Anyone interested in the "Stimulus Bill" ?

Be my guest: click here and weep

There's some good stuff in there, also some crap. I do have one question - $1.1 billion to expand Early Head Start programs - there was no Head Start when I was a toddler.....how did I ever manage to get through high school, college and post grad work without having a "Head Start"???

Wendy
Bolsa Chica SB

I'm glad Obama already put my check in the mail

Wendy, good stuff or not, there isn't one item in ten that will stimulate anything but more votes for the "ins" and deeper debt.

Lou (onaquest) said:

Wendy, good stuff or not, there isn't one item in ten that will stimulate anything but more votes for the "ins" and deeper debt.

Click to expand...

\\

Very true unfortunately.  Even our children didn't have a Head Start program and they are very succesfull.  Does this expensive need for a head start program in any way reflect kids are slower now.  I think not but maybe somebody thinks so.

Being an educator, I am glad to see some of the funds headed in that direction.  However, there is a lot of red tape in accessing many of these programs and, while No Child Left Behind touts "research-based practices," some research indicates some federal programs (like the "Reading First" grant program) decrease learning!  I am hopeful that the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) funding can go a long way to improving what we're able to do with kids in those areas.

I too see a lot of good stuff in there.. as well as some .. Shall we say "Not so good"

however what you are seeing there is nothing new  this is "how Washinton D.C. Works"

It is rapidly becoming what I call a "Barnacle Bill"

You see, Some senator or representative introduces a very good bill, this bill will address a serious need or right a serious wrong, but then senator blow hard, well he's got a pet project so he purposes an amendment,and senator die-hard has one too, and senator clanbborn, and senator Paid-for and senator.........

Well you get the picture.. Lots of amendments (Barnacles) get attached to the bill and what was once good and pure and necessry goes down from the drag.

The lack of line by line veto is almost criminal IMHO. 

Ron,

And you expect the new Pres would use this line item veto in the bill his admin wrote?  ??? :

It's all good. I support my president who is at least trying to do something about the economy in the toilet. Much better than some other people I won't mention.

seilerbird said:

It's all good. I support my president who is at least trying to do something about the economy in the toilet. Much better than some other people I won't mention.

Click to expand...

And just what did you see in there that's good for you? or me?

OH, I forgot, it's all good for you.........

Like Rush said......PORKULUS! 

I support the effort if not the execution. 

Since we're offering suggestions:

Having looked at the problem in some depth and having read several economists theories, it appears to me that the fundamental underlying causation of the issue is property values.  Without a "bottom" to housing prices, the "unwinding" of highly leverage financial institutions will continue no matter what TARP does.  In order to get to the bottom of the housing pricing trough, people have to have buying power (borrowing power) and the belief that real estate assets are priced at their value to stimulate sales and stop prices falling.  Their in lies the rub.

Until something is done to stem the tide of foreclosures, nothing will prop up housing values and prices will continue to tumble causing more write-offs at banks, causing less lending, causing less spending, causing more lay-offs, causing less spending, etc.  It is a never ending negative feedback loop pushing housing prices down.

In order to stop that cycle, it would seem prudent (not fair, but prudent) that the Fed step in and guarantee the distressed loans, but force the banks to refinance anyone with reasonable credit at 80% of the current depressed value of the house at a 30 year fixed rate, and guarantee the loan.  This would dramatically reduce the number of foreclosures, the lender only has to write down the incremental value of the loan, not the whole thing, and the "value" of the home is effectively stabilized around the guaranteed loan value.  Obviously this is not fair for those of us who are not is a position to need foreclosure assistance, and it effectively helps those who made risky decisions, but in the long run it stabilizes the rest of the market values and keeps people in their homes and with more money in their pocket, spending more, and that would stimulate economic growth.  The trade off would be that if the fed forces a loan refinance for the distressed asset, the bank that wrote down the loan gets a stake in the equity of the home at the future sale to make up for the loss and so the homeowner doesn't unfairly gain if the value of the house goes up.

That is how I would spend $800B.

I a lot of pet projects in there - everybody gets at least $40-50M for their favorite deal. And I see a lot of appropriations in there that sound like regular budget items, e.g. Army/Air Force/Navy/Marine operation and construction.  But any money spent, no matter where and how, gets into the economy generates jobs for people who spend their income on other things and...  In that sense this is surely a stimulant.

But I am disappointed not see funds ear marked for things like highway & bridge maintenance/replacement. What happened to Obama's promise to use the stimulus funds to upgrade our infrastructure? Of course, that was Obama talking and this list if from the Senate, which is not well known for following a presidential lead.

And the House version is quite different. The full text of the House bill can be seen here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/24/house-stimulus-bill-full_n_160569.html

Someone asked what's good about the list in the bill I will cite SOME of the lines and add comments

$198 million in school lunch funding
and
$500 million for special WIC supplemental nutrition program

A properly fed child has the ability to learn better than one that is starving, and unhalthy

$200 million in farm disaster assistance funds
and
$28 million for emergency farm loans
and
$100 million in grants for "aquaculture producers" hit by high feed costs in 2008

Means more food at lower prices for us all.. A good thing if you need to eat on occasion

$650 million for addition Digital-to-Analog Converter Box coupons
The program ran out of money.. Personally I'd like to see the mandatory convert repealed however.

$200 million to develop a nationwide wireless network for federal law enforcement
This one is pure pork.. Why not just use AT&T

$440 million in State and Local law enforcement grants

In tough times we need better law enforcement.. And many LE agencies have seriously cut back citing budget issues.  My own retirement was hastened by budget cutting (I was a police dispatcher) These next two apply as well

$150 million for rural law enforcement

$50 million in aid to combat Internet Crimes Against Children

-

Several billion in assorted Defense and military spending.. Does not belong here, deserves it's own bill

In fact several lines deserve bills of their own

I could continue... Some of the stuff should be settled otherwise

For example funds for electricity development and reliability.. Back in what, the 1960's when Niagra went off line and took most of the eastern US with it... They promised new procedures that would insure it never happened again.

It did, in 2003

I think the power companies should be funding that, And the power companies should be sued to pay for it too.  NOT the feds

seilerbird said:

It's all good. I support my president who is at least trying to do something about the economy in the toilet. Much better than some other people I won't mention.

Click to expand...

There is nothing our present President, or any President for that matter, can due to control our economy except do away with the Fed. Ever since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, it's the international bankers through the Federal Reserve that control our economy, not the U.S government. Anything the gov does will only work if it is financially beneficial to the Federal Reserve bankers.

I agree with Gary that a lot of this looked like regular budget items rather than a special stimulus package. But things like construction will stimulate at least some parts of the economy.

As for the housing problem, does anyone remember when we bought houses to live in, not as investments that we planned on selling in 5 years when their value went up?

As for a line-item veto, do you really want the president to have that much control over bills passed by the congress?

Wendy
Bolsa Chica SB

Wendy said:

As for a line-item veto, do you really want the president to have that much control over bills passed by the congress?

Click to expand...

I think it would be better than what we have now.  Everybody scrambling to attach their favorite project or earmark to a need legislation.

$650 million for addition Digital-to-Analog Converter Box coupons
The program ran out of money..

Click to expand...

Yeah, but the government estimates there are 5.5 million homes that still "aren't prepared' for the changeover. Now at $40/converter, that works out to $220M. So why do we need $650M?  Does it cost that much to hand out money? [It might, given the renowned  government efficiency]. And just what does that "stimulate"?  The converter factories won't sell any more converters that they would otherwise cause the people have to buy them anyway. So basically it just leaves a few more dollars in the pockets of those peole who don't have a converter yet. Better than nothing, but not much of a stimulant for the economy.

Ditto for school lunches. It's a "good thing" to aid the poor, but it doesn't do a whole lot for the economy.

For those who would like to read an economist evaluation of the stimulus bill, check this summary: Stimulus?

It seems to me that the most conservative or liberal person could understand this.

Richard