Critics and Congressional opponents of the American Recovery Plan (including two of Maine’s four-person delegation) apparently claim the included 2021 stimulus checks of $1,400 are too large, not related/targeted to the pandemic, and/or are not “targeted” to those who will use it “best.” Presumably, they feel they know better who exactly ought to be getting checks, and how much they need.
However, those of us eligible to receive checks will now have the freedom to decide ourselves how to “target” the use of the check. I believe this is a great way to quickly boost the economy. Recipient spending will spread out the money among many small businesses. Undoubtedly some recipients will use their checks to pay off debts, to stock up on food, to make delayed repairs or purchases, to help struggling family members, while others, if they decide they do not need this, may choose to donate it to charities of their choice. The charities in turn will spend the money.
Though these uses may not be directly connected to having had COVID-19 or to losing a job due to the pandemic, the expenditure of this money will certainly help keep others employed. We should all thank Sen. King and Congresswoman Pingree for their wisdom in passing this law, and for their confidence that those of us eligible for checks will make good spending decisions to improve our economy.
Lucinda E. White,
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less