Recovery Act Protecting Millions From Poverty

The other day Bob from BobCesca.com posted part of a report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and it had some very interesting information.

First, let me remind everyone that the CBPP is a Non-partisan research and policy institute working on federal and state fiscal policies and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income Americans. So, like the Congressional Budget Office, (CBO) they do not have an agenda and it matters not which political party is in office.

There are charts and graphs at the site and the entire report can be accessed at their site.. I am just going to point out some highlights.. There are some very good things that need to be seen and read in this report. They need to be pointed out and I think should be shared with some of the wingnuts out there so they will shut up about the Recovery Act not doing anything good.

While the recession is expected to drive states’ poverty rates up for 2009, new analysis based on Census data shows that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) is keeping large numbers of Americans out of poverty in states across the country. In addition to boosting economic activity and preserving or creating jobs, the recovery act is softening the recession’s impact on poverty by directly lifting family incomes.

The Center’s analysis, which covers 36 states and the District of Columbia, examines the effect on poverty of seven ARRA provisions: the expansion of three tax credits for working families, two provisions that strengthen unemployment insurance assistance, a provision that boosts food stamp benefits, and a one-time payment for retirees, veterans, and people with disabilities.[1] Nationally, these provisions are keeping more than 6 million Americans out of poverty and reducing the severity of poverty for 33 million more. (These figures include both people whom ARRA has lifted out of poverty and people whom ARRA has kept from falling into poverty.)

These estimates are conservative. The seven provisions examined cover only about one-fourth of the recovery act’s total spending. The remainder of the act contains an array of provisions that also have an effect on poverty either through direct job creation or through increased spending (on areas such as education, health care, and housing) that leads to more consumer demand in the economy, which in turn preserves or creates jobs. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the legislation as a whole had increased employment by 600,000 to 1.6 million jobs as of September 2009 and is expected to boost employment by 900,000 to 2.3 million jobs by the fourth quarter of this year.[2]

Moreover, this analysis does not capture the full anti-poverty impact of the seven provisions it examines. It considers the provisions’ direct effects on the incomes of the families that receive added income or benefits as a result of these provisions, but not the provisions’ additional effects on the economy and private-sector employment. For example, increased jobless benefits or food stamps preserve private-sector jobs in a recession by enabling consumers to continue purchasing goods and services they otherwise could not have afforded. That additional spending, in turn, ripples through the economy, helping stores and companies to stay in business and avoid steeper layoffs and reductions in work hours, and thereby averts larger increases in poverty.

That is my emphasis.. I felt it needed to be seen and so I put it in bold.. I think that is the biggest part of this that needs to be told over and over. There is more..

Congress designed the recovery act to reach a wide spectrum of low-, moderate-, and middle-income Americans. Policymakers took care to include provisions that provide assistance to low-income families, not only because they stand the greatest risk of hardship during downturns but also because of evidence that they are the most likely to spend quickly whatever money they receive, thereby pumping more money back into the economy in a timely manner.

Our analysis considers seven of the act’s temporary provisions, totaling $205 billion over five years:

* a new Making Work Pay tax credit of up to $400 for workers ($800 for a couple) earning up to $95,000 ($190,000 for a couple);
* an expanded Child Tax Credit for lower-income working families with children;
* an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit, including increased tax-credit benefits for a working family with three or more children and for married families to lessen the marriage penalty the EITC can otherwise impose;
* additional weeks of emergency unemployment compensation benefits (paid after a worker’s 26 weeks of regular state unemployment benefits expire);
* an additional $25 per week for unemployed workers to supplement their unemployment benefits;
* a $250 one-time payment to elderly people and people with disabilities who receive Social Security, SSI, or veterans’ benefits; and
* an increase in food stamp benefit levels.

The state-by-state findings presented here build on a Center analysis released in September 2009, which focused on figures for the nation as a whole as well as five large states. Details of the methods used here are described in the appendices of that report. [3]

In brief, the analysis uses Census data to examine how these policy changes will affect family income and poverty status by state. The estimates start with data collected in March 2004, March 2005, and March 2006 through the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey. Data for three years are combined to increase the reliability of the state-by-state estimates.

We make three adjustments to these Census data. First, we correct the tendency of Census and other surveys to undercount receipt of certain public benefits, using the data and methods for making such adjustments that are reflected in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ TRIM model. [4] Next, we adjust the data to approximate recent economic and demographic conditions in each state, including labor-market conditions and state population levels in April through June of 2009. Finally, we adjust the food stamp participation data to approximate actual food stamp participation levels by state in May 2009. For each family in the resulting data, we estimate the family’s 2009 income with and without the seven recovery act provisions.

The analysis considers a family to be kept out of poverty if its estimated income is below the poverty line without the recovery act provisions but above the poverty line with the provisions. We use a measure of poverty that adheres to National Academy of Sciences poverty measurement recommendations by including after-tax cash and non-cash income, while subtracting child care and work expenses and out-of-pocket medical expenditures.

We provide estimates for 36 states and the District of Columbia. For the remaining 14 states, our data are insufficient to show reliable results. [5] Given the uncertainty associated with using a sample of the population, we show a range of estimates for each state. This range can be substantial, particularly for states with the smallest survey samples. For example, estimates for Iowa range from 25,000 to 55,000 residents kept out of poverty, with our best estimate falling in the middle (40,000).

The end notes are important too..

End Notes:

[1] As explained below, data were insufficient to estimate the antipoverty impact in the remaining 14 states.

[2] Congressional Budget Office, "Estimated Impact of the American Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output as of September 2009," November 2009; and letter from CBO Director Douglas W. Elmendorf to Senator Charles E. Grassley, March 2, 2009.

[3] See Arloc Sherman, “Stimulus Keeping 6 Million Americans Out of Poverty in 2009, Estimates Show,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, September 9, 2009 (appendices).

[4] Specifically, we correct the Census data for underreporting of food stamps, TANF, and SSI benefits using the data and methodologies to correct for underreporting that are used in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' TRIM model.

[5] For seven of these 14 states, we do not show results because of very small sample size. In addition, we checked to ensure that our predicted state-to-state distribution of ARRA benefits is generally consistent for each state with the actual distribution of benefits paid through October 30, 2009, as reported on the government website, www.recovery.gov. We do not show results for another seven states because we determined that the state's share of benefits in our model differed by more than 10 percent from the state’s actual share of the benefits (due to random sampling error, the inability of our model to fully capture some complex program interactions, or other reasons).

There are charts on the web site and other facts you can read, I didn't want to post the charts, some times they are hard to see when we post them.. so thought the link would be best..

Please take the time to look at this and feel free to link to it, post it, share it or whatever you would like to do.. This needs to be shared and told.. the media is not covering this.. they would rather talk about how bad it is.. not the good things.

I hope you see that while not all the news is good, there are at least some things in the ARRA that did benefit a lot of people. We have heard so many times, it wasn't big enough, it wasn't targeted enough, it was all pork.. so on and so on.. This shows it was good for the ones who needed it most. That's the bottom line.

President's Weekly Address: Progress in the Global Economy

With the next G20 Summit approaching in Pittsburgh, the President goes over the progress in stemming a global economic crisis. He discusses the impact of the Recovery Act, and pledges that "lobbyists for big Wall Street banks" will not prevent real reform for the future, including a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

From the address is this portion I thought worth noting:

Central to these reforms is a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Part of what led to this crisis were not just decisions made on Wall Street, but also unsustainable mortgage loans made across the country. While many folks took on more than they knew they could afford, too often folks signed contracts they didn’t fully understand offered by lenders who didn’t always tell the truth. That’s why we need clear rules, clearly enforced. And that’s what this agency will do.

Consumers shouldn’t have to worry about loan contracts written to confuse, hidden fees attached to their mortgages, and financial penalties – whether through a credit card or debit card – that appear without a clear warning on their statements. And responsible lenders, including community banks, trying to do the right thing shouldn’t have to worry about ruinous competition from unregulated and unscrupulous competitors.

I will have more later.. I found something that I want to blog about but have some things to do today and will be gone for most of the day.. but will be here this evening and will write it up then.. but till then.. here is our President.

Bob Herbert Has Good Things to Say About Pres. Obama

The NY Times Opinion Pages this week has an Op-Ed writer that is worth taking a look.

The always worth reading Bob Herbert is very good Friday with an article titled "Miracles Take Time". In this piece Mr. Herbert points out that Pres. Obama is getting blamed for this economic disaster unfairly by the right wingers and others for not fixing the Stock Market, even though he has only been president for 6 weeks.

Barack Obama has only been president for six weeks, but there is a surprising amount of ire, anger, even outrage that he hasn’t yet solved the problems of the U.S. economy, that he hasn’t saved us from the increasingly tragic devastation wrought by the clownish ideas of right-wing conservatives and the many long years of radical Republican misrule.

He goes on to point out 4.4 million jobs have been lost since this recession started in December, 2007 and instead of people offering help to fix that, they take to the floor of the senate this week to deride him over of all things earmarks.

Freaking out over earmarks is like watching a neighborhood that is being consumed by flames and complaining that there is crabgrass on some of the lawns.

However maybe the most important paragraph to me is this one, which to me points out one of the best arguments for President Obama's bold agenda.

In the midst of the craziness, conservatives are busy trying to blame this epic economic catastrophe — a conflagration of their own making — on the new president. Forget Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush and George Herbert Hoover Bush and the Heritage Foundation and the Club for Growth and Phil Gramm and Newt Gingrich and all the rest. The right-wingers would have you believe this is Obama’s downturn.

As I said it is a great opinion piece. Bob Herbert is one of my favorites at the Times, and he didn't disappoint yesterday. He goes on to point out how the right are trying to paint the president with the Socialist meme, as a communist, and every other radical thing they can find.

He even brings up the Alan Keyes birth certificate lawsuit and how crazy that is. The article is worth taking a minute to read. It is very well written and very good. He ends it with this thought.

What I know is that the renegade clowns who ruined this economy, the Republican right in alliance with big business and a fair number of feckless Democrats — all working in opposition to the interests of working families — have no credible basis for waging war against serious efforts to get us out of their mess.

Maybe the markets are down because demand has dried up, because many of the nation’s biggest firms have imploded and because Americans are losing their jobs and their homes by the millions. Maybe a dose of reality is in order, as opposed to the childish desire for yet another stock market bubble.

Maybe the nuns in grammar school were right when they counseled that patience is a virtue. The man has been president for six weeks.

RNC and Their Dishonest Take on President Obama's First Month

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

From the mind of the RNC.org web site... here is their review of the first month of President Obama. Of course they tell us all the time, they are not going to criticize him, nor are they going to say anything against him because he is so popular with the people. Yeah, right. I believe all that... don't you??

I don't even know where to start with this crap. First of all, I will start with the very first thing they have on their list. The "Slash Earmarks". I have been hearing this all week. President Obama, when he was running for President, promised and stated over and over, that he would REFORM earmarks. He never once said he would ELIMINATE THEM.

Eliminating them was always McCain's big thing.. he was going to use his Sharpie and make them famous or some stupid crap. But then Senator Obama, only said he wanted to eliminate the WASTEFUL spending, and REFORM the way the earmark process worked, to get it out of the dark back room type process and get it into the light of day. His pledge was to take it back to the level of 1994, around "Slash Earmarks: During the years when Republicans controlled Congress, earmarks grew from $7.8 billion in 1994 to $29 billion in 2006. In the past two years, the Democratic Congress has cut earmarks nearly in half, to $17.2 billion in 2008. Obama and Biden are committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year." That comes from the "Blueprint for Change" page 9. They say it is page 20, but it isn't. unless you count the pages differently than they were on my computer.


Obama's First Month Has Been Marked By Wasteful Spending, Failed Bipartisanship, And Questionable Ethics

President Obama Promised To Slash Earmarks And Stop Wasteful Spending:

President Obama Pledged To "Slash Earmarks." "Slash Earmarks: ... In the past two years, the Democratic Congress has cut earmarks nearly in half, to $17.2 billion in 2008. Obama and Biden are committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year." (Obama For America, Blueprint For Change, www.barackobama.com, p. 20, Accessed 2/19/09)

President Obama: The Stimulus Has No Earmarks. "'I am confident that by the time we have the final package on the floor that we are going to see substantial support, and people are going to see this is a serious effort. It has no earmarks. We are going to be trimming out things that are not relevant to putting people back to work right now,' Obama said." (Douglass K. Daniel, "GOP Leader Doubts Stimulus Bill Will Pass Senate," The Associated Press, 2/2/09)

But President Obama Just Signed An Economic Stimulus Package Full Of Wasteful Spending:

Despite Promises, The Stimulus Is Not Free Of Money For Special Interests. "The compromise stimulus bill adopted by House and Senate negotiators this week is not free of spending that benefits specific communities, industries or groups, despite vows by President Obama that the legislation would be kept clear of pet projects, according to lawmakers, legislative aides and anti-tax groups." (Dan Eggen and Ellen Nakashima, "Despite Pledges, Package Has Some Pork," The Washington Post, 2/13/09)

Nancy Pelosi's Mouse... FALSE... there is NOTHING in the plan for the damn mouse.. geeze how many times does that have to be proven a lie.


The Bill Even Includes $30 Million For Salt Marsh Harvest Mice In San Francisco. "Lawmakers and administration officials divulged Wednesday that the $789 billion economic stimulus bill being finalized behind closed doors in Congress includes $30 million for wetlands restoration that the Obama administration intends to spend in the San Francisco Bay Area to protect, among other things, the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi represents the city of San Francisco and has previously championed preserving the mouse's habitat in the Bay Area." (S.A. Miller, "Pelosi's Mo use Slated For $30m Slice Of Cheese," The Washington Times, 2/12/09)

And President Obama Campaigned On The Promise Of Bipartisanship And Said He Wanted Republicans To Vote For His Stimulus Package:

"Obama Has Said He Plans To Work With Republicans To Cut Through Partisan Gridlock That Often Blocks Legislative Progress." (Sabrina Eaton, "Ohioan An Early Obama Critic," [Cleveland] Plain Dealer, 1/29/09)

President Obama Wanted Not Only "Quick Congressional Action" But Also "Significant Numbers Of Republicans" To Vote For The Stimulus. "In pursuit of his twin goals of reviving the economy and transforming the political climate in Washington, President-elect Barack Obama not only wants quick congressional action on his mammoth stimulus package but also wants significant numbers of Republicans to join in voting for it." (James Puzzanghera and Christi Parsons, "Obama Aims For Quick Economic Stimulus, Bipartisan Support," Chicago Tribune, 1/6/09)

This is a lie, Sen. Mark Begich of AK stated several times and you can go to my blog roll and go to Immoral Minority, there is a video of him and Sen. Lisa Murkowski talking and they both say it was a bipartisan bill. He is a Democrat, she is a Republican. There are tax cuts in this bill, there are other things in this bill which was put in by the republicans. Just an out and out lie. AGAIN.

But The Stimulus Package Was Not Bipartisan; House Republicans Were Not Even Allowed At The Table When The Bill Was Written:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): We Won The Election, We Wrote The Bill. "Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) parried GOP assaults on Democrats' $825 billion stimulus package Thursday and refused to slow the bill down to give more time for Republican input. 'Yes, we wrote the bill. Yes we won the election, but that doesn't mean we don't want sustainability or Republican support,' Pelosi said." (Steven T. Dennis, "Pelosi Defends Democrats' Vetting Of Stimulus Plan," Roll Call, 1/22/09)

Democrats Rolled Over House Republicans And "Yielded No More Than Necessary" In The Senate To Pass The Stimulus Package. "In the case of the stimulus bill, Democrats used their solid majority to roll over House Republicans and yielded no more than necessary to garner three critical GOP votes in the Senate." (Janet Hook, "Bipartisanship Faces Stiff Test," Chicago Tribune, 2/16/09)

For President Obama, "Urgency Trumps Bipartisanship." "But with the economy in crisis and the stimulus his top priority, [President Obama] also made clear that urgency trumps bipartisanship." (Todd J. Gillman, "Selling The Stimulus Bill President Discovering That Bipartisanship Has Its Limits," The Dallas Morning News, 2/10/09)

And President Obama Pledged Transparency And Openness Before Signing Legislation:

During The Campaign, President Obama Promised To Give The American Public 5 Days To Review Legislation Before Signing Any Bill. "Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days." (Obama For America Website, www.barackobama.com, Accessed 2/19/09)

All these bills are online if you want to see them, all you have to do is look. I have seen all of them for days and have even posted them right here on my site. So to say they aren't available is just false. You just have to look and read.

But The Obama Administration Has Failed To Allow The Public 5 Days To Review Legislation It Has Signed:

According To The Nonpartisan PolitiFact, President Obama Did Not Provide 5 Days Before Signing His First Bill, The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. "But the first bill Obama signed into law as president -- the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act -- got no such vetting. In fact, the Congressional Record shows that the law was passed in the Senate on Jan. 22, 2009, passed in the House on Jan. 27, and signed by the president on Jan. 29. So only two days passed between the bill's final passage and the signing." (Angie Drobnic Holan, "Obama Signs First Law Without Web Comment," St. Petersburg Times' "PolitiFact," www.politifact.com, 1/29/09) ( yes, they say they are, but they are holding Pres. Obama to a standard they have never held another President. They even say they are. So, I think maybe they are just a little partisan. As in.. me thinks they protest too much.)

President Obama's Second Bill Signing Occurred Hours After Passed By Congress. "For his second bill, Obama signed an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides health coverage for low-income children. He signed it on Feb. 4, 2009, just hours after it was finalized in Congress." (Angie Drobnic Holan, "Still No 'Sunlight Before Signing,'" St. Petersburg Times' "PolitiFact," www.politifact.com, 2/4/09)
And During The Campaign, Obama Said Lobbyists Wouldn't Dominate His White House Or Work For Agencies They Used To Lobby:

During His Campaign, President Obama Promised To "Stop The Revolving Door That Lets Onetime Lobbyists Go To Work For The Federal Government." "[O]n the campaign trail, Obama vowed to stop the revolving door that lets onetime lobbyists go to work for the Federal Government and oversee contracts that could harm -- or help -- their former employer." (Mark Thompson, "Obama's Lobbyist Ban Meets A Loophole: William Lynn," Time, 1/27/09)

William Lynn, was requested to be waivered by Robert Gates. I have talked about this before. I think it is worth noting that no one really ever points this out. Yes, there were some, that President Obama might have slipped through, but this one was entirely Bob Gates at the Pentagon. He was the one who asked for and pushed for this waiver saying that he couldn't work without him, since Pres. Obama wanted Gates to stay, he bowed down to this. I am not giving the President a pass, just saying there is some blame to be put around the bend here.

President Obama Signed An Executive Order Banning Lobbyists From Working For Agencies They Used To Lobby. "And one of the first things the new President did in office was seemingly make good on that promise, signing an Executive Order barring former lobbyists from joining his Administration to work at agencies they recently lobbied." (Mark Thompson, "Obama's Lobbyist Ban Meets A Loophole: William Lynn," Time, 1/27/09)

But President Obama Has Appointed Numerous Former Lobbyists:

President Obama Has Appointed At Least 21 Former Federal Registered Lobbyists, Including Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "A USA TODAY review of Obama hires shows that 21 have registered as federal lobbyists, although most have not done so within the past two years. They include White House aide Cecilia Munoz, who lobbied last year for the National Council of La Raza, and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who lobbied in 2007 for a national teachers union." (Fredreka Schouten, "Geithner Names Ex-Lobbyist As Treasury Chief Of Staff," USA< /st1:country-region> Today, 1/27/09)

Little disingenuous don't you think.

President Obama Appointed Former Raytheon Lobbyist William Lynn As Deputy Secretary Of Defense. "This year President Barack Obama is putting Raytheon's recently departed top lobbyist in charge of the Pentagon's day-to-day management. ... Not surprisingly, Obama's good-government backers were less than pleased to see the President, only a few days after signing the blanket ban, issue a waiver permitting William Lynn to serve as Deputy Secretary of Defense." (Mark Thompson, "Obama's Lobbyist Ban Meets A Loophole: William Lynn," Time, 1/27/09)

In Addition To These Issues, President Obama Has Had Difficulties Appointing People To Fill Top Positions In His Administration:

"But Mr. Obama Lost Four Nominees To Tax And Other Issues And The Pace Of Appointments Slowed." (Peter Baker, "Obama Team Has Billions To Spend, But Few Ready To Do It," The New York Times, 2/17/09)

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner Failed To Pay Taxes While Working For The International Monetary Fund. "Timothy Geithner didn't pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for several years while he worked for the International Monetary Fund, and he employed an immigrant housekeeper who briefly lacked proper work papers." (Jonathan Weisman, "Geithner's Tax History Muddles Confirmation," The Wall Street Journal, 1/14/09)

Health And Human Services Secretary Nominee Tom Daschle Withdrew His Nomination After Reports That He Had Failed To Pay Taxes. "Former Sen. Tom Daschle has withdrawn his nomination to head the Department of Health and Human Services, according to a statement Tuesday from the White House. ... Daschle, the former Senate majority leader, apologized Monday for failing to pay his taxes in full. He said earlier he was 'deeply embarrassed' for a series of errors that included failing to report $15,000 in charitable donations, unreported car service and more than $80,000 in unreported income from consulting." (Ed Henry and Kristi Keck, "Daschle Withdraws As HHS Nominee," CNN, 2/3/09)

Nancy Killefer Withdrew Her Nomination For Tax Problems Dating Back To 1995. "They knew about Nancy Killefer's tax problem from 1995, yet they nominated her for a post in the office of management and budget anyway. This morning she withdrew." (Sam Donaldson, Op-Ed, "Sam On What Nominees' Withdrawal Says About Obama," ABC News, 2/3/09)

Commerce Secretary Nominee Bill Richardson Withdrew His Nomination After Reports That State Contracts In New Mexico Were Under Investigation. "First, they knew about Gov. Bill Richardson's potential problem in the New Mexico investigation into state contracts, but they nominated him to be commerce secretary anyway. Weeks later, of course, Richardson withdrew." (Sam Donaldson, Op-Ed, "Sam On What Nominees' Withdrawal Says About Obama," ABC News, 2/3/09)

I Have a Great Gov. and So Does Kansas

I have a pretty good governor here in Missouri. Well, so far anyway. He hasn't been in office long, but so far so good.

When Pres. Obama signed the Recovery Bill, the site Recovery.gov went active. Now my governor has followed suit. He has started his own web site and it is called, Transform Missouri.

It is a new site dedicated to the Recovery Plan, to solicit ideas from residents, local governments, businesses and non-profits. Gov. Jay Nixon, (D,MO) said he hopes to gather as many ideas as possible from a wide range of sources.

People can submit general ideas or more detailed proposals, which require a proposed timeframe and an estimated number of new jobs.

Missouri is slated to receive about $4 billion from the stimulus package, though that amount does not include competitive grants the state might secure.

Nixon said the money will be used for education and job training, new technology and infrastructure.

At the same time that Gov. Nixon, launched his site, his counterpart in the state of Kansas released her site.

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, (D,KS), and Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson said the site was created to help Kansans take advantage of the federal stimulus package.

From the site itself is this statement from Gov. Sebelius:

Fellow Kansans,

Welcome to Kansas’ web site for federal stimulus bill information, where we have brought together the most recent, comprehensive information on this important legislation.

This web site will help you learn more about the federal stimulus bill and the opportunities that it may provide you, your business and your community.

Here in Kansas we are working to maximize the resources needed to create jobs; provide assistance to families; build Kansas roads and bridges; and lower health care costs through modern technology. To learn more, please visit the federal stimulus bill highlights page. To visit President Obama’s webpage on the federal stimulus bill, please visit recovery.gov.

We hope you will check back often, as more information about the federal stimulus bill will be available each week.

This is why I love elections, as they say they have consequences. We had a no account republican governor for 4 years. His name was Matt Blunt.. yeah Blunt.. Roy Blunt's Baby Boy... That Roy Blunt.. the one who is in the House of Representatives. Who stepped aside so Classy Eric Cantor could step up.

Who stepped aside so he could position himself to run for Kit Bond's Senate seat when he retires after this term. No great loss as far as I am concerned. He is just another lying rethuglican. As is Roy Blunt.

These are the things we have to celebrate, these web sites being put up and being used by our governors and by our government to help us stay on top of this Recovery Plan, to keep it transparent and to keep it honest. This is how we can do it, by tracking it, by watching it, by voicing our opinions of how it is used and how it should not be used.

If all the governors will do this type of thing, we will have something we have not had in a long time, truly we will have, Government OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE.

Positive YouTube AD for the Recovery Plan from Citizens Who Care

Here is an answer to the Jesus video that a PAC made using the timeline and spending in the Recovery Plan. I think this small grass roots group did an amazing job. Take a look at it. Steal it and use it... play it, rate it up and lets get it out there to cancel out the negitivity.



This was done by a small group of Military family members who support Pres. Obama, they did all this on their own time, with their own money. They call themselves, CITIZENS WHO CARE

Proof of the Bipartisanship in the Recovery Bill

This is from Alaska... but it shows how two Senators, one from each party, have differing views on the Recovery Plan. Yet, they don't have differing views on how the bill got put together. So it lays to rest the notion this was a partisan bill.

Neither of them dispute the facts when Sen. Mark Begich, (D, AK) says the D's and the R's all worked together to put this bill together and then went to the floor and the R's said it was too much spending and voted against it. Watch:



Quite funny....lol

Progress on the Recovery Plan in Action

According to my KC Star this morning... The Recovery Bill signed into law by Pres. Obama is going to have great effect in both Kansas and my state Missouri sooner rather than later.

Kansas announced Friday that it is directing $84 million in stimulus money to widen U.S. 69 in central Overland Park between Interstates 435 and 35.
Traveled by up to 87,000 vehicles a day, this stretch is considered one of the state’s worst bottlenecks.
The highway, one of two major north-south routes through suburban Johnson County, gives commuters access to an estimated 90,000 jobs within a three-mile radius of where it intersects with I-435.
“This project will address serious congestion and safety issues and will enhance long-term economic activity,” Kansas Transportation Secretary Deb Miller said Friday.
Bids for the project are expected to be opened in May, with construction starting as early as June.

That's just one, there are several others,including these three projects which are also open for bids:

•$23 million for I-135/47th Street in Wichita.

•$11 million for Kansas 23 in Gove County to improve 16 miles of a narrow, 50-year-old road that lacks shoulders and has steep side slopes.

•$88 million for Kansas 61 in McPherson County to expand a 15-mile corridor from two lanes to four.

In Missouri, work started on the Osage River bridge near Tuscumbia, Tuesday right after Pres. Obama signed the bill into law. Yes, part of that was PR work, but it was also a show of confidence by my Gov. Jay Nixon (D). He is fighting a republican congress, who actually encouraged him to turn down the stimulus money. And of course our own Sen. Kit Bond, who voted against the bill, then scurried home to brag about bring home the bacon.

Here in Missouri, the bids are open for contracts Friday for 32 smaller projects sharing stimulus money.

Among them was the resurfacing of 18 miles of Interstate 29 from Vivion Road toward Platte City.
The bids opened in Missouri were the second wave of several for doling out $640 million in stimulus money for highways and bridges statewide.
Other Kansas City area projects intended for stimulus money include widening Missouri 150 near Lee’s Summit and reconstructing the interchange at I-70 and I-435 in Missouri.

All of the heavy resurfacing and highway repair work here in Missouri is contracted out. The Highway Department does the spot repairs and small repairs and patches. So this will mean jobs and money into the pockets of small and medium sized businesses and people will be going to work here.

I am excited to see this happening. We need this work done. Lots of this work has been put on hold for a long time due to not enough money in the states coffers, we have been told, and also to see the President's plan working. I am sure this is only one or two places it will be seen.

Hopefully we will begin to see other success stories coming out in the days to come. I hope others will post theirs too.

Recovery.gov is live

The newest web site from our government is ready to go. Recovery.gov is live.

Here is how they describe it:

Recovery.gov is a website that lets you, the taxpayer, figure out where the money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is going. There are going to be a few different ways to search for information. The money is being distributed by Federal agencies, and soon you'll be able to see where it's going -- to which states, to which congressional districts, even to which Federal contractors. As soon as we are able to, we'll display that information visually in maps, charts, and graphics.

There are all kinds of neat things to see and discover. Take a minute to check it out and see for yourself what is there. A timeline to track what is happening. The full text of the bill. A place to share our stories how this is affecting us.

This is something unique. Never before has our government given us a chance to see exactly what it is doing with our money, how it is dispersing it, how it is spending it, to give us a chance to make suggestions on how to do it better.

I am sure there will still be criticisms, but this is really unprecedented. Spin this one GOP.

Get your Reading Glasses, the New Plan is up and it is LOOOONG

UPDATED


Here is the new American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

It is sloppy, it is written on, it is not pretty, but it is there. It reminds me of something I would take to the grocery store for my list. But that's what they have made available for us to read.

I suppose you could say it is a rough draft and say this is their working model and call it the work up model. They are still moving text around and finalizing all the fine points before getting it ready for a vote and ready to send to the President.

You can access the text here at Open Congress.org . It is in two parts, just over 1,000 pages and has an explanation with it. Not sure what the explanation is for.
******************UPDATE*****************
This is a little easier... it is a summary but it is all the numbers and is a breakdown of the plan in easy to read line by line spending. Much easier to read and understand. So American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009, Act 2
******************************************
No, I have not read this one as of yet. This came in overnight and I have spent most of the night dozing and watching the news about the plane crash in the Buffalo area. How sad for this area, and for these people. My heart goes out to them all and to the flight crew.

Happy Reading everyone!!!

Easy to read Comparison of the Bills

This is a very easy to read and very easy to see comparison of the Senate and House bills. It shows the exact differences and the amounts between the two.

Go here to see the Recovery Plan laid out in Easy Terms to read and see.

I have seen several different plans and charts but this is by far the best one I have seen. It makes it so easy to see every little difference.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Senate Version

Well, here it is.. the draft of the Senate Stimulus Bill.. H. R. 1 all 778 pages of it. They sure don't make it easy.

It is still about the same amount of money as the House bill, $827 billion as opposed to $820 Billion but is weighed more to tax cuts.

Discretionary funds governed by the Senate Appropriations Committee are cut by about $83 billion, a 23 percent reduction that includes a $40 billion cut from a state fiscal stabilization program and the virtual elimination of a $19.5 billion public school and higher education construction program opposed by Republicans.

One of the last decisions was to strike $5.8 billion in public health funds to fight preventable diseases. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) was the driving force in making this cut, but elsewhere, she was also a force in adding $870 million for community health centers.

Within the Senate Finance Committee, about $7 billion in savings would be achieved from spending programs and $18 billion from tax changes.

The savings include $2 billion from the president’s health information technology initiative. Another $5 billion would be achieved by scaling back subsidies promised under a new initiative to help workers maintain their employer-provided health insurance when cut from company payrolls.

The conference negotiating process, which will include members from the House, Senate & White House, is setting up to be long and possibly contentious at times. Hopes of having the bill on Obama’s desk by President’s Day next Monday appear to be quickly fading. Once the conference committee has crafted a compromise, both the House and Senate will have to take one final vote to approve the package.

So, there it is. If you want to try to read it again. I posted the differences yesterday. That's a link to the same comparison just a different site if you want to look at it again.

I think it is like Sen. McCaskill and some of the others have said, better something than nothing. It may not be perfect but at least there it is. She said earlier that some of the things that weren't in this could be pushed through in appropriations and budgets, so we will just have to hold them to it.

Hopefully, they will get this passed quickly and things will start to turn around. Others are starting to notice that the republicans are just obstructing...they have no real objections to this, they are just objecting to object. It's all about winning back the House and Senate in 2010. So, document, keep track and remember all of this, because when the elections come up next year, it will be time to work hard for the Democratic party. We can't let them take over after what they have done this time.

We just can't.

I call Foul on Tweety!!!!

Wonder why Pres. Obama has had trouble with the Recovery Bill?? With media like this helping, it is no wonder... Watch this clip if you haven't already seen it.. then look at the times that Chris Matthews tore into the bill, picking at it worse than the republicans have done.

Media Matters looks at how he talks about it and how much fun Tweety had with the it over the last couple of weeks.

Summary: Chris Matthews said that Republicans "got some of their blood thirst going here when they learned that they could score when John Boehner went after the condoms in the -- condoms in the -- in the House version" of the recovery bill, adding that "it was a lot of fun for the Republicans to say contraception shouldn't be one of the pieces of this stimulus package." But Matthews himself also repeatedly raised, criticized, and on at least one occasion misrepresented the section of the bill dealing with contraceptives on Hardball.

On at least 5 different times from January 23, until February 3, Chris has picked at the Recovery plan and made fun of it in different ways, and was worse than some of the republicans talking about it.

On February 2, Matthews said: "You know, when you buy a bag of candy, a bag of M&Ms, you know that everything in there is M&Ms. Just as an example, this stimulus package, nobody knows what's in there. It's not -- there's a little of this, a little of that, a little of this thing. We're finding out little things about Hollywood. We're finding out something about condoms."

He has allowed the republicans to just say whatever they want, he never questions them, he never challenges them. They lie, they say anything they want, quote any type of figures they feel like and cite any thing they pull out of thin air. I have heard some of the stupidest things, like tonight, Haley Barbour stated the unemployment provision (which I think is now gone) would change the laws in the state and give people unemployment whether they were looking for work or not... and he just let it stand... heck they do that now here... and I am sure they do that everywhere, but to say it was a condition of the recovery bill was just stupid and I couldn't believe it's just there with no challenge.

I am not sure what is going on, or why there is so much of this happening with Tweety. This was part of what he had to say this morning on the Joke's show..again from Media Matters:

MATTHEWS: I think he's failed as a communicator, John. And I think the -- it's such an irony for one of the great communicators since Reagan and Kennedy. If you -- if somebody came up to me and said, I want to sell you this car, and you couldn't see the wheels on the car, and you couldn't see the engine, you'd say, how does this thing work?

The trouble with the stimulus package is they keep calling it a stimulus package, but you can't see the stimulus. How does this work again? And he's never really explained how any big chunk of this thing is going to get the economy moving again. He's got to say, this part of it's going to get this thing going. This part is going to get that thing going. The tax cuts are going to get consumers buying stuff; the stores are going to be filled again. People are going to buy cars again, blah blah blah; this other part is going to have cops put on the street again, so they'll be safe shopping again, and neighborhoods will not empty out again.

I think he's got to explain why each big chunk of this will get the economy moving again, and admit honestly that some of it is just relief; it is not recovery or reconstruction. Some of it is simply paying off people with real problems, like unemployment extension and health care for the unemployed. He ought to just say, this part is relief.

As you can see, this isn't a one time happening.. it is more than once, and it is developing into a habit. I don't know if it would do any good but there is an email address from Media Matters for Hardball. We can try to send him an email and let him know we aren't very happy with him. I know I am not happy with him. So, if you want, there is the address, send away...I am ..

hardball@msnbc.com

The Republicans Just Don't Get It... Proof in the Pudding

Here is a story I found from Hotline on Call that shows just how idiotic some of the Republicans really are.

Rep. Pete Sessions, from Texas made the statement yesterday that the House member needed to be like the Taliban and get an insurgency mentality. Yes, that's what I said... get an insurgency mentality...Can you imagine the headline on Drudge or FAUX News if a Democratic House member had said something like that??

He states falsely that the GOP members had NO input into the house bill and that they will continue to not support the recovery bill President Obama is asking for.

"Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban," Sessions said during a meeting yesterday with Hotline editors. "And that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- I'm not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that's not what we're saying. I'm saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."
That agreement, as Sessions described it, involved a promise from Pelosi to preside over an "open, honest, ethical Congress." Obama, Sessions added, has pledged to diminish the political rhetoric in Washington and work in a bipartisan fashion.
"If they do not give us those options or opportunities then we will then become insurgency of a nature to where we do those things that are necessary to making sure the American public knows what we think the correct answer is," Sessions said during the 60-minute interview. "So we either work together, or we're going to find a way to get our message out."

In other words, we get our way or we will pout and cry. Like always, the Republicans want to have their way or they will just take their marbles and go home.

"I simply said one can see that there's a model out there for insurgency," Sessions said before being interrupted by an aide. The staffer said Sessions was trying to convey that the Republicans need to start thinking about how to act strategically from their perch in the minority.

"I think insurgency is a mindset and an attitude that we're going to have to search for and find ways to get our message out and to be prepared to see things for what they are, rather than trying to do something about them," Sessions said. "I think what's happened is that the line was drawn in the sand" by Pelosi.
Sessions said the GOP's 178 members stand by their votes against the bill.

"I don't think any one of our members today feels like they would take back that vote," he said. "... There's no remorse."

So, as you can see, according to him they will vote again as a block to defeat the bill. Just remember that and if you have one of these people in your area. Vote against them. If they care that little for our country, that it is not a matter of what is best, but what is best for them, thinking they will win re-election. That's all they are thinking of.. read this last bit.

Asked to assess the political landscape for the midterms, Sessions suggested that the NRCC will back the best candidates in each district -- as opposed to targeting support to specific contests, as the group has done previously. He noted that Democrats hold seats in 83 districts that President Bush won in 2000 or 2004, showing that the GOP has opportunities, despite the party's losses in the last two cycles.

Sessions said he believes Republicans can take back the House.
"We believe our job is to aim to win the majority," Sessions said. "I've never aimed to come in second place."

So, now you know... they didn't vote against this bill because of any high minded reason, they voted against this bill because they think this is the way they will win re-election in 2010 and will win back seats in the House. They are only thinking of defeating the Democrats, not of what is best for the economy or the Country. Not of what is best for you or me or our families...but what is best for them, selfishly.

The Prez is Pizzed Off Part 2...

Washington Post Op Ed today the President takes to the pages of the paper to tell the people how he feels and remind us he won the election last year by a large margin.

In other words ENOUGH IS ENOUGH people... back off..get over these tax cuts crap and on with the business of getting my recovery plan passed and out to the people.

I think he is speaking to Democrats and Republicans both here. Remember he said he wanted no pork, just a clean bill that will help put people back to work. Yes, there will be some tax cuts in it but not the bloated crap they republicans want in there.

Last night I was posting some of the stuff the Senate was playing with as they were going back and forth. It was changing every 5 to 10 minutes as they were voting on bills. Some were being passed some weren't. And there was no method to there madness.

Here is some of what the Prez has to say:

By now, it's clear to everyone that we have inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the days of the Great Depression. Millions of jobs that Americans relied on just a year ago are gone; millions more of the nest eggs families worked so hard to build have vanished. People everywhere are worried about what tomorrow will bring.
What Americans expect from Washington is action that matches the urgency they feel in their daily lives -- action that's swift, bold and wise enough for us to climb out of this crisis.
Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

So, as you see he is wanting us to hurry, but get it right. Well not us, but the congress. And yes us, because they work for us, even if they forget. So, again, I am saying, call, write, email your senator, congress man or woman, even your governor and urge them to contact each other to get this legislation called the Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed. They must vote for it. Not against it.

Even if they are Republicans, you must call them, Especially if they are Republicans. They are threatening a filibuster to stop this bill, and if they do that, then let them suffer the consequences. Because I am sure they will.

It is good reading for your early morning...nice to have coffee with...to start your day with. And it is sure to set the hair of the Republican's on fire.. It certainly did the Morning Joke...He was about to have a heart attack when MEEKa read it to him...

Senate American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Here is the Senate Bill... I have not read it yet... Just got it from Twitter...

It is 736 pages... Lets see what the Repubs can pick apart on this one...lol

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES—111th Cong., 1st Sess.
H.R. 1