Earlier this year, the federal government worked across party lines to pass a historic economic-relief bill. By most measures, it worked: Concerns about a wave of bankruptcies and permanently high unemployment have more or less receded.

Despite the lockdowns, personal incomes soared in the second quarter, cushioning household finances and avoiding a wave of defaults. While business-assistance programs such as PPP had flaws, they largely succeeded in mitigating the long-term damage of the pandemic: Commercial-bankruptcy filings have fallen below their pre-pandemic trend, and the vast majority of business closures during the lockdowns have proven to be temporary.

Now, the CARES Act has expired. An appropriately tailored follow-on bill โ€” with small-business assistance, funding for testing and tracing, limited unemployment benefits, and state and local relief designed solely to plug fiscal holes created by the pandemic โ€” would tide us over until a vaccine or therapeutic were widely available. Yet it seems unlikely that Washington will produce one.

The House Democratsโ€™ $2.2 trillion spending package allocates $500 billion to states and cities directly and an additional $225 billion to state and local public-school systems โ€” five times the amount of revenue lost due to COVID-19. By refusing to negotiate a more reasonable level of state and local assistance, and advancing a proposal to lift the limit on the SALT deduction, House speaker Nancy Pelosi is putting her high-earning constituents ahead of working Americans.

For his part, President Trump inexplicably decided to walk away from the negotiations last Monday, only to reverse course in a tweet mere hours later. His ham-handed tack only sowed confusion. The White House ultimately proposed a $1.8 trillion bill that includes enhanced unemployment benefits, checks to households, and various forms of assistance to businesses. Some portions of the bill โ€” such as its expansion of Obamacare subsidies and sizable state and local aid โ€” are ill-considered, but the White House is in a negotiation, and one where it doesnโ€™t have much leverage.

The House speaker called the White House proposal โ€œinsufficient,โ€ claiming that the president โ€œhas not taken the war against the virus seriously.โ€ In fact, the administrationโ€™s plan includes an ample $175 billion for testing, tracing, and vaccine programs. The real disagreement comes down to state and local funding, with Democrats taking advantage of the pandemic to attempt a bailout of profligate blue states.

Rather than simply seize on that issue, GOP senators have broadly opposed coronavirus-relief spending. A critical mass of Senate Republicans has come out against the White House proposal because it would add too much to the deficit. While the federal debt remains a long-term concern, it shouldnโ€™t foreclose economic assistance during an unprecedented public-health emergency. No less so because fiscal inaction would, according to Goldman Sachs Research, cut fourth-quarter economic growth in half, reducing long-run tax revenues and exacerbating the debt issue. The protracted economic damage of widespread business closures and high unemployment far outweighs the cost of additional spending, especially at a time of near-zero interest rates.

All of this said, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnellโ€™s idea of simply passing what can be agreed on for now delivers urgent aid, and is preferable to the alternative.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic disruption are far from over. Washington should act like it.