The Senate Passed it

[ColleenSwerb]

A few minutes ago the Senate passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

I added the White House blog to my reader, and it's been interesting to follow along with what's been going on with our government.

[Darcy Baldwin]

Yep - sucks in a big way :(

[LenaGardner]

I've not been following it. Can someone give me the cliff's notes?

[ColleenSwerb]

Lots and lots and lots of money going to states in an effort to boost the economy and provide jobs. I believe there's also a tax cut involved.

[rochelle789]

Yep - sucks in a big way :(

It might suck in a big way to you, but I might have a chance at keeping my job now.

[Melissa Bennett]

Ya'll know there is stuff in there about your health care being affected too? Yep your doctor will now be "guided" on what all he can do for your care. Ugh!!

[scrapperjade]

Okay, I'm not up on US politics (I'm not even up on Canadian politics, lol), but why would this Act suck? Wouldn't putting money into the economy, saving people's jobs and lowering taxes be a good thing? I'm confused!

[Emmy]

Opinion is going to depend on how you view government - I am a "small" government person. Lower taxes and give people their own money back to spend - don't find ways to spend it for them - that's my basic viewpoint. This stimulus bill has in many ways been treated as a big spending spree by the dems in congress - there are items in it that are absolutely ridiculous and will in no way help our economy (funding going to STD awareness is one example).

There are of course other items in it that hopefully *will* help our economy so there's some good to it - it's just we will be paying for it for a very, very long time.

I have no idea how the act will affect me personally other than the fact that we might buy a house this year - even if we do benefit on that front, like I said, we'll be paying for it for a long, long time.

[rachaelsscraps]

What's that site that's keeps track of the US debt? Cuz the numbers just jumped up a lot! :blink:

[Stacey42]

To me it looks like an chance to help the economy in a realistic way became an opportunity to force in funding for everyone's pet projects that have gone ignored for the last 8 years. I think some things in the package will help. I think some will not help in a large enough way to offset the costs and I think some will not help at all.

What stimulates the economy is people having money to spend & then spending it, instead of sitting on it and hording canned goods. From what I have read money is not really going to enough people in enough amounts to help much on the 'havign money' side and you can't legislate consumer confidence. If the goverment mailed us all $1000 checks how many of us would go buy something new with it right now? I'm willing to bet most of us would either pay of a current debt or put it in the bank.

[scarletsierra]

There are nuggets of good things in that bill. And I truly, truly hope those nuggets outshine everything and really work for the American people

But sadly it's more about spending than anything, IMO. And not the kind of spending that I see realistically creating jobs and helping those who need it so much right now. It scares me a little just how big our gov't is becoming and just how much we the people entrust Congress to do what is best for us and make the right decisions and spend our money.

eta: The health care stuff that Melissa mentioned really makes me uncomfortable.

[rachaelsscraps]

To me it looks like an chance to help the economy in a realistic way became an opportunity to force in funding for everyone's pet projects that have gone ignored for the last 8 years. I think some things in the package will help. I think some will not help in a large enough way to offset the costs and I think some will not help at all.

What stimulates the economy is people having money to spend & then spending it, instead of sitting on it and hording canned goods. From what I have read money is not really going to enough people in enough amounts to help much on the 'havign money' side and you can't legislate consumer confidence. If the goverment mailed us all $1000 checks how many of us would go buy something new with it right now? I'm willing to bet most of us would either pay of a current debt or put it in the bank.

I agree with you. I know if I was given $1000 right now, I'd probably go buy a new laptop, though! (Mine doesn't charge anymore, and now my internet connections aren't, well, connecting- so I have to plug it into my cable modem. Really wireless, eh?! LOL!...)

Anyways, I'm not exactly sure what to think about the economy right now, I guess I agree with bits & pieces of both sides' views! :unsure:

[emilyscout]

Alls I know is that when i watched the little press conference the other night obama just reminded too much of william shatner when he talks. Seriously i couldn't get past it and listen to what he was actually saying.

[jessica31876]

awful thing in my opinion. I wrote letters and signed an online petition to show my position. All the spending in there that will not directly stimulate the economy (new cars for government workers, office funiture, sefe sex education) should have been enough IMO to keep it from passing. Now our kids kids will have a debt to pay off while we will all be long gone.

[Rae's World]

I absolutely believe that we will be "paying" for this in the end. And not just us but or children and their children. This money has to get repaid back somehow and guess how that is gonna happen?? taxes, and we will be paying them for a very very long time.

I am for small government also. who knows what is gonna happen in the long run. Some of the points in the bill are a little vague and even ridiculous. But it has passed and the world kept revolving.

[ColleenSwerb]

Our kids and grandkids were screwed no matter what, imo.

[my4boys]

Our kids and grandkids were screwed no matter what, imo.


AMEN to that Col, I can honestly tell you that my 11 year old is scared about growing up with this following him. That is a sad, sad fact :cursing:

[Traci Reed]

I wasn't for it or against it, as I didn't have the time to study it. I'm sure it had a bunch of pork barrel stuff that is "necessary" to get these things passed. The thought I find interesting is that everyone against it is up in arms about "our grandkids having to pay this off", but I'm sorry, our grandkids also have a multitrillion dollar debt to pay off from an endless war in the wrong country. At least some of this debt is an attempt to stimulate the economy, rather than drain it. Not that it makes it ok, but we can't just ignore the debt of the Bush presidency and go ape about this one just because it's from the Obama presidency, we should go ape about both if we feel the need to at all, LOL!

[cheltzey]

Here's the blog post I wrote before it was passed...
http://cheltzey.blogspot.com/2009/02/stimulus-by-any-other-name.html

[cheltzey]

I wasn't for it or against it, as I didn't have the time to study it. I'm sure it had a bunch of pork barrel stuff that is "necessary" to get these things passed. The thought I find interesting is that everyone against it is up in arms about "our grandkids having to pay this off", but I'm sorry, our grandkids also have a multitrillion dollar debt to pay off from an endless war in the wrong country. At least some of this debt is an attempt to stimulate the economy, rather than drain it. Not that it makes it ok, but we can't just ignore the debt of the Bush presidency and go ape about this one just because it's from the Obama presidency, we should go ape about both if we feel the need to at all, LOL!

I think many of those who are worried about excessive deficit spending (which is another ball of wax entirely from the national debt) were upset about the trillions spent on the war in Iraq, Republican or Democrat.

[switchwiz]

I know there's a lot of pork barrel stuff in the deal, but I sure would rather we all get some money to spend or save or whatever then to continue to give all these corporations billions so they don't go bankrupt which is something else we'll be paying for forever and none of that money ended up in our pockets!

[AmyM]

Yes money has been wasted and squandered in the past by Bush and many others. That doesn't give a blank check nor an excuse to make it worse. People like the sound of money coming to them, but do some ever stop to think where that money is coming from? It's on the backs of our children and grandchildren now. Or, coming at you with interest from places like China and Japan. Things like leashless dog parks and fattening up welfare benefits don't stimulate the economy. They stimulate the ego of our pathetic excuse of a congress and that's it. Fattening up corporations of course doesn't sound like a good thing to do, but those corporations are the ones who provide jobs. They are also the ones going overseas to avoid our ridiculously high tax policies. About tax cuts in the bill- I don't consider a one time check to be a tax cut. How about lower the tax rates on everyone and give us a federal tax holiday. That would immediately put money in people's pockets.....but oh no, that would be way too simple and government wouldn't get their slimey paws on as much. This is nothing but payback to the people who put Obama in office, plain and simple. Pet projects and check off the wish list. They're already admitting it will take at least a year to feel any effect. That should tell us something. Pay attention to how the stock market is responding to it. Mark my words, this will be the worst mess in American history, and that's all I'll say about that.

[ColleenSwerb]

It's not all pet projects and worthless spending though. Yes, there is always always always pork involved, and I'm not saying this bill has none. But there are also a lot of construction and infrastructure projects that are receiving aid. Yes, that's my field of work, so I admit I'm slightly biased, but those are the kind of projects that get money into the pockets of the blue collar folks. Which is where it needs to go.

Our kids and our grandkids were screwed a long time ago. This won't help that problem, but it certainly isn't the only cause of it either.

[AmyM]

Hey Col, since this is your line of work maybe you can answer it. Isn't road maintenance and things of that sort up to the states and already in their individual budgets (although lacking)? Plus, I'm thinking....it takes forever for the county to fix a pothole. Wonder how long it will take for any of those projects to get started. I don't think everything in it is crap, just 90% of it. LOL

[rochelle789]

It's not all pet projects and worthless spending though. Yes, there is always always always pork involved, and I'm not saying this bill has none. But there are also a lot of construction and infrastructure projects that are receiving aid. Yes, that's my field of work, so I admit I'm slightly biased, but those are the kind of projects that get money into the pockets of the blue collar folks. Which is where it needs to go.

Our kids and our grandkids were screwed a long time ago. This won't help that problem, but it certainly isn't the only cause of it either.

Thank you for posting this! The very one-sided tone that this thread had taken had begun to make me quite angry, considering I am one who may be directly affected by this. I work in higher ed and the money that is going to this state from the bill (probably about 3 billion to the state I work in) will be put toward infrastructure projects and education. People can go ahead and call that pork or wasteful all they want, but it will create and save jobs...potentially mine and thousands of others in this state alone.

[ColleenSwerb]

Here's the thing. The Infrastructure of this country is in SHAMBLES. I'm not joking even a little bit when I say that. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE, which I am a member of) has given the country's infrastructure a rating of C or lower for the past 8 years or so I believe. They issue a report card every 2 years. 2009's rating is a D for overall infrastructure. You can see it here (http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/).

Yes, states budget for things like maintenance of roadway structures, and the updating of roadways to meet federal codes. And yes, the state gets federal funding for certain projects or portions of projects. The problem is that those budgets get smaller and smaller every year (partly due to pork, partly due to the fact that the general population doesn't get it, so to satisfy their constituents the politicians they don't fight for it, plus the politicians have their own agendas). Instead of fixing 5 entire bridges that have serious problems, the state will patch up problems on 20 of them. Why? Because the politicians can then go back come election time and say hey! I got money for 5 projects, I'm awesome!

One situation that MD is facing, is that over the summer when gas prices were sky high, less people were driving their cars and buying gas. That meant less money coming in from tolls, less money coming in from the gas tax. It sounds like no big deal, but it was a HUGE dent in MD's expected budget. I'm sure that MD is not the only state that had such problems. The tax on gas hasn't increased at all since it was put into effect. It's a monetary value, not a percentage.

I'm not totally sure, but I believe President Obama is also planning to push a separate infrastructure stimulus package. That may have ended up rolled into this one, I'm not totally sure. But I know that since the end of last year, MD has started the wheels turning on many projects that have been put on the back burner due to lack of funding. Roads, bridges, street-scape projects, water and waste water improvements. All kinds of stuff that takes all kinds of construction workers, and will provide numerous opportunities for folks while also increasing the quality of the infrastructure in this country.

The theory is, that money put into actual PROJECTS will multiply into the economy several times (I think like 7 times). The government gives the state money, the state awards contracts to construction firms who can hire more people, those people get money and spend it, whatever they spend it on (tv's, cars, groceries, anything really) helps the businesses that they make purchases from, etc etc etc. That sort of spending is better than just straight giving it to people who will just end up saving it or paying off debt, which doesn't help the economy hardly at all.

I didn't mean to write a novel, lol! Sorry!

[Nettio]

What bothers me more than anything is that what passed through the Senate is a HUGE compromise and really most of the more worthwhile funding has been cut in favor of tax cuts which isn't going to help with job creation. The Republican party had eight years to be in charge and look where it got us. It's time for them to step back and stop insisting on fiscal policies that simply don't work. According to the Center for American Progress (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/02/job_creation_comparison.html):

"The Senate compromise recovery and reinvestment legislation provides for 12 to 15 percent fewer jobs created or saved than the House-passed Recovery and Reinvestment Act despite costing slightly more. The House-passed legislation creates or saves between 430,000 and 538,000 more jobs than the Senate compromise.

The consequences of this lower job creation go beyond the immediate impact of the recovery plan to the labor market. The recovery and reinvestment legislation as passed by the House was designed not just to create jobs through spending but also to put the economy on an upward trajectory where the private sector is once again creating jobs without the aid of intensive government intervention. The compromise necessitated by conservative influence in the Senate weakens the ability of the package to achieve that aim. ( … The greater job creation in the House bill is because the balance is more focused on investment programs than on less effective tax cuts.) " - This is essentially what Col is talking about with the projects vs giving people money.

For those of you who are so insistent that the stimulus is a bad idea, I really encourage you to take the time to read this column (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/opinion/14krugman.html) by Paul Krugman. He's a Nobel-Prize winning economist and I think he does a good job explaining what the purpose of the stimulus is and why spending is needed. It's from November but clearly it still applies for the situation today. I think everyone has gotten so caught up in the numbers that they've completely forgotten what is really at stake here. Based on what I've read, it seems that if something isn't done, the amount of debt left for your children will be the least of your worries. :(

[ColleenSwerb]

Thanks for posting that Lynnette. I'm gonna read it in the morning. I read the Krugman article back in November/December, but I want to see what the center has to say.

[meganmecrazy]

Ya'll know there is stuff in there about your health care being affected too? Yep your doctor will now be "guided" on what all he can do for your care. Ugh!!

YES, this is always a big discussion between my hubby and I and how against this we are. :( They are slowly working their way into fully taking over the health care bit. We are very worried.

[cheltzey]

The theory is, that money put into actual PROJECTS will multiply into the economy several times (I think like 7 times). The government gives the state money, the state awards contracts to construction firms who can hire more people, those people get money and spend it, whatever they spend it on (tv's, cars, groceries, anything really) helps the businesses that they make purchases from, etc etc etc. That sort of spending is better than just straight giving it to people who will just end up saving it or paying off debt, which doesn't help the economy hardly at all.

Col, I'm completely in favor of this. There is an appropriate place for fiscal policy, and infrastructure tends to be an excellent job creation engine. The National Endowment for the Arts, on the other hand, has never been known as an economic stimulator (no matter how much you believe in its aims).

As to the Krugman article, it's important to understand that this was written well in advance of the current bills, so it's not a piece in favor of the particular legisilation. Also, as with any other source, it is important to examine information for biases. All economists have them, so it's important to understand what they are. He makes some excellent points, and one of his best is this:
The policy response should be as well-crafted as possible, but time is of the essence. I think this is a standard against which the bill should be measured and, in my opinion, it fails to meet this criterion.

As to those concerned with red ink, it is wise economic policy to go into deficit spending during times of recession. As Col pointed out, revenues fall during difficult economic times, and forcing a balanced budget could lead to contractionary policies, which often deepen recessions. Many states who have balanced budget requirements written into their constitution are facing this exact problem.

[rochelle789]

Many states who have balanced budget requirements written into their constitution are facing this exact problem.

This is exactly the issue in the state I work in, and it's a huge, huge mess. So many jobs are going to be lost because the state is forced by law to balance its budget. The deficit is beyond comprehension.

[jessica31876]

I am not against the bill but the stuff added into the bill which is not going to stimulate the economy and is not in the best interest of the people they are supposed to be fighting so hard to get it passed for. If the money being spent was ALL going for creating jobs/keeping jobs and helping get us out of this recession it would be ok with me and a whole lot of other people but adding things like purchasing vehicles and office furniture is not going to help anyone but the government officials receiving these items. My thought on this is NOTHING should have been included in this economic stimulus bill UNLESS it directly helps American citizens and is going to somehow help keep jobs/create jobs or to add something to our economy which would bring us out of the recession.

[cheltzey]

Interesting analysis of the bill by Chicago School economists (this school of thought tends to be quite conservative):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123423402552366409.html

[Laura_A]

Ya'll know there is stuff in there about your health care being affected too? Yep your doctor will now be "guided" on what all he can do for your care. Ugh!!

IMO, it's just one step closer to Socialism.

You know what I've decided would be the best thing... as "never-gonna-happen" as it is... I think the Govt. should pay off everyone's bank loans. Actually cut a check in your name for the amt of your loan. Then, we'd have more $ to spend, people wouldn't lose their homes and the banks wouldn't need a bail out.

[ColleenSwerb]

Reading that article now Chels.

To say that the stimulus shouldn't have been passed unless there was NO pork, is a little unreasonable in my opinion. When was the last time ANYTHING in the government was done without adding pork?

I'm not saying that it's right to add pork, and I'm not saying that this stimulus is perfect, but pork is an inescapable part of government in this day in age. Yes, Obama wants to stop that by getting both parties to work together to come to compromises (without pork), but it can't happen over night. And with the economy in such dire straights as it is, we simply can't afford to wait around until that time comes before we try and do anything to fix this.

[Traci Reed]

Regarding the "government being able to dictate things to your doctor.."

Not True. (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/02/10/fnc-health-smear/)

[cheltzey]

Reading that article now Chels.

To say that the stimulus shouldn't have been passed unless there was NO pork, is a little unreasonable in my opinion. When was the last time ANYTHING in the government was done without adding pork?

I'm not saying that it's right to add pork, and I'm not saying that this stimulus is perfect, but pork is an inescapable part of government in this day in age. Yes, Obama wants to stop that by getting both parties to work together to come to compromises (without pork), but it can't happen over night. And with the economy in such dire straights as it is, we simply can't afford to wait around until that time comes before we try and do anything to fix this.

Col, the reason I like the article is that it tries to put aside all the rhetoric and emotion and look at it from a strictly academic POV. However, like I said, the lens they look through is always going to be slightly distorted.

[cheltzey]

Regarding the "government being able to dictate things to your doctor.."

Not True. (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/02/10/fnc-health-smear/)

Thanks for the link, T. Interesting how things get so twisted, isn't it?

[Melissa Bennett]

Interesting how both sides can twist it though. Since non of us have our hands on the actual bill I guess we really cannot say for sure what is in there. I think it is disturbing that we the American people are not made aware of all the little crap that they sneak into these bills. Just seems wrong in my opinion.

[ColleenSwerb]

This site has a listing by state of what's being funded by the stimulus:
Stimulus Watch (http://www.stimuluswatch.org/project/by_state)

[nun69]

I didn't read everything here and I don't even know much about what's going on since I haven't seen the news since Nov 30th!!! {well off and on}, but being in the military and serving in Kuwait, the best thing our gov't could do is pull us the hell out of this war that we have no reason to be fighting....just FYI, I make and extra $800 a month {tax free} for serving my country in a warzone...now don't get me wrong, I think everyone over here deserves that, but imagine when you multiply that number times 1000's not to mention the $$$ spent on supplies, vehicle contracts, jet fuel, etc....so my 2 cents, we may be able to help the economy a little more if the gov't decided that there where better places and uses for our tropps right now than in the Middle East...ok, that was my 2 cents :) I hope nobody is offended, but I just figured since I was in the military I could give my opinion about the war;)

[Traci Reed]

I didn't read everything here and I don't even know much about what's going on since I haven't seen the news since Nov 30th!!! {well off and on}, but being in the military and serving in Kuwait, the best thing our gov't could do is pull us the hell out of this war that we have no reason to be fighting....just FYI, I make and extra $800 a month {tax free} for serving my country in a warzone...now don't get me wrong, I think everyone over here deserves that, but imagine when you multiply that number times 1000's not to mention the $$$ spent on supplies, vehicle contracts, jet fuel, etc....so my 2 cents, we may be able to help the economy a little more if the gov't decided that there where better places and uses for our tropps right now than in the Middle East...ok, that was my 2 cents :) I hope nobody is offended, but I just figured since I was in the military I could give my opinion about the war;)

Haha, I have this same opinion but it's often not my place to state it :)

[nun69]

Haha, I have this same opinion but it's often not my place to state it :)

ok, well it's nice to know I am not the only one that feels this way;)

[ColleenSwerb]

But we can't just bring back thousands of troops at the drop of a hat either.

[Traci Reed]

Nah but we can bring em back pretty quickly if we tried

[Melissa Bennett]

As a military wife and vet myself, I really think we are long overdue for bringing back our troops. I agree the cost of this war is just to much in price and life. I also know after being a military wife for 17 years that there is many other areas they could fix and save money too. I cannot believe the absolute waste in money they do in the military.

[Nettio]

As a military wife and vet myself, I really think we are long overdue for bringing back our troops. I agree the cost of this war is just to much in price and life. I also know after being a military wife for 17 years that there is many other areas they could fix and save money too. I cannot believe the absolute waste in money they do in the military.

I was going to say the same thing. I think if the general public realized just how wasteful military spending is they'd be really appalled. It certainly surprised me and this is just over three years. I can just imagine what you've seen in 17 years.

[scarletsierra]

Troop withdrawal is inevitable. And I believe it should be, and will be, done responsibly. And as another military wife I'm with Melissa and Lynette on this.

About the medical stuff in the bill...I'm not so concerned that this is about the gov't mandating care decisions, etc. From what I understand the language is vague and potentially dangerous. That's what makes me uncomfortable. Not that the provisions couldn't be a good thing...it's just vague and to some people (who don't support universal health care) is evidence of socialized medicine on the horizon in the United States.

Chelsey and Traci thanks for the articles.

btw, total appropriations for the Iraq war over 6 years is less than this one stimulus bill. Heck even less than the previous bailout bill: cost of war (http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home). But that, of course does not include all peripheral impacts (and more important ones, imo like loss of life), etc. and some contend that none of those monies should ever have been spent, so take that into account. However, it does put spending by Congress into perspective.

The HUGE bailout package put forth by the Bush administration (which still has done nothing stimulate the banking industry, credit, the economy) and now this GInormous spending bill...that's a whole lot of money (which we don't have btw) being spent. Our money.

I'm just saying that there is a pattern of fiscal irresponsibility and the missue of our tax dollars by our government. The stakes are higher than ever right now, so I think it's okay for people to be concerned and not want this ramodded down their throats. This should be scrutinized IMO.

That's not to say, however, that there aren't good provisions in the bill. There are. But this doesn't have to be the politics of fear game (which liberals are just as good at as the conservatives, imo) of "we must pass this bill right this moment or a depression is imminent" sentiments flying around. It's not a choice between pass this bill and do nothing. It's a choice of passing the bill as is or improving and and passing a better one. Which, in the end, I think will happen. Because I'm an eternal optimist despite my better judgement. :)


FTR, I'm a former uber liberal ideologue turned independent with a streak of libertarianism, so this isn't remotely about partisanship for me. It's about active citizenship.

[Nettio]

Interesting analysis of the bill by Chicago School economists (this school of thought tends to be quite conservative):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123423402552366409.html

Thanks for that link, it was an interesting read. I definitely agree with a lot of the points they make.

[jessica31876]

ok here is a perfect example of something I do not think is necasary:

17 billion dollars being spent in Puerto Rico on some energy bill. Or suggested to be spent I suppose because from what I read on that site it says these are all just proposed spending not approved yet.

http://www.stimuluswatch.org/project/view/3349



This site has a listing by state of what's being funded by the stimulus:
Stimulus Watch (http://www.stimuluswatch.org/project/by_state)

[nun69]

But we can't just bring back thousands of troops at the drop of a hat either.

sure we can...why are we here in the first place? Iraq has already taken back the Green Zone and there are no more American Troops there....and tell me why we are in Kuwait?and being in the military for 18 years, I have seen what the gov't can spend it's money on....

[Nettio]

sure we can...why are we here in the first place? Iraq has already taken back the Green Zone and there are no more American Troops there....and tell me why we are in Kuwait?and being in the military for 18 years, I have seen what the gov't can spend it's money on....

Isn't Kuwait largely a staging ground for supplies, etc for Iraq? I know my DH was in Kuwait for a month before they came home loading up cargo ships.