He voted against 2 coronavirus relief bills. Rep. Andy Biggs may oppose the next one, too

Rep. Andy Biggs, the Arizona Republican who has gotten national attention in recent days for his votes against the two coronavirus relief bills in Congress, says he stands by those moves — and he has problems with a third package moving in the Senate.

Biggs remains troubled by the impact of the legislation on the national debt and worries that the intended aid could have devastating effects on small businesses.

He is no longer concerned that newly passed legislation puts the government on the hook for abortions and denies suggestions that homophobia played a role in his vote against the package.

Voting against both coronavirus aid bills, which passed by lopsided margins in the House and Senate with the support of President Donald Trump, has put Biggs in the familiar position of conservative legislative contrarian.

"You start moving into really kind of an alternative universe here when the government starts giving out all these paychecks like that," Biggs told The Arizona Republic Thursday. "Will it provide the stimulus that you think it's going to provide?

"We want to protect people and protect their livelihoods and their lives as much as we possibly can. But at the same time, we also want to make sure that whatever path we can get back on, that it's enduring. And how long before we get back to recovery?"

Biggs' more ponderous concerns have stood out at a time when his Republican colleagues — and Trump — have quickly moved past their misgivings to help pass aid the kind of debt-digging deals that GOP members balked at during the early months of the 2008-09 financial crisis.

One thing Biggs likely doesn't fear is political retribution for his positions. His Mesa-based 5th Congressional District is one of the more conservative ones in Arizona.

Through December, only one of three Democratic challengers, Joan Greene, had reported raising any money in their bid to unseat him. Greene, who lost to Biggs in 2018 by 19 percentage points, had $4,200 in cash compared to his $482,000.

The first coronavirus aid bill

On March 4, Biggs was one of only two members in the 435-seat House who voted against an $8.3 billion package that exceeded the $2.5 billion Trump initially sought.

"In true Washington, D.C., fashion, congressional appropriators turned the president’s reasonable $2.5 billion request into a bloated $8.3 billion package," Biggs said in a statement at the time. "By passing this larded-up bill, Congress again fails to wisely appropriate taxpayer dollars. ... Throwing money at a potentially serious issue does not alleviate the American people’s concerns. Nor does politicizing the issue to score points for future elections."

On Thursday, Biggs stood by that vote, saying some of the money wouldn't be spent until years from now, and some would go to foreign countries. But there also was a sense that the money had simply ballooned beyond what could be quickly used, he said.

"It did look to me like there was some attempts to kind of play with that figure by some people, as opposed to just saying this is what they say they need," Biggs said. "So I think of the top line was not good, either."

The second coronavirus aid bill

A week ago, the House overwhelmingly passed another, more far-reaching bill that required paid sick leave for some workers and free testing for the deadly coronavirus, among other things. Forty Republicans voted against it, including Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz.

Biggs shared much of Lesko's concerns that the legislation was rushed — it passed about 1 a.m. in Washington after GOP members said they had only minutes to scan the bill — and made unfair demands of small businesses.

Beyond that, though, Biggs said the coronavirus bills could add $2 trillion to the national debt, which is already approaching $24 trillion.

Biggs didn't express concern for the debt when he voted for the 2017 corporate tax cuts.

"When this bill is signed into law, we will see an even more robust economy," he said at the time. "We understand that the tax cuts in this legislation belong to our constituents. Our constituents are better equipped than the federal government to stimulate our economy with their hard-earned money."

In August, before the coronavirus pandemic began ravaging the economy, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the nation was on a path to trillion-dollar deficits for years to come, an event unprecedented in peacetime.

After he voted to reject the aid bill, Biggs discussed his problems with it in an interview with the conservative Family Research Council.

In that interview, Biggs complained about "two major anti-family, anti-life provisions" in the bill.

One of those was the lack of language specifically prohibiting the use of federal funds for abortions in most cases. He acknowledged that had been added to the bill that passed.

The other provision included coverage for paid sick leave for those in "committed relationships," an attack Biggs' critics said offered cover to homophobia.

"They've redefined family for the first time in a piece of federal legislation to include committed relationships. And the problem with that, of course, is it's really hard to define a committed relationship," Biggs said in the interview. "They've tried to. They put in, in my opinion, kind of an amorphous definition, but that leaves it wide open."

Biggs said Thursday that his problem was what he viewed as circular logic defining who is in such a relationship, not that it could apply to gay couples.

"From where I come from, which is a legal background, I looked at that and said that is probably one of the most tautological definitions you can get when you say a committed relationship is a committed relationship," he said. "That's where I think they really got me out of context."

Lucas Acosta, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, which advocates equality for the gay community, said that seems like a technical dodge.

"He's talking to far-right, extremist, anti-LGBTQ hate groups," Acosta said of the council, which the Southern Poverty Law Center described as specializing in "defaming gays and lesbians."

"I'm a little flabbergasted, really," Acosta said. "It's disgusting. We should be focusing on this national emergency right now."

A third coronavirus bill in the works

On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., unveiled the shape of a third, $1 trillion stimulus bill that many in the GOP could support. It includes provisions for direct cash payments to American adults, ranging from $600 to $1,200 each, depending on their income. Those earning more than $99,000 annually would not receive anything for themselves. The package also would provide $500 per child.

The Republican plan, which has already drawn Democratic criticism, also would provide bridge loans to small businesses worth up to $10 million.

Biggs suggested he's troubled by the latest GOP plan, too.

He is concerned the cash injection could spark inflation. And he fears the money will not find its way to the businesses that need the most help.

"Where are people going to spend it? Are they going to spend it at the places that are seeing the most immediate detriment? I'm talking small businesses. I'm talking about a bike shop or a small restaurant, or a flower shop or retail service industry.

"They're the ones that are really getting crushed. If you're working for Microsoft, you're not getting crushed. If you're working for a big company, you're not getting crushed. You're making some adjustments."

Reach the reporter Ronald J. Hansen at ronald.hansen@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-4493. Follow him on Twitter @ronaldjhansen.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.

Subscribe to our free political podcast, The Gaggle.