President Obama has actualized his campaign promises. No one thought he could do it, but he did. He wanted to bring bipartisanship back to Washington. Last night, a vote on the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" was opposed in a bipartisan manner, 244-188 with 11 lonesome Democrats voting against the legislation. Republicans and Democrats, sharing a common purpose, holding hands across the aisle. He also promised the need for 'transparency'. This latest legislation is not only 647 pages of transparency, but the common citizen will find it a page turner and more understandable than the IRS tax codes.
In all seriousness, which when I actually contemplate what our 'representatives' are doing in Washington I immediately grab my blankie and start sucking my thumb curling up into the fetal position, I hope the Republican's stood their ground not just to oppose this new administration. I hope the Republican's finally stood their ground against principles contrary to the conservatives' beliefs who elected them. Did losing the majority, the White House, and the trust of us conservatives finally convince them to return to their roots and foundations of the Republican Party? Or are they just playing politics? Probably a little of both, but I'm glad they did.
This "Stimulus Package" is like the government lottery. Who's going to collect their windfall? Energy department's winning is $54 billion, Education's winning is $141 billion, Health Care's winning is $150 billion! This is not their total budget, this is on top of their allotted fiscal budget. But, they won't receive one lump sum. Actually, the legislation lottery calls for only 20% of the earnings to be shelled out in 2009, which seems contradictory to the Promo-Ads running on national news, starring Nancy Pelosi saying our economy needs 'swift' action and an immediate stimulant.
What are they thinking? Throwing money into a black hole won't make the bottom seem less distant. In early 2008 our economy needed a jump start, and the government promised that the $152 billion stimulus package would do the trick. Couple months later, the government is again promising that the $700 billion financial industry bail out would be more than enough. Now, we have to swallow a $820 billion stimulus package when smaller one's didn't work? And why would we trust the government with a bigger budget when they can't account for the already astronomical $700 billion bail outs? President Obama spoke often on the campaign trail about the 'trickle up' theory of economics. Giving more to the workers, which will stimulate the economy and 'trickle up'. How is giving the government and more businesses follow his 'trickle up theory'? It doesn't! If he truly was pushing this new concept, he would give the American people money to put towards their mortgages and credit card debt, which would stimulate the economy. But this isn't change? This is Bush's economic policies of the last year on steroids!
If you can't make it through the entire legislation, found here...
Look at the simplified break down of the 'stimulus package' here.
4 comments:
What do you suggest then? Either way it's Russian roulette as far as I'm concerned. Several school districts in Idaho are moving to 4 day weeks because they don't have enough money. And please, don't tell me people are the only answer. You can't give what you don't have.
I think there are suffering areas in our country, especially our education. Allocate necessary funding to improve our school systems WITH AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. This is a spending bill. Where is the plan for improvement? There are no ideas, just money.
Also, 17% of this bill is 'intended for education', but it is all at the discretion of the Sect. of Treasury. Is it binding? Not from what I read. And learning from recent history, he can change his mind.
We gave the govt a chance with the first few 'bail outs' and they fouled them up. I don't see why using the same failed play book will offer different results.
Throwing money at the problem doesn't fix the problem. Teaching correct principles does. Teaching the American people that we can't spend and spend money we don't have, teaching the government that they can't spend and spend what they don't have is more the answer, not taking more non-existent money and spending it on crap. This is out of control. Yes, more socialism please, since it's failed in every country that has tried it. I'm sure that's debatable, but the socialistic countries that seem to have barely survived socialism are only returning to free market principles before they completely bankrupt themselves--or asking for American handouts. I want the governments hands out of the pot and we need to let the market correct itself. It's no secret that the "New Deal" actually prolonged the depression by approx. 7 years. We don't need another one. If I have to tighten my belt because of this economy, then why doesn't the government tighten their belt also? Forget the word recession, depression, here we come. AND yes, this started under the previous administration so let's give them the lovely credit they deserve, but with everything that is going on, it seems the current administration is off to a horrible start.
I am buy no means into politics. This is how I see it. We have had two stimulus packages when George Bush was in office this pass year. Did the republicans want these stimulus packages I couldn't tell you but if they did and now they don't it seems that they learned a lesson and realize that something else needs to be done.
Personally we all blame the government but I think America as a whole should be blamed. Our greed and our thinking that everything is a right instead of a privilege.
I have been trying to teach my kids about rights and privileges and my own daughter said in response to the word privilege " I don't even know what that means"
Post a Comment