The pandemic is promising months of stormy weather ahead. Yet leaders in Congress are poised to throw out the nation’s umbrellas.

Senate Republicans are now preparing to unveil a fifth coronavirus relief bill with limited or no additional state aid and reduced unemployment benefits. That’s despite a steady drumbeat of warnings from economists and advocates who say scaling back federal pandemic relief will have deleterious and long-lasting effects on vulnerable residents and the economy.

The relatively jobs-rich D.C. region is not immune.

More than 600,000 laid-off workers in D.C., Maryland and Virginia rely on the federal unemployment benefits that will expire this week. Courts in Virginia are beginning to hear eviction cases after a statewide eviction ban ran out, and Maryland is on track to resume eviction proceedings, too.

In the meantime, states and the District are losing millions in tax revenue during the economic crisis, leading to belt-tightening on the local level. Failure to prop up state and local governments will deepen the economic calamity, policymakers say, as leaders are forced to slash services that more and more people rely on.

What’s more, cutting relief now could lead to higher costs later. Homelessness could rise 40 to 45% by the end of this year based on unemployment projections. D.C. alone could see 2,500 new households experiencing homelessness by the end of 2020, per current estimates.

Such an increase would have ripple effects, too, says advocacy manager Jesse Rabinowitz with the nonprofit Miriam’s Kitchen. It would worsen the health crisis, further entrench systemic poverty and strain already insufficient government resources.

“Medical costs, frequent trips to the emergency room [stemming from] health conditions that would be prevented if people had housing — those things are really expensive,” Rabinowitz says.

Amber Harding, an attorney with the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, says it makes sense to think of legislative remedies in medical terms.

“Preventive care costs less than emergency care,” Harding says. “It’s the same for housing and homelessness.”

Top monetary policymakers have brought similar messages to Congress, warning of a sustained downturn if the federal government doesn’t prop up state and local governments. Both Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and former Chair Ben Bernanke have stressed the need for aggressive relief to preserve jobs, maintain public services and keep dollars circulating through the economy.

“Providing that help is in everyone’s interest,” Bernanke wrote in an op-ed for the New York Times.

Powell made similar remarks in testimony before both chambers of Congress last month, saying the U.S. economy will be better off if furloughed workers are able to stay in their homes and pay their bills.

“It would be a concern if Congress were to pull back on the support that it’s providing too quickly,” Powell said.

That advice was brushed off by Republican Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, who advised the Fed chair to “stick to monetary policy.”

Some leaders — including Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan and Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam — have said lifting stay-at-home orders and reopening businesses even as the virus spreads will help shore up jobs and stabilize the economy. But research suggests that approach will fail as long as consumers — particularly the wealthy — continue to feel unsafe going out and spending money.

Health officials and economists have said a more effective long-term approach would be to pay people to stay home, allowing them to cover housing expenses, purchase essentials and reduce their exposure to the virus.

Many economists say it may be equally important to target aid at lower-income residents, and not only because they need the most help. Middle-income Washingtonians — many of whom may receive another $1,200 stimulus check in the next round of coronavirus aid — are more likely than low-income residents to put that money in the bank, defeating the purpose of the payments.

“The relief measures most effective at boosting the economy are those that put money into the hands of struggling families — because they are most likely to spend the funds rather than save them,” says a recent report from the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

That view is echoed by advocates for the D.C. region’s poorest residents.

“These people are going to spend that money instantly. Not because they’re spendthrifts, but because that’s what people who have no income do,” says George Jones, CEO of safety net organization Bread for the City. “They go and buy groceries. Maybe they buy the shoes their kids have been needing. They gas up their car.”

But Jones and other advocates are unimpressed by city and state efforts to assist the most vulnerable.

D.C. Council members recently opted against raising taxes on high-income residents, which could have helped fund rent assistance for tenants facing eviction and other social services that have become more urgent during the crisis.

“Governments need to take their heads out of the sand and stop thinking somehow this will magically get better,” Jones says. “Not investing proactively in the emergency response that’s going to be required is short-sighted.”

The District — which received less coronavirus aid than any U.S. state, including less-populous Wyoming — continues to push Congress for additional relief while local leaders have been forced to approve millions in budget cuts. It would cost the District around $5.2 million to cover one month of rent for the city’s neediest residents, according to a recent analysis from the Brookings Institution. But the cost of housing thousands of newly homeless residents could exceed that price tag.

In Maryland, Gov. Larry Hogan has directed $30 million in federal funds to rent relief and support for residents of state-financed housing. But with an estimated 356,408 Marylanders at risk of eviction by the end of September, they money isn’t likely to go far enough, advocates say.

“$30 million of assistance only scratches the surface,” said tenant advocates with the coalition Renters United Maryland.

The progressive Public Justice Center and others have urged Hogan to direct millions more in federal funds to rent assistance to stave off a spike in homelessness, which could accelerate spread of the virus and strain state and local safety nets.

Progressive activists in Virginia have also pressed Gov. Ralph Northam to allocate at least $1 billion to rent relief. To date, the governor has dedicated $50 million to eviction prevention, but critics say the money has been slow to arrive. Courts in Virginia resumed hearing eviction cases in recent weeks after the governor declined to request another statewide stay on evictions last month. Attorneys with the Virginia Poverty Law Center and Legal Aid say the combination of resumed hearings and insufficient rent assistance is certain to lead to a tidal wave of evictions.

In the meantime, local safety net organizations have sounded the alarm about the growing strain on their services.

In Fairfax County, the nonprofit Cornerstones has seen a 200% increase in families visiting its food pantry, according to CEO Kerrie Wilson. At affordable housing communities the organization operates, more than a third of tenants couldn’t pay their rent in May or June.

“That number is going to get bigger as unemployment benefits run out,” Wilson says. “If we don’t address getting money to people who need it most, this is going to get much worse before it gets better.”

Bread for the City CEO George Jones says demand for food assistance has shot up since the pandemic began. Prior to March, his organization provided groceries to about 5,000 households a month. Since then, that number has soared to as many as 5,000 households per week.

Amber Harding with the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless says more federal funds would certainly help strengthen the city’s safety net. But until those funds arrive — if they ever do — she says lawmakers must find ways to raise revenue and prioritize services that will help prevent much deeper problems later on.

“There’s a tendency in a recession to buckle down and tighten belts,” Harding says. “But you can’t tighten some people’s belts any further.”