The GOP and the Stimulus Bust
The stimulus was a missed opportunity, and one that Republicans may now see as a juicy political opening.
Republicans opposed the president’s stimulus plan en masse, arguing it would do little to stem unemployment and revive the economy, while worsening the flood of red ink gushing from the federal coffers. Little did they know how correct they would be.
The New York Times reports:
Nearly three months after President Obama approved a $787 billion economic stimulus package, intended to create or save jobs, the federal government has paid out less than 6 percent of the money, largely in the form of social service payments to states. Although administration officials say the program is right on schedule, they have actually spent relatively little so far.
[. . .]
The intent of the stimulus program was to pump money into the economy quickly, and many members of Congress said at the time of its passage that speed was of the essence. But the huge program has been a challenge to administer for both a new administration and for states and local governments grappling with their own fiscal problems.
Some states and cities are beginning to complain that the money has yet to reach them. Others have been slow to get their paperwork to Washington; Virginia has yet to send the Transportation Department its list of road projects. At the same time, some economists have questioned the administration’s claims that the bill has saved or created 150,000 jobs.
The stimulus isn’t very stimulating because so little has been spent. Only $11 million has gone out the door on highway projects. It is no wonder that a top Democrat is now acknowledging that the stimulus was “oversold.” (”A spokesman for Minnesota Rep. James Oberstar, who leads the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, says the White House shouldn’t have billed road money as the signature component of the stimulus, or as a surefire boost to needy communities.”) But there was plenty of money, $800,000 to be exact, to pay for an addition to the airport in Rep. John Murtha’s home town.
But the main purpose of the stimulus — job creation — is unfulfilled. Indeed, the economy is hemorrhaging jobs. The unemployment rate is now 8.9% and is expect to hit double digits with no prospect of job growth until 2010. That’s a far cry from what the administration was peddling in January, when Christina Romer released a report claiming that the stimulus was needed to keep unemployment at or below 8%.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Jennifer Rubin is PJM's Washington, DC, editor. She also blogs at Commentary’s Contentions.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
19 Comments
1. Derek:Well, politically the GOP lost a Senator and NY-20 to betting against the stimulus. If they primary out Charlie Crist, then they’ll lose a senate seat because of it.
And in all reality, I seriously doubt the populace cares that an article that doesn’t even have to commonsense to fact check whether or not the stimulus money is on schedule says stimulus money is moving slow. (btw, the timeline is to have 93 billion spent by October, 6 percent means we’ve spent 47 billion already… so it isn’t behind schedule at all)
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9968/hr1.pdf
No, it isn’t the media that’s going to color people’s minds about the stimulus. At least not media directly about the stimulus. People are going to be looking at unemployment, their 401k’s (stockmarket), and what the media is saying about the economy overall.
If the media is spinning a narrative about an economic recovery then who is really going to care that Obama only got 6 percent of the stimulus money out in 2 months?
BTW, the timeline is to have 92 billion spent by October 2009, 6 percent means we’ve spent 47 billion already… so it isn’t behind schedule at all, not that i’d every accuse the NYT of shoddy journalism.
You can see the CBO timeline for spending here:
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9968/hr1.pdf
“Assuming enactment in mid-February, CBO estimates that the bill would increase outlays
May 14, 2009 - 3:15 am 2. Ed Wallis:by $92 billion during the remaining several months of fiscal year 2009″ If 45 billion (6 percent of the total stimulus) is already out the door, then in what world is the stimulus bill moving slowly?
“To paraphrase cartoonist Walt Kelly’s character, Pogo: We have met the enemy, and it is big-government Republicans.”
FROM:
May 14, 2009 - 4:04 am 3. Mike2:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/13/conservatives-need-to-lead-opposition-to-obama/
One of John McCain’s big mistakes was to not oppose his own president’s part of the Stimulus. Will the whole package work? Like everything else the proof will be in the pudding.
May 14, 2009 - 4:22 am 4. Carl:Ms Rubin is correct saying, “In sum, sometimes saying “no” is exactly the right thing to do.”
That’s why I put into effect my own personal stimulus package plan(PSPP). The PSPP lumps all money moochers (family, friends and/or politicians) into one category with a single qualification (for lending) question I ask myself.
“Did he, she or they do anything or something that either caused or contributed to creating whatever the mess is that they currently have or the one that anyone with the brains of an Oreo Cookie knows full well that they will make in spite of their phony promises?”
If the answer is “Yes” then my answer is “No!”. If the answer is “No” then my answer is still “No!”.
I am amazed at how much positive stimulus my personal stimulus plan has improved my disposition.
May 14, 2009 - 4:22 am 5. typos_R_us:“BTW, the timeline is to have 92 billion spent by October 2009, 6 percent means we’ve spent 47 billion already…”
I wonder if there is any point to rebutting such math skills.
May 14, 2009 - 6:05 am 6. L:To find six percent of a number, you multiply that number by .06 You DON”T divide, or what ever the ‘ell you did.
6% of 92 billion is 5.52 billion. Since you obviously are not so hot with numbers, that is 5 billion 520 million. Keep the change. For future reference, six percent is 6 pennies out of a dollar. So if someone offers you 47 pennies on a dollar as 6%, take it. Since I’m a firm believer in KISS, let me state that is another way, in hope you understand. 6% of 100 billion would be 6 billion. So how the ‘ell can one think that 6% of 92 billion is 47 billion? 50% of 92 billion would be 46 billion. 50% being a half or 1/2 as the math weenies are wont to say.
A little common sense goes a long ways.
typos_R_us: “I wonder if there is any point to rebutting such math skills.”…
Wow. Before you call someone out, make sure you’ve got your facts straight.
According to the document linked, $816b was the amount of the stimulus. 6% of that comes out to the the $47 figure the original poster referenced (actually closer to $49b, but at this point what’s a couple of billion dollars). His math is correct, that we are actually on pace to to easily reach the $92b figure by October.
This still doesn’t mean any of this is working or is a good idea, but lets at least try to argue with the facts on our side.
May 14, 2009 - 6:53 am 7. stace:Romer’s pitch to sell the stimulus includes a graph showing projected unemployment rates. The two curves on the graph project unemployment rates with, and wthout, the stimulus bill.
March and April’s unemployment numbers are tracking the curve that projects what happens WITHOUT the stimulus. So, yes, it was oversold.
May 14, 2009 - 7:17 am 8. TOhio:“But Republicans may now see it as a juicy political opening. They can rightly claim they opposed the boondoggle spending, which has done nothing but increase our fiscal woes.”
The next step is to target Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins for ouster from the Republican Party. They helped to get the Porkulus bill passed and they should pay. Arlen Specter already felt the heat and is out of the party. Good.
If the Republican Party is going to be the party of fiscal conservatism, then all of the politicians who voted for Porkulus need to go.
May 14, 2009 - 8:41 am 9. billslayer:I have no problem with the money being spent too slowly. I dont know if it’s possible to spend the money too slowly…I have a problem with the fact that the “stimulus” happened in the first place. Call me a CHUD but Bush’s first round of “stimulus” set the stage for this mess. Yes, I get that the Tent Revival Con Man pulled the trigger but Bush handed them just enough rhetorical ammo to get away with it. Oh yeah–and TARP should never have happened either!
May 14, 2009 - 9:32 am 10. typos_R_us:L, I didn’t read this the way you did. Not sure if it’s me or it was so poorly written as to be confusing.
“BTW, the timeline is to have 92 billion spent by October 2009, 6 percent means we’ve spent 47 billion already…”
No, I didn’t read the article. Why should I have to?
If I want male bovine feces, I can just walk out to the back yard, where my neighbors bull is very much in residence.
{snipped}
“Nearly three months after President Obama approved a $787 billion economic stimulus package,”
{snipped}
“According to the document linked, $816b was the amount of the stimulus.”
So which is it we are discussing? 787 billion, 816 billion or 92 billion. In the absense of other information, I had to assume he was talking about 92 billion, since that WAS the number applied to the subject of that sentence. So naturally I think that was the number we were talking about.
Not my fault he changed subject in mid sentence. God knows I’m no English major but I do dimly remember being told that a new subject gets a new sentence. Has that changed?
As far as the URL, that goes to the Congessional Budget Office ( that is what the cbo.gov means). The CBO is a joke. Anything you see from the CBO needs to be taken with several grains of salt. If a senior Congress critter decided that water runs uphill, the CBO would dutifully do a study and put out a report on how water runs uphill.
CBO is even more politicized then the CIA or State. Almost as bad as Justice.
I havn’t practiced the arcane art of sentence deconstruction in several decades. I never much cared for it anyway, so I could have screwed the pooch on this one.
May 14, 2009 - 9:41 am 11. typos_R_us:Transposing the data to do a validity check, I get 50 months to complete the project, which fits the common sense test. I seriously doubt that the Usurper will still be in the oval office 50 months from now. I know, based on historic examples, the economy will be in worse shape in 50 months then it is now.
The stimulus package adds nothing to the economy. It just moves money from one pile to another, with little bits getting lost in the process. It will keep things from hitting bottom until the make work is done. When all the roads are paved, the bridges to nowhere finished, the real crash will begin. Or at least that is what happened every other time a government has tried to spend it’s way out of an economic crisis.
TOhio is correct. The Demonrats have hosed the economy so badly that it will take decades to get it right. I expect the voters will respond accordingly. So conservatives need to run off the Rino’s. Let them go pig out at the Democratic trough. They will be gone after the next election anyway.
May 14, 2009 - 9:53 am 12. David W. Lincoln:Meanwhile, the Usurper crawfishin’ ( southern talk for walking backwards) on the Torture photos tells me that the CIA finally got solid proof that the Usurper was born in Kenya. IIRC, they do the baby footprint thingie over there. Not real sure about that but they have to have something on the Usurper to make him spin on a dime like that. Wish I could have been a fly on the wall when that GS 17 from Turkey Run told the Usurper; “You publish those photos and we publish these.”
Now we see how far the left wants to go. What if the judges say release the photos and the CIA says ‘No’?
The Law does not reach where enforcement does not go.
Who has the most guns?
Democracy is so much fun!
Yes, the option is open for the GOP to hold the Dems accountable for the increasingly larger credibility deficit that afflicts the US these days.
For the United States has a trade deficit, and the US federal government is
May 14, 2009 - 9:58 am 13. billslayer:running a larger deficit these days.
What the GOP needs is a pledge, a solemn oath by all elected members of the party that they will oppose–unless there’s a goddam comet about to smash ben affleck–that they will oppose any and all forms of deficits pending, and in the existing context absolutely refuse to spend any more than 90% of tax until such time as ALL debt is paid off. Oh yeah, and no more sneaking around the taxpayers by issuing debt through the treasury! Who’s with me?????
May 14, 2009 - 10:45 am 14. JED:The stimulus has not hit the fan yet and the market is wallowing in the lower mid ranges. Consumer confidence and spending is off. Where as the markets may be interpreted as recovering slightly, because they are not falling any faster, we will only know if the stimulus package worked after a few years. History trumphs journalism in matters of those measurements. Those measurement are a principle of hindsight. Gambling with our future is very exciting. Employment is predicted to be the last item to recover which does not sound like “trickle up economics.” The quick fix is to increase federal employment.
May 14, 2009 - 1:35 pm 15. billslayer:I like billslayer’s pledge or something to that effect. That would be about responsibility on contract.
JED:
If you like that idea then repeat it to everyone you know. Keep talking about it in these forums. Call into talk radio and talk about it there. If you hear of one of the republican establishment trying to push a watered down version of this with a million loopholes in it–call them out on it in all of the aforementioned forums. THIS is change we can believe in!
May 14, 2009 - 4:02 pm 16. Wallace:In other words: they were wrong. … It will be interesting to see how the new report “saves or creates” the same amount (3.5 to 4 million) of jobs by the end of 2010 that they promised at the bill signing-even though the country has lost more than 1 million jobs since then, …
It won’t be as interesting as he thought. Obama backed out of the number of created jobs claims already when he used the “saved job” term. Now he can claim success no matter how awful the situation is.
- The number of lost jobs is 5 million. Well, that could’ve been worse. It could have been 9 million without the jobs saved by the stimulus. Success!!
- The number of lost jobs is 10 million. It is only 10 million thanks to the One for passing a stimulus that prevented a 14 million lost job catastrophe. Success!!
- The number of lost jobs is 15 million. Thanks to the stimulus it weren’t 19 million. 4 million jobs saved. Success!!
May 14, 2009 - 7:54 pm 17. Derek:@ comment 10
I was going to let what i said stand without evidence as just an aside, but i decided against that and went back and tried to edit everything. Didn’t do a great job. BUT my main point is that the NYT article didn’t even take the time to fact check their claims. And I remembered charts for spending timelines during the whole stimulus debacle, so I knew they were out there, so it’s not like the NYT couldn’t have done so.
May 14, 2009 - 8:38 pm 18. Confused in Virginia:I totally disagree that the stimulus was a missed opportunity for the Republicans, allthough I can understand how it can seem that way. While it may be possible that they could have added amendments to “finance needed defense spending, provide badly needed infrastructure, and provide tax assistance to employers to maintain and increase hiring,” I think that it is highly unlikely that Mrs. Pelosi or Mr. Reid would have allowed it.
I also believe that by not participating in the money grab as the Democrats have done, the Republicans are finally standing on principle and when everything unravels as it is starting to do, they will be seen as the people who put their country’s well-being ahead of political greed.
In time (probably not too far into the future), Republicans and moderate Democrats, who were mesmerized by the anti-Christ, will start waking up from their trance (especially if they lose their jobs or their homes) and realize what a grave mistake they made that November day, and will not repeat that mistake in 2012.
So, you are correct in saying that “sometimes saying ‘no’ is exactly the right thing to do,” but when it’s a very difficult choice and it’s done while standing firm on your principles, that is when you can win people over.
May 17, 2009 - 1:28 am 19. The Historian:CALIFORNIA: FULL SPEED INTO THE ABYSS
Voters poised to say NO to tax increase propositions from the legislature. The time of reckoning is near.
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/05/tuesday-may-19th-california-goes-over.html
May 17, 2009 - 2:45 pm