Schumer on governors rejecting recovery funds: The package is not ‘multiple choice.’
Schumer on governors rejecting recovery funds: The package is not ‘multiple choice.’
In response to several Republican governors declaring their intention to reject portions of the recently signed economic recovery package, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) sent a letter to OMB Director Peter Orszag on Tuesday arguing that the package does not allow governors to opt out of funding for particular portions of the bill. He writes, “No one would dispute that these governors should be given the choice as to whether to accept the funds or not. But it should not be multiple choice“:
As you know, Section 1607(a) of the economic recovery legislation provides that the Governor of each state must certify a request for stimulus funds before any money can flow. No language in this provision, however, permits the governor to selectively adopt some components of the bill while rejecting others. To allow such picking and choosing would, in effect, empower the governors with a line-item veto authority that President Obama himself did not possess at the time he signed the legislation.
Today, Govs. Phil Bredesen (D-TN) and Gov. John Lynch (D-NH) became the first Democratic governors to suggest that they would follow the GOP’s ill-advised lead in rejecting some of the stimulus funding. “We are evaluating this piece of money, whether it makes sense for us to take it. We may well be one of the states that say we can’t take on that portion of it,” Bredesen said in reference to the package’s funding for the expansion of unemployment insurance.
BERNANKE: If unemployment benefits are not distributed to the unemployed, then they won't spend them and it won't have that particular element of stimulus.SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): So if this was done on a wide basis, it would be counterproductive, not productive?
BERNANKE: It would reduce the stimulus effect of the package, yes.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
NYT:
Can’t wait to see the re-election campaigns that explain this….
February 24th, 2009 at 1:00 pmEverybody knows that unemployed people would just hoard the money instead of spending it.
/snarkasm
February 24th, 2009 at 1:01 pmBERNANKE: It would reduce the stimulus effect of the package, yes.
Well, duh! That’s the whole idea.
Republicans have already said that if the stimulus package works, Democrats can cement themselves in the majority for decades. That’s unacceptable to the GOP. Thus they must work to make the stimulus fail.
Of course, that means further damaging the US economy, but if you wanna make an omelet, ya gotta break a few eggs.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:07 pmBut, just so I get this straight, Jindal, and others, are taking the pork, but not wanting to take what would actually be spent on such things as food, clothing, rent, gas, insurance, inspection, regisration for the vehicle, bus fare..things required to find a job.
Seems to me this ’solidarity’ plan of the GOP is going to backfire as it forces the goobernors, reps and senators to ignore the constituents they were elected to represent
February 24th, 2009 at 1:08 pmThe failed policies of the GOP got us where we are, why would we expect them to do what is right for the people? The GOP is a failed party that is on it’s way out completely. Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schulz was on Keith Olbermann last night and said she served with Jindal when he was a congressman. He voted for federal unemployment twice while a congressman but now has had a change of heart in wake of the worst economic calamity in history. Go figure that ideology.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pmNo unemployment insurance. If we hit levels of unemployment as we did in ‘29, Do these Guvs think riding the rails is a good idea. I’m not fear mongering, I just sometimes think about my grandparents telling me about polite, contrite gentlemen coming to the door with their hat in their hand, offering to work for food or begging for a handout. Has anybody considered how this would play out in 2009? I think it may not be as civil? Am I wrong?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pmWhat, you mean prayers for the unemployed aren’t stimulative?!?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pmHeadline:
Headline:
Hedge Fund Run by Biden’s Son and Brother Had Links to Stanford
What Part of ‘Stimulus’ Don’t They Get?
Oh they get it alright, they are all involved. How long before we find out how much of a bailout Bidens’ Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund will get?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:13 pmThe wingers are betting the farm on one cow. They are hoping the stimulus fails and they think they will walk into power. I have news for them. The folks who are unemployed are looking for relief and could give a crap less who is governor.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:14 pmGreat, Sen. Schumer. Make them decide… and remind the Democratic Governors that Democrats have no business denying unemployment benefits to workers (the majority of whom are victims of Bush’s and the Republicans’ failed policies). It’s time to get tough on so-called Blue Dog Democrats. They don’t belong in a party of and for the people.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:15 pmralph the wonder llama, you have it exactly right. I think we should start referring to this obstructionism and hope for failure as “The Rush Effect”.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:16 pmkasinca Says:
The wingers are betting the farm on one cow.
A mad cow, at that.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:17 pmSo, you’re in a sinking ship, and someone hands you buckets. Maybe they’re not the nicest buckets, or are exactly the color you wanted, but they are buckets.
Instead of bailing and trying to save the ship (of state), we have people who are holding out for better buckets?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:17 pmPelotonpro 048 Says:
I’m not fear mongering, I just sometimes think about my grandparents telling me about polite, contrite gentlemen coming to the door with their hat in their hand, offering to work for food or begging for a handout. Has anybody considered how this would play out in 2009? I think it may not be as civil? Am I wrong?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
___________
I can just picture it now – throngs of unemployed investment bankers roaming the streets… attempting to create securities out of plastic bottles, old news papers, and banana peels… carrying “Brother, can you spare some liquidity” signs…
The thought is chilling indeed!
February 24th, 2009 at 1:18 pmWhat Part of ‘Stimulus’ Don’t They Get?
Oh they get it alright, they are all involved. How long before we find out how much of a bailout Bidens’ Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund will get?
and how will that compare to the billions to Haliburton and Bechtel for contracted ‘work’ in Iraq?
Let’s see what the oversight is with the new guys. My guess is it’ll be a hell of a lot better than the last guys.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:20 pmWell, you could do some research on your own and demonstrate that there’s something drastically wrong with the Vice-President’s role in the stimulus.
Or you could just throw a bunch of shit to wall and see if it sticks.
Let’s see which path you choose.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:20 pmPLC — “The Rush Effect”… I like it. I like it A LOT.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:21 pmFCUK THE REPUBLICANS
They voted against it, so they should get none of it.
Let the redstaters rot, maybe they will smarten up and vote out the scum that represent them.
But asking redstaters to smarten up is a LOL moment, yeah right, smarten up, LOL.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:21 pmjacambece Says:
Headline:
Vice President Joe Biden also will be given a role coordinating oversight of stimulus spending.
Headline:
Hedge Fund Run by Biden’s Son and Brother Had Links to Stanford
What Part of ‘Stimulus’ Don’t They Get?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
__________
What do these two stories have to do with each other, exactly?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:23 pmIn short, take it or leave it.
And if you do leave it, I don’t think prayer is going to help you with the angry hordes with torches.
PEACE
February 24th, 2009 at 1:27 pmVia Greenwald:
So, the republicans are, en masse, holding their breath until the country turns…blue.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:31 pmThis takes some (if not all) of the wind out of the sails for Jindal’s response tonight.
Well played Mr. Schumer
February 24th, 2009 at 1:33 pmIf they leave one small bite on their plate, it proves they wholeheartedly disapproved of the entire meal.
No – really – it does.
How did the newsdolts manage to get “reject” out of “turning down a fraction of a per cent?
Because R spokespeople told them that’s what it meant, and the “liberal media” is the GOP’s p.r. department.
February 24th, 2009 at 1:39 pmI thought ,”The Rush Effect,” was obstructive sleep apnea, Type II diabetes and drug addiction?
February 24th, 2009 at 1:47 pmyou’re thinking of Rush Syndrome.
The “Rush Effect” refers to how airplane rows lose room exponentially in proportion to Rush’s presence on a given flight.
hey – did you just ride the Tour of CA??
February 24th, 2009 at 1:49 pm“Conform or be cast out.”
February 24th, 2009 at 1:54 pmtombaker, I was on an international flight with Rush once and his breathing caused uncomfortable changes in cabin pressure. Qatar yes, CA no. See you at Paris-Niece!
February 24th, 2009 at 2:01 pmTo allow such picking and choosing would, in effect, empower the governors with a line-item veto authority that President Obama himself did not possess at the time he signed the legislation.
That’s a great legal argument right there.
February 24th, 2009 at 2:03 pmtombaker, I was on an international flight with Rush once and his breathing caused uncomfortable changes in cabin pressure! See ya at Paris-Nice!!!
February 24th, 2009 at 2:05 pmHmmmm just more proof that the republican’ts want President Obama and our country to fail!
February 24th, 2009 at 2:07 pmPelotonpro 048 Says:
I thought ,”The Rush Effect,” was obstructive sleep apnea, Type II diabetes and drug addiction?
““““““““““““““““““““““““““““
Well yes but “The Rush Effect” also includes diarrhea of the mouth, constipation of the brain and horrendous anal cysts that hatch and multiply into brain dead supporters.
One could say that the dumbing down of America has served Rush and his ilk very well.
February 24th, 2009 at 2:10 pmIt seems to me that when Ronny Raygun reversed the “Fairness Doctrine” the GOP plan was to allow the take over the public airwaves by their corporate buddies who would employ obedient blowhards like Limbaugh, Savage, Weiner, Hewitt, etc, etc, to push hate and pro-business.
It seems that the bitter bipartisanship truly began around 1994 when the Newt Gingrich faction took over the majority in the house, this was about the same time republican hate radio began to take off. So this was an obvious plan by the GOP from the very beginning. Control the message and you control the masses. It worked well for a long time, hopefully America is wising up?
February 24th, 2009 at 2:17 pmWe know what the problem is with Republicans, but what’s up with those two Democratic governors? That really chaps my butt.
February 24th, 2009 at 2:31 pm“We are evaluating this piece of money, whether it makes sense for us to take it. We may well be one of the states that say we can’t take on that portion of it,” Bredesen said in reference to the package’s funding for the expansion of unemployment insurance.
In effect, making it so that their states’ unemployed must move, in order to find enough to live on. Their neighboring states will retaliate, and we’ll have a political battle, with the hapless poor reduced to political props. These Dino’s should just announce they are changing parties. It would give their voters a chance at finding a real democrat to lead. I’m sure Tennesee is in desperate need of economic assistance, so this is mere posturing for effect.
February 24th, 2009 at 2:42 pmAre these governors trying to “ship” their poor to other parts of the country?
I don’t remember the exact dates, but I do remember how Southern states manipulated the benefit system once before. I want to say that this was the early 60s.
Essentially what they would do is to give the poor in their states a ONE WAY ticket to ANYWHERE in the country as long it was outside of THEIR state. One cute way of eliminating the problem of the poor in your state.
My recollection is that the issue actually went to the Supreme Court where it was found to be illegal.
So are all of these Southern governors simply trying to play the game a different way these days?
February 24th, 2009 at 2:48 pmI wonder if Jindal lives in a FEMA trailer?
February 24th, 2009 at 2:49 pmSaid another way, Governors that choose to opt out on the unemployment benefits, if so permitted, would be causing greater unemployment which would require additions spending for benefits to those that would have otherwise gotten jobs and taken off of unemployment benefits. It sure seems to me that the unemployment insurance paid by those employed by the stimulus would pay for the extended benefits of those not working so the States wouldn’t be out of anything.
February 24th, 2009 at 2:51 pmIt goes like this. If the governors know that the funds will be sent to their states without their help, then they feel free to say they don’t want it. This way they will still get it, and still remain faithful to the party. The party that threatens them and controls what they do.
These governors and the legislators that refuse funds, should be allowed to refuse. Their constituents if they have not seen as yet, will see them and the GOP for what it is.
February 24th, 2009 at 3:30 pmEven if they “opt out” of receiving any of the stimulus money, the plan will still be using their tax payers money. If they reject the money, can the rejected funds be added to the funds that accepting states will receive?
February 24th, 2009 at 4:18 pmIf the stimulus package produces jobs in the states that accept the money, then there may be a big sucking sound to these states as those that are left hungry and without a home in say, LA, move to the states with the jobs. This leaves the Republican reject states with a smaller population which will then decrease their number of Reps in the House. In essence, they will lose power.
February 24th, 2009 at 4:57 pmDon’t worry about Bredesen. He’s just pouting because he’s not going to get the Secretay of Health job. I’m surprised he would even be considered since he did so little to help Pres.Obama get elected. There are no Democrats in Tennessee, including Jim Cooper. They are GOP in disguise, believe me.
February 24th, 2009 at 5:01 pmcurious Says:
It goes like this. If the governors know that the funds will be sent to their states without their help, then they feel free to say they don’t want it. This way they will still get it, and still remain faithful to the party. The party that threatens them and controls what they do.
These governors and the legislators that refuse funds, should be allowed to refuse. Their constituents if they have not seen as yet, will see them and the GOP for what it is.
Completely agree with this. Well put.
February 24th, 2009 at 7:01 pmrepugs stop your stupidass moves. No you can’t pick and choose what you want like some Walmart dvd bin.
repugs have underminded:
invasions
Our Constitutions
oil
Banks
Wall Street
US citizens
economy
Global Warming
Co2
our soldiers
our values
our health
the world
NOW
Our President.
February 24th, 2009 at 7:43 pmwhy
sikis
April 26th, 2009 at 2:19 pmporno izle
porno videolar
porn videos