House passes Obama economic stimulus plan President: 'Perilous moment' requires swift action to kick-start economy
updated 1 hour ago WASHINGTON - In a swift victory for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House approved a historically huge $819 billion stimulus bill Wednesday night with spending increases and tax cuts at the heart of the young administration's plan to revive a badly ailing economy.
The vote was 244-188, with Republicans unanimous in opposition despite Obama's pleas for bipartisan support. Eleven Democrats voted against the measure, while no Republicans supported it.
"We don't have a moment to spare," Obama declared at the White House as congressional allies hastened to do his bidding in the face of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.
Story continues below ↓ advertisement | your ad here
The vote sent the bill to the Senate, where debate could begin as early as Monday on a companion measure already taking shape. Democratic leaders have pledged to have legislation ready for Obama's signature by mid-February.
A mere eight days after Inauguration Day, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday's events heralded a new era. "The ship of state is difficult to turn," said the California Democrat. "But that is what we must do. That is what President Obama called us to do in his inaugural address."
Unemployment at highest level With unemployment at its highest level in a quarter-century, the banking industry wobbling despite the infusion of staggering sums of bailout money and states struggling with budget crises, Democrats said the legislation was desperately needed.
"Another week that we delay is another 100,000 or more people unemployed. I don't think we want that on our consciences," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the leading architects of the legislation.
Roll call vote All Republicans voted against President Barack Obama's spending plan. Of the Democrats, 11 voted against the measure. Among them: Allen Boyd, D-Fla., Bobby Bright, D-Ala., Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind., Parker Griffith, D-Ala., Paul Kanjorski, D-Penn., Frank M. Kratovil, D-Md., Walt Minnick, D-Idaho, John E. Peterson, D-Penn., Heath Shuler, D-N.C., and Gene Taylor, D-Miss.
Republicans said the bill was short on tax cuts and contained too much spending, much of it wasteful and unlikely to help laid-off Americans.
The party's leader, Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, said the measure "won't create many jobs, but it will create plenty of programs and projects through slow-moving government spending." A GOP alternative, comprised almost entirely of tax cuts, was defeated, 266-170, moments before the final vote.
On the final vote, the legislation drew overwhelming support among Democrats while all but a few Republicans opposed it.
How much you want to bet that someone says it's because of one of the hits he took when he was in the NFL? They'll blame him voting against it due to the fact that they knew it was going to pass, just the people in the district didn't want it to be passed...sort of like election time here in Schenectady County.
I received this through email and thought this would be the perfect place to post it:
"This year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment.
This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format:
Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment? A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.
Q. Where will the government get this money? A. From taxpayers.
Q. So the government is giving me back my own money? A. Only a smidgen.
Q. What is the purpose of this payment? A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.
Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ? A. Shut up.
Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:
If you spend that money at Wal-Mart, all the money will go to China.
If you spend it on gasoline it will go to the Arabs.
If you purchase a computer it will go to India .
If you purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico , Honduras , and Guatemala (unless you buy organic).
If you buy a car it will go to Japan .
If you purchase useless crap it will go to Taiwan .
And none of it will help the American economy.
We need to keep that money here in America . You can keep the money in America by spending it at yard sales, going to a baseball game, or spend it on prostitutes, beer, and wine (domestic ONLY), or tattoos, since those are the only businesses still in the US.
Oh please do send me a stimulus check so I can put it in my savings account. Cause I'm not spending it! IMHO
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Schumer: $5B for NY in stimulus package Updated: 01/29/2009 06:23 AM By: AP Wire Service
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - New York Senator Charles Schumer says the stimulus package likely to pass Congress includes about $3.4 billion in federal aid for New York City and $1.6 billion for upstate counties over the course of two years.
Schumer says the $825 billion program, which the House began debating Tuesday, has $737 million in upstate Medicaid relief, and at least $860 million in education aid.
For the city, he says it should include $1.8 billion in Medicaid funding and a minimum of $1.6 billion in education aid.
By THOMAS OLIVER First published in print: Thursday, January 29, 2009
You want to believe. You want to think the bailout and the stimulus will work.
But the more you pay attention, the more your faith is tested.
You try not to recall that this financial crisis began in August 2007, and you fight the impulse to calculate that was 17, 18 months ago. And still the crisis continues, as if the $350 billion bailout and last year's stimulus and rebates were little more than spitting into a hurricane.
You read that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says about half the new administration's $825 billion stimulus won't kick in for another year or two. You read a list of projects included in the stimulus and it begins to seem more like old times. Less like a response to an economic emergency and more like pork and pet projects of the new ruling party.
The numbers are getting too large to wrap your mind around. A million, you understand. A billion, you've grown used to, although $700 billion here and $825 billion there strains your comprehension.
A trillion is a number from science fiction, having something to do with light years and space travel.
Yet, you've been told our federal budget deficit this year will be $1.2 trillion. Add in the bailout and the plans to rescue us, and they are speaking in a foreign language, using terms such as $2 trillion.
You try to ignore the fact that one day the taxman will want to collect on that debt.
And you can't seem to shake the notion that if overreaching and overextending got us here, how does overreaching and overextending get us out? And if going where no stimulus has gone before isn't overreaching and if increasing the deficit to $2 trillion isn't overextending, then those words have no meaning.
And with all that, you read about continuing layoffs and store closings and foreclosures. The year-end statement from your 401(k) arrived last week, and you still haven't opened it.
You grasp at the news that sales of existing homes rose in December over November. Could it be?
But then you remember that November and December aren't usually home-buying months. Further, you discover that nearly half, or 45 percent, of those December sales were foreclosed properties.
You worry again about the decline in your home's value, as you read the 2.7 percent decline in housing prices in November is the largest monthly decline on record for Atlanta.
And then you remember that for all the hoopla and figures thrown around, you hear or read little about plans to address the housing crisis. Yet, you know this is where it all began.
And then you get a call from the Conference Board and someone wants to ask you some questions about how you're feeling about things.
Not so good, you tell them. Not so good.
Thomas Oliver writes for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. His e-mail address is toliver@ajc.com.
Again - I see medicaid funding and education aid - but where is the "stimulus" for job creation, housing stabilization, tax relief, etc. IN the words of our imperial leader, we need to "kick-start the economy" ... how is funding Medicaid and education (along with STD research and ACORN) going to improve the economy? Is there a guaranteed tax relief for homeowners? If so, where's that spelled out?
I hope I am wrong, but this appears to be a disaster waiting to happen. Today on the news they said that NYS pays 79% more in medicaid relief than any other state in the country. Not only do we need job creation...we need major welfare reform!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
You're right Bumble, NYS pays a lot more in welfare/medicaid than most states and the reason is because NYS is taking all comers in with no questions asked and allowing them to collect welfare/medicaid benefits so people are coming here from all over the country to get these benefits. Does anyone wonder why NYS is in the financial shape that it's in and why our taxes keep going up.
We need to shine up that French gift.....ummm what is it called....oh, yeah, the Statue of Liberty.......we dont have liberties,,,,,The State takes liberties..
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Stimulus plan as it stands is $800B mistake BY MARTIN FELDSTEIN The Washington Post
As a conservative economist, I might be expected to oppose a stimulus plan. In fact, on The Washington Post oped page in October, I declared my support for a stimulus. But the fiscal package now before Congress needs to be thoroughly revised. In its current form, it does too little to raise national spending and employment. It would be better for the Senate to delay legislation for a month, or even two, if that’s what it takes to produce a much better bill. We cannot afford an $800 billion mistake. Start with the tax side. The plan is to give a tax cut of $500 a year for two years to each employed person. That’s not a good way to increase consumer spending. Experience shows that the money from such temporary, lump-sum tax cuts is largely saved or used to pay down debt. Only about 15 percent of last year’s tax rebates led to additional spending. The proposed business tax cuts are also likely to do little to increase business investment and employment. The extended loss “carrybacks” are primarily lump-sum payments to selected companies. The bonus depreciation plan would do little to raise capital spending in the current environment of weak demand because the tax benefi ts in the early years would be recaptured later. NEED FOR INCENTIVES Instead, the tax changes should focus on providing incentives to households and businesses to increase current spending. Why not a temporary refundable tax credit to households that purchase cars or other major consumer durables, analogous to the investment tax credit for businesses? Or a temporary tax credit for home improvements? In that way, the same total tax reduction could produce much more spending and employment. Postponing the scheduled increase in the tax on dividends and capital gains would raise share prices, leading to increased consumer spending and, by lowering the cost of capital, more business investment. On the spending side, the stimulus package is full of well-intended items that, unfortunately, are not likely to do much for employment. Computerizing the medical records of every American over the next five years is desirable, but it is not a cost-effective way to create jobs. Has anyone gone through the (long) list of proposed appropriations and asked how many jobs each would create per dollar of increased national debt? The largest proposed outlays amount to just writing unrestricted checks to state governments. Nearly $100 billion would result from increasing the “Medicaid matching rate,” a technique for reducing states’ Medicaid costs to free up state money for spending on anything governors and state legislators want. An additional $80 billion would be given out for “state fi scal relief.” Will these vast sums actually lead to additional spending, or will they merely finance state transfer payments or relieve state governments of the need for temporary tax hikes or bond issues? The plan to finance health insurance premiums for the unemployed would actually increase unemployment by giving employers an incentive to lay off workers rather than pay health premiums during a time of weak demand. And this supposedly two-year program would create a precedent that could be hard to reverse. INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING A large fraction of the stimulus proposal is devoted to infrastructure projects that will spend out very slowly, not with the speed needed to help the economy in 2009 and 2010. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that less than one-fifth of the $50 billion of proposed spending on energy and water would occur by the end of 2010. If rapid spending on things that need to be done is a criterion of choice, the plan should include higher defense outlays, including replacing and repairing supplies and equipment, needed after fi ve years of fighting. The military can increase its level of procurement very rapidly. Yet the proposed spending plan includes less than $5 billion for defense, only about one-half of 1 percent of the total package. Infrastructure spending on domestic military bases can also proceed more rapidly than infrastructure spending in the civilian economy. And military procurement overwhelmingly involves American-made products. Since much of this military spending will have to be done eventually, it makes sense to do it now, when there is substantial excess capacity in the manufacturing sector. In addition, a temporary increase in military recruiting and training would reduce unemployment directly, create a more skilled civilian workforce and expand the military reserves. All new spending and tax changes should have ........................................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar04302
Trade will ALWAYS happen....the only problem is folks forgot how and then there is no 'control' over it......the monkey on our back is starving..... the monkey hasn't learned to work the levers yet.....but it will in quick order,,,,,and we will all be in line to learn new levers of living.......
History is set to repeat itself, again. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009 that is being debated in Washington has all the hallmarks of a classic deja vu. Last year the federal government sent out rebate checks in an attempt to stimulate the economy. They also dumped huge sums of money into failing Wall Street banks and insurance firms. Both had no effect. It’s long past time that central planners learned that throwing good money after bad will not stimulate the economy. We must instead cut taxes, reform burdensome regulation and eliminate government waste. It is not until we pay attention to our past history of stimulus failures that we can begin to move toward the future.
Logged
