Wednesday, February 4, 2009

What's at stake

Is the President finally getting a backbone on this stimulus thing? Given his recent speech, I think he might be. The way I see it, he tried to play nice with the Republicans (see my earlier post) and what did they do? They all voted no, which is pretty much a big slap in the face! Well, today it seems he's finally putting them in their place...
In the last few days, we've seen proposals arise from some in Congress that you may not have read but you'd be very familiar with because you've been hearing them for the last 10 years, maybe longer. They're rooted in the idea that tax cuts alone can solve all our problems; that government doesn't have a role to play; that half-measures and tinkering are somehow enough; that we can afford to ignore our most fundamental economic challenges -- the crushing cost of health care, the inadequate state of so many of our schools, our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

So let me be clear: Those ideas have been tested, and they have failed. They've taken us from surpluses to an annual deficit of over a trillion dollars, and they've brought our economy to a halt. And that's precisely what the election we just had was all about. The American people have rendered their judgment. And now is the time to move forward, not back. Now is the time for action.

So while our lawmakers are taking their sweet old time as our economy burns, let's take a look at a few meaningful things in this bill that are being held up with their pissing contest:
  • $142 billion for a middle-class tax cut
  • $47 billion to extend unemployment benefits
  • $16 billion to expand food stamps
  • $17 billion in one-time payments to low-income Americans
  • $26 billion to expand access to health care
  • $87 billion to help states pay for Medicaid
  • $24 billion to modernized health information technology
  • $46 billion to fix bridges and roads
  • $80 billion to improve public education
  • $19 billion for school construction
  • $14 billion to make college more affordable
  • $32 billion for clean energy
There's much more. All together, the Obama plan will create or save an estimated 3 to 4 million jobs and keep our nation"s economy from sliding into a lengthy and severe recession. So what is the real reason the GOP is so opposed to this stimulus package? I think the Huffington Post summed it up best...
The GOP does not want Obama or America to move forward, what else can they run on in 4 years?
Why didn't a single House Republican vote for the recovery package? One high-ranking congressional aide opined to the Huffington Post, "It wasn't because of family planning funds or preserving the National Mall or whatever Rush Limbaugh and Drudge's talking points were. It's because this legislation is the clearest repudiation of Bush and Congressional Republican economic policies yet."

It is, in a way, a public relations coup that the stimulus has been boiled down to, as one Hill Democrat puts it, "funding for the arts, funding for the mall, and funding to fight AIDS." Those aspects of the legislation, as the White House points out, constitute a mere 7/100th of one percent of the entire package.
What about jobs being created and long-term savings by the $6.7 billion for energy-efficient renovations and repairs to federal buildings...

"I don't think people realize what a big deal weatherizing the federal buildings would be. The government wastes millions of dollars every year on buildings that are old and need to be weatherized," said a high-ranking Democratic aide. "We have windows that leak and have bad insulation. These are buildings all over the country and we are going to go in there, weatherize them, create jobs and save money down the road."

The Republican ideology and the Bush years have left this country's economy in such a state of collapse that most economists say we have to think big. This is true on a broad level, where the middle-class saw its purchasing power drastically diminished during the past 8 years as their income remained stagnant while productivity and profits grew! The economic growth of the Bush years was funded by debt on the backs of the middle-class. So what if this bill props up dormant federal programs? The policies of the past eight years were hardly stimulative.
"We cannot move forward without understanding what created this crisis," said Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel. "This recovery package is the beginning of a longer-term investment in America's middle class, our small businesses, health care, renewable energy technologies and a new infrastructure to reinvigorate our economy so that American workers and businesses can compete and win in the 21st Century."

7 comments:

  1. I think the Dems have been hitting the pipe a little too much lately.
    CLICK HERE TO SEE

    ReplyDelete
  2. While I do agree the Congress needs to stimulate the economy, not by wasteful spending. If they want to waste 800Billion maybe Barack should pick a fight with Iran and get some military contracts flowing again. Just kidding. Get the private sector back to work. Dont give the money to states like California, so they can pay for workers not to get furghload for 2 whole days a month. Why should I pay for a UNION based job worker keep his or her job, isn't that one of the reason for being in the union. If states get stimulus money they will just set their state tax dollars aside that would have been used for those projects and just use fed money. As far as the banks and their TARP money, they know its going to get worse cause their still leveraged to much even with the fed money, so their hanging onto it cause they already got obligations coming due this year and they know their in deep do do. I say let the top 20 to 40 banks fail in the US and just pick up the pieces afterwards. Panic and Kaos is already here so do it quickly I say.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ive come to the conclusion that Chuck Schumer is partially responsible for the magnitude of the banking situation. He started the whole ball rolling with his ,in my mind an illegal memo in regard to Indy Macs solvency. Now allot of senators are privy to this info, so why do you think he was a sloppy little man and let it leak out.When they all new Fanny and Freddie Mac were in the same boat, and even questioned (Barney Frank)about it 2 months after(July). I cant imagine all the brokerage houses panicked at the same time to create the situation on this YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMu1mFao3w .But I do believe Paulson and Bush pumped the money in cause of this. But Bush did it out of necessity and Paulson did it for other reasons. Cause that money market run that day was just a shot over the bow by whom?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Your wrong when you say Republican idealogy, it was Bush and the Republican Congress at that time acting like a compasionate bleeding heart liberal that left us with this defecit and the republicans that didnt act like they should, and now are realizing there error of thier ways. So Mr. Rangel is an expert now-SPENDING got us in this SPENDING will get us out of this. Lets compare the unemployment is approx. 8% now and was approx 8% in 1980-82. PANIC vs. NO PANIC. This R Emmanuals Crisis to push this new welfare entitlement society piece of crap bill. OH lets see also January consumer spending up. You leave this recesion heal its self with yes tax cuts all around and 11 months you got real growth. Of course according to Mr. John Kerry he says we the private sector does not know what to do with our own money only government can spend it wisely, isn't that what got us in this situaution.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Closing comments; the stimulus bill has passed with the help of Pennsylvanias shameless Arlen Specter, A Republican only in name. Here's a thought on the Judd Gregg Commerce withdrawl. Obama needed a respected Republican in there to do the Census in 2010, so when they realign the representatives using approximate standards instead proper procedures he could use him a republican as cover, but Gregg new his political career would be ruined after that of course, hence the withdrawl. These next 4 years will be as clean as they come, total transparency. I wonder if Obama will wait the 5 days before he signs this bill, as promised on the campaign trail. I'm sure he will, cause that will give the Senators enough time to read the bill for the first time. I wonder what the next fight in Congress will be? Fairness Doctrine, Gun Control,

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey Karen, Reagan in the early 80's had one thing in his economic arsenal to help combat the recession he took over from Carter that Obama doesn't have. That would be the Federal Reserve Prime Interest Rate. Reagan started with a very high rate that he drastically reduced to get help get things moving. Obama is starting with a rate that is almost zero, not much you can do with that!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was doing some research and stumbled across some intersting stuff. first check this sight out.
    http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/gold101.html
    I was intrigued by this statement in there.(We know that gold was overvalued at least up to 1940 because the world was converting gold into dollars as fast as it could. We also know that gold was undervalued after 1952 because dollars were now being redeemed for gold at a rapid pace.)
    I then came across this sight.
    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/01/14/did-the-new-deal-help/
    and this quote(What did end the Great Depression? Romer argues that another FDR policy — doubling the fixed exchange rate for the dollar relative to gold — did the trick, though the New Dealers seem to have lucked into that result rather than planned it. The rate change worked as a monetary stimulus, inducing large gold flows into the United States, where they could now buy twice as many dollars. That buttressed bank deposits and increased bank willingness to lend, encouraging investment.)

    interesting stuff but dont know if any of it really did have an impact. i guess evrybody has thier own theory.

    ReplyDelete