Monday, February 16

A Lingering Question

I have a lingering question regarding last week's passage of the stimulus bill.

After all the frenzy to get the stimulus bill passed because "if we don't the world is going to fall off its axis and all our money will self-combust and we'll be wearing potato sacks by Saturday if we DON'T PASS THE BILL NOW, so let's not even take 48 hours to read it or to find out who put the handwritten changes and sticky notes all over it because WE MUST PASS THE BILL NOW.

Then, we can wait four days for Obama to sign it into law.

So why couldn't we have waited until Tuesday to vote on the bill?

16 comments:

Rachel Langston said...

I absolutely agree! Not to mention that many of the morning headlines are talking about how the Obama administration is trying to MINIMIZE expectations for the bill. I thought it was the "right bill, the right size at the right time". If that is true, why shouldn't we expect big things? There is certainly a BIG price tag that goes with it.
Rachel Langston

Whitney said...

Completely with you on this one! By the way, thank you for your site. I enjoy reading your posts and appreciate your willingness to share conservative opinions in a very non-conservative time. Keep up the great work!

happyathome said...

That was my first question I asked myself when I read that he was signing the bill tomorrow. There could have easily been 3 days for reading the bill, as stated on the House floor the day of the debate and vote(but they had previosly voted to ignore that statute). Three days does NOT make a difference since it will take WEEKS to see any of this hit the average person. All I hear is "bold and swift" in quotes for getting this down the pipe. You would have thought this would have been signed today, of all days. Must be taking a day off....

Melissa said...

I'm trying to re-assure myself that the reason this administration seems to be off to such a disastrous start is because I'm biased.... I'd rather believe I'm just a disappointed conservative rather than the fact that we now have a bunch of tax evading, left wing extremists running our country for the next 4 years.

Oh yeah. I went there.

Jeff said...

Melissa,
Let me reassure you. In the spirit of Jeff Foxworthy, you know you're a biased, right-winger when you consider passage of the largest bill in history in the first 3 weeks of Obama's Presidency with a 67% approval rating (compared to 31% for Republicans in Congress) to be a "disastrous" start.

Peace,
Jeff

happyathome said...

Oh approval ratings swing very quickly.....wait and see when it takes until JUNE to get the $7 and change a week to help stimulate this economy. I am usually a "glass half full" person, not with this package! Pushed through with haste and thought of themselves, a pat on the back for a job well done.

The Gang's Momma said...

$7-13 a week more in the average American's pocket DOES NOT = Bold and Swift! I'm not in a potato sack yet, but I doubt that $7-13 a week will make enough difference to enough average Americans to keep the approval ratings soaring. . .

happyathome said...

I completely agree!
If you are anything like me, you have spent many a sleepless night wondering what to do with the extra thirteen dollars a week from the recent Spending Bill? The prospects are limitless. A vacation, a nice bauble for the Mrs. or maybe that Italian Villa you have been off putting? How does one choose? Me, I think I’ll just wait. In time, I am sure this administration will tell me what is best. Why not a little more government in our lives to tell us what to do? Hmmmmm.....

Melissa said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Melissa said...

Jeff, you just crack me up! Let me put down my Bible and my gun so I can adequately respond to your obvious approval regarding the passage of the "largest bill in history".

You know, I could go out and purchase all new clothes, food, shoes, new golf clubs, a new car (not GM) and a slew of various other items to "better" my life. The question is where does the money come from?....I'd just be charging away on all my plastic. Eventually, the bill comes and the party is over. The sad thing about this bill is that future generations who have nothing to do with this mess will be footing the bill for it.

So, if you are looking for my kudos to our fearless leader on passing the "largest bill in history", don't hold your breath. In the words of a friend of mine, the president and his colleagues are worse than drunken sailors...at least drunken sailors only waste their own money, not mine.

Jeff said...

It's funny to hear so-called conservatives complain about future generations footing the bill when the only recent President to actually balance the budget and run a surplus was a Democrat. Where was all of this concern for future generations during the last 8 years? Where was this concern when W and the Republican Congress pushed through a $1.35 Trillion tax cut and racked up a $5 Trillion national debt? I almost fell off my chair laughing when I heard Karl Rove talking about fiscal responsibility. It appears that Republicans are much better Republicans when they are a small, nearly inconsequential minority party. Then again, even when they had the opportunity to bargain for something in the stimulus bill, they chose to fight for $70 Billion for AMT relief, and then out of the other side of their mouth complained about much less costly spending items being non-stimulus. Bizarre.

Melissa said...

Actually, the bizarre thing is that despite warnings from economists and people who have studied things like this historically, well-educated people are all thumbs up over this bill. Sadly (or frighteningly depending on how you look at it) Wall Street isn't fooled by a liberal wish list in stimulus bill's clothing.

I've never agreed with overspending billions of dollars and creating a deficit, BUT, let's not call this irresponsible spending a "stimulus package" so we can make Americans feel all warm and fuzzy when they know in their guts it is a HUGE mistake....problem is, there are too many people out there not ready to admit so early in this administration that maybe our new president doesn't walk on water after all. Re: the stellar approval ratings.

We'll see.

Jeff said...

Melissa,
Which economists are you refering to? I'm sure there is one, but I don't know of any economists that don't think we need government spending. I guess we should just ignore the chief economist at Moody's. My hunch is, you don't really care what economists actually say, unless they affirm your political biases.

Melissa said...

Jeff,

In my attempt to wrap my brain around this monster, I have tried to gather information from ALL media sources. There is a consistent message that spending does not equal stimulating. It could, if more thought and objectivity were put into it, but the administration has decided to use "the sky is falling" theory to shove it down our throats at warp speed. But, I can see why....if they wasted any more time people might actually wake up from their Obama-induced comas and think maybe this "stimulus bill" isn't such a good idea after all.

And, yes, it sure does float my boat when most of the economists I've heard, no matter their political backgrounds, think this is a waste of taxpayer money. If I had more time I'd link...but, there are just too many to know where to start.

Natalie said...

Jeff,

In a prior post, I linked to a slew of economists of all political stripes who thought the stimulus plan was a bad idea. Those links were specifically for you, so go back and look for them. Can't look now, but they are just one or two posts back.

nat

Jeff said...

Natalie,
I'm not seeing your links. Do you mean Ed Yardeni? That's the only economist I see referenced in your links.

There are plenty of economists that have legitimate concerns with the stimulus bill, including the concern that it's not big enough and that the money isn't spent quickly enough. But most respected economists (even former Bush economist, if you can believe that) think (a) we need a large stimulus (spending) bill and (b) the stimulus bill that passed will be effective, if not as effective as it could have been with a better bill.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/07/AR2009020702159.html?nav=rss_email/components

 

blogger templates | Make Money Online