Byron York’s Daily Memo: Coronavirus aid: Is there any amount of money that is too much to spend

Virus aid: Is $2 trillion enough? $3 trillion? $4 trillion? There is unanimous, or virtually unanimous, agreement in Congress that the government had to throw vast sums of money at the coronavirus crisis. The number of people left suddenly unemployed is staggering; they need a lot of help under unique circumstances. But after a small assistance bill — about $100 billion — Congress has now passed a $2.2 trillion bill and a $484 billion bill. There’s talk of more. Joe Biden says he wants a stimulus “a hell of a lot bigger” than $2 trillion. So the question: Is there any amount of money that is too much to spend? Is it time to tap the brakes? After all, people in Washington used to get the vapors about a $1 trillion deficit. Is double or triple that — or even worse — OK?

“The American people did not invite this virus, and we did not ask for it, so Congress enacted the largest relief effort in history,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy told me. “It’s our responsibility to our citizens that this effort is executed efficiently and with accountability. This pandemic should not be used by Democrats to push for an endless socialist wishlist, or to make up for fiscal mistakes that were committed before this virus came to our shores.”

That means Republicans will start asking more questions of the next bill. “We had no choice — to not do it would have been fatal,” says a senior House Republican of the spending bills. “But this is money we don’t have, and to risk seizing the entire economy is fatal.” What is unclear now is how much downward pressure Republicans will exert on the next spending bill. There’s no doubt some members feel the time has come to start trying.

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

Barack Obama, anti-lockdown hero. As many Americans pass six weeks of stay-at-home orders, a growing school of thought is questioning the efficacy of lockdowns. Yes, practice social distancing. Be careful. And yes, wash your hands thoroughly and often. But shut down so much business? Maybe not. Check out this interview with Stanford Medical School scientist John Ioannidis. And the Twitter feed of former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, a leading lockdown skeptic. Even Slate magazine, a reliable voice on the left, says it’s time to get out. And then there is former President Barack Obama, who ignored the advice of what one Twitter voice called the roll-up-in-a-ball crowd to play a (perfectly legal) round of golf in Virginia Saturday. It was a beautiful day in the Washington area, and a lot of people were out, walking all around town and driving at near-normal traffic levels in the suburbs. (Yes, me, too.) You won’t see pictures of it accompanied by disapproving comments like the Florida beaches. But people, even former presidents, are starting to return to normal around the nation’s capital.

Michael Flynn ‘completely exonerated’? Watch this week for something to happen in the Michael Flynn case. Lot of rumblings from the latest court proceedings.

Call him Congressman Pushback. Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw has made a big splash in a little more than a year in Washington, and now he’s taking on a new role as debunker of some of the ugliest accusations directed at President Trump in the coronavirus crisis. Crenshaw, a decorated veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, took on Bill Maher about allegations Trump wasted time that could have been used to save lives. He also confronted the accusation that the president has “blood on his hands.” So I asked him why he has stepped forward.

“My role is not to defend the president — it’s to defend the truth,” Crenshaw told me. The congressman has made a series of videos called “Here’s the truth,” in which he debunks this or that misleading or false story that’s going around Washington. Now, he’s going after “a false narrative that’s spreading like wildfire amongst our media and especially the Democrat pundits and politicians.”

But aren’t some of the accusations kind of fringe-y? Aren’t some so out there that a congressman might not want to get involved with them? “I don’t really agree that they’re fringe-y unless you consider the Speaker of the House to be on the fringe — and you might, politically speaking,” Crenshaw said. “The reality is that Nancy Pelosi is the leader of the Democrat Party. She’s been quoted saying, ‘As the president fiddles, people are dying.’ When she was asked by Jake Tapper if Trump’s downplaying of the crisis has cost American lives, she responded very clearly, ‘Yes, I am. I am saying that.’ You’ve got NBC’s Chuck Todd asking Biden if Trump has blood on his hands. Joe Biden at least shied away from saying absolutely yes, but why is it even being asked? Why is this phrase ‘blood on his hands’ being used so much? These are not fringe Twitter users. When I make these kind of arguments, I never reference fringe Twitter users that are anonymous people. I always reference leading journalists for leading publications, and politicians. I think that’s the fair way to do it. And there’s a long list.”

Crenshaw says he has heard from the White House about his work — last week, the president re-tweeted one of Crenshaw’s videos with the comment “BRILLIANT, A MUST WATCH!” They appreciate the help, Crenshaw told me, since “they’re under fire from all directions, which is, frankly, normally the case.” Now, look for him to keep doing it. “I think as Republicans we often have a lot of truth on our side,” Crenshaw said, “and all we need to do is express it correctly. That’s just what I try to do.”