In the United States, many families have been affected economically by the Covid-19 pandemic. Because of the virus, countless people have lost their jobs, leaving them without a source of income. This has proved detrimental to those who live paycheck to paycheck and need every cent to afford basic commodities. On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Safety (CARES) Act was passed to mitigate the health and economic impacts of Covid-19— the legislation included a $1,200 direct payment and expanded unemployment benefits. Nine months later, on December 27, 2020, Congress passed a second Covid-19 relief bill. However, this stimulus package was underwhelming compared to the CARES Act.

Costing a hefty $900 billion, the December relief package offered unemployment benefits, tax adjustments, and a $600 stimulus check for eligible Americans. Since its announcement, many have criticized the stimulus check as an inadequate solution. They argue that the spending in this bill, like the $10 million given to gender programs in Pakistan and $125 million for Egyptian economic development, should have been reallocated to a more substantial stimulus check. While these critics are correct in arguing that $600 is not enough for financial compensation, their criticism of the bill’s areas of spending stems from a misconception— one that highlights an even greater problem with this relief package.

A vital detail omitted by many when discussing the Covid-19 package is that it was a section of a larger omnibus bill (a bill proposing multiple pieces of legislation that would normally be separate). Along with the $900 billion relief, the bill included $1.4 trillion in 2021 congressional appropriations, which are a part of the US’ annual spending budget. Thus, the foreign spending on Pakistan and Egypt in this bill are actually a part of that annual budget and completely separate from Covid-19 relief spending. With this in mind, Congress could not have simply reallocated funds from foreign spending to Covid-19 relief when they are two separate entities in an overarching omnibus bill. 

There is no doubt that the inclusion of Covid-19 aid in this omnibus bill inhibited room for compromise between Democrats and Republicans. By placing the relief package in the same bill as congressional appropriations, Republicans and Democrats were automatically inclined to pass the bill; after all, a vote against the bill was a vote against aid to the American people. This encouraged both parties to sneak their own spending goals into the bill. Moreover, the bill’s authors rushed to pass the bill before an imminent government shutdown. While President Trump signed a stopgap extension to keep Congress in session for another week, it is doubtful that any congressman or woman had enough time to fully read through the proposals of the 5,593-page bill.

Had the Covid-19 relief stood as its own piece of legislation, Congress would have had more room to compromise: disagreement on funding would not have been tied to the other sections of the omnibus bill. This would have almost guaranteed more stimulus money for the American people, as both parties have expressed that $600 of stimulus money per family is insufficient. Additionally, congressmen and women would have been able to thoroughly read a separate bill concerning Congress’ 2021 appropriations, as Covid-19 relief would not have been used as an excuse to rush its passage.

Even though the $600 stimulus package has already been passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump, the pandemic is far from over. With Covid-19 cases steadily increasing, future relief bills are likely to arise— the upcoming Biden administration is already considering a third stimulus check. Should the American people need another relief package to keep them afloat, Congress needs to place the American people first. By separating Covid-19 relief from other forms of spending, we can finally prioritize the safety and security of the American people over partisan political interests.