, "Actually, I believe that is unfair to the vermin of the planet. The truth is the Repukes have now proven themselves worse than vermin. They are offshoots of the very COVID-19 virus inhabiting bat shit."

The ungodly, disgusting scenes played out after a stunning 24-hour period in which the state’s governor (Tony Evers)  tried to cancel in-person voting because of the public health risk.  In late March Evers issued an executive order instructing people to stay at home. This was justified given there is such a severe shortage of poll workers that Evers asked the national guard to step in.  At that time, indeed, a mail ballot option could have been enacted - but the 'pukes resisted - knowing they had a Reeptard Supreme Court seat to fill.  (This is the point today's WSJ op -ed on 'Wisconsin Confusion'  missed totally.) So  the GOP strong arm tactics made voters risk their lives - hence ensuring lower turnout.  The final tally will almost certainly preserve the Reep advantage of 4-2  on the Wisconsin SC.

 Anyone applauding Evers sanity would soon be disappointed as he was overruled by the state  Supreme Court  composed of 4 Repuke slimeballs and 2 Dems.   I call the Repukes slimeballs because only a slimeball would knowingly force state voters to expose themselves to such infection risk with COVID-19, as well as risk spreading it to others.

Any hope the U.S. Supreme Court would counter this insanity was short -lived. The Court-  made of  5 conservo slimeballs -  weighed in hours before the polls opened to rubber stamp the decision of the original  (Wisconsin) slimeballs.

No surprise then that even though the Democratic race between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders is winding down, the Wisconsin contest has exploded in controversy. It is both the most significant battle so far between Republicans and Democrats over the right to vote in 2020 and a chaotic scramble to protect both the vote and public health.  By all rights this ought to come back to bite Trump and his Reeptardo cult big time in November.

Last week, 111 jurisdictions reported not having enough poll workers to staff even one voting location. Jurisdictions are significantly limiting where people can vote. Milwaukee, which usually has 180 poll sites, will now have just five. Long lines formed on Tuesday at polling locations after polls opened, prompting fears that the election could represent a serious public health risk in the face of the virus.

The lack of polling locations in Milwaukee was particularly notable because nearly 70% of African Americans in Wisconsin live in the city. Madison, which has less than half of Milwaukee’s population, had 66 polling locations open.

The Wisconsin elections commission has declined to project turnout, but it is expected to be low. Democrats say Republicans are banking on low turnout to help Daniel Kelly, a conservative justice on the state supreme court, hold on to his seat. Wisconsin election officials will not publicly release the results of the election until 13 April, following instructions from a federal court order.

No surprise Republicans have resisted calls to mail a ballot to every voter and ease restrictions on mail-in voting .  But despite their hysteria (and Trump's) that mail in voting risks "cheating" there is zero evidence to support that wacko claim. Indeed, we here in Colorado have been using it for years.  It is a rational way to circumvent many voting problems including frail elderly unable to get out in person, or illness, or workers unable to take a day off  to vote.  In the time of pandemic for which we've no inkling of the duration, it makes eminent sense.  Hence, given such a sane and sensible option, the choice to force citizens to expose themselves to infection and death is to act with the moral fiber of a Nazi.

Now that we can agree the Wisconsin Repukes are little better than Nazis in moral terms, we can also acknowledge the absurdity of their stance based on the actions of Robin Vos, the Republican speaker of the Wisconsin assembly.  Vos  served as a poll worker on Tuesday and was caught on a video  telling people it was “incredibly safe to go out”.  But the little maggot moron didn't process  the sheer irony of his BS given he was dressed head-to-toe in protective gear, undermining his moron message.

Currently, as noted in a recent WSJ piece (March 28-29, p. A5, 'States Weigh Expansion of Vote by Mail') "all states allow some voters to cast mail ballots, but a third of states apply conditions for residents to use that method."   In order to ensure fairness in the general election those conditions need to be removed, despite what the DOE-Turd said about "Dems winning too easily if we allow mail voting."  No, dope, if you don't allow mail voting in a parlous time such as we're in you are taking away the citizens' franchise - and that is downright unconstitutional.  Besides, we already know the pandemic has already caused some states to delay primary voting (e.g. Ohio).  This can't happen for the general election for which the date is mandated under federal  law.

It is clear to me that the Democrats will have to fight like junkyard dogs in the coming months to be sure a good portion of the $400m set aside for elections in the CARES act is set aside for mail ballots.  

See also:

Election Integrity | Elections | Republicans

Republicans Admit They Lose When Elections are Fair and Free

 

And:

Wisconsin is the worst-case scenario for voting in a pandemic

And:

2020 Elections | Election Integrity

Wisconsin’s Unconscionable Sham

And:

Dying to Vote in Wisconsin (And a Warning for November)