needed injection of cash for a great many people - but not all as you point out. Trying to 'parse' the worthy from the un-worthy is a significant challenge which could hold up the entire program, or add more administrative cost than necessary. In some people's mind it's better to err on the side of ensuring none of the truly worthy get overlooked, even if some of the funds go to those that don't need it.
The "they will spend it" segment was a notation that the $$ doled out, for the large part, wouldn't be 'squirreled away', but rather would return immediately to the economy...not a bad thing, since those funds would 'buy stuff' and help keep jobs, etc...a fine point, I admit...the prior paragraph is the crux of my comments. Also, note that there is precedence with FEMA for this kind of payout...it's just the amount and volume that's different.