The Wall Street Journal reports that Congress is getting closer to a new relief package, but state and local funding and liability protections are sticking points.

“There are still some issues that are outstanding and it’s no secret generally speaking state and local and liability have always been the difficult issues,” said Rep. Tom Reed (R., N.Y.), co-chairman of the Problem Solvers Caucus, a bipartisan group of 50 House lawmakers, which endorsed the $908 billion proposal. “That’s where we stand right now. I think we can get there.” . . .

[Texas Senator John] Cornyn said he suggested in a Monday night meeting leaving out both controversial items, but that his suggestion “went over like a lead balloon.”

The $908 billion includes $160 billion for state and local governments, but it’s unclear how that funding would be distributed if it is included in the final package.

Members of the bipartisan group have said their formula is expected to look similar to a framework put forward earlier by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R., La.), who helped write the new proposal, and Robert Menendez (D., N.J.). It would divvy up the funding based on population size, each state’s relative share of the nation’s infection rate and each state’s share of the total revenue loss this year. State and local governments would be prohibited from using the money on unfunded liabilities or pensions.

Jared Walczak of the Tax Foundation has estimated that, depending on the distribution formula, Washington could receive $3.5 billion to $3.9 billion. Washington’s current state budget already balances. If Congress approves more funding that could be used for general expenses, it would give legislators more options for the 2021–23 budget, and it would help them address any future revenue losses or higher pandemic-related spending needs.