There's news that Gavin Newsom -- facing recall -- and the state legislature are proposing to use some $7 billion of the $26 billion in federal stimulus cash it received under President Joe Biden to pay back rent owed by thousands of "low-income" California families. (I use quotes because you can earn almost $150,000 per year in San Francisco and still qualify.)

No doubt people are glad to have the relief -- and landlords will be glad to get the money -- but there are also many questions here.

One is about fairness. Theoretically, taxpayers in other states are subsidizing rent in California. Is that what Congress knew it would be doing when it passed the "COVID relief"?

Of course, the money is just being borrowed, or printed, so perhaps taxpayers elsewhere won't feel the pinch. And other states also have a surplus (because it turns out they didn't need "relief" as badly as Biden and the Democrats said they did.) But California itself has almost $400 billion in debt -- the highest of any state. Shouldn't there be some plan to use part of the money to pay that down?

There are also other questions. The state has crumbling infrastructure and a glaring homeless problem. Are these going to be addressed, too? Maybe there is so much cash that the state can spend whatever is needed on these other problems as well?

If money grows on trees, why didn't we try this before? What about inflation? Or incentives?

Gavin Newsom faces a recall, which explains some of the sudden generosity. Do we want to allow politicians to buy votes in this way? Maybe so, if it is for the public benefit?

All interesting questions, which are -- of course -- not really being asked. Curiously, San Diego reports that it has hundreds millions of dollars in unclaimed money that was supposed to help people with rent relief -- even before the new proposed spending.

Maybe people like doing things for themselves, if they can?

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2021/06/22/california-to-use-federal-money-to-pay-all-back-rent-for-low-income-residents/