I find it interesting that right after you call it a deceptive half-truth, you basically validate the assertion. It was declared to be an immediate stimulus towards building the infrastructure of the country and yet only ten percent of it going to the shovel-ready projects that can do the most good as quickly as possible.
If you want spending that complements the stimulus, that’s fine; give it time to be thoroughly vetted. Don’t piggyback it onto legislation that’s meant to give the economy the footing it needs right now.
But I’m resigned to the fact that I’m a conservative and you’re not. The medium of the internet is not known for uniting people of differing political opinions on to common ground - so let’s just look at something that’s a bit more objective; history.
FDR knew how to unite the people. He knew how to reach out to Republicans and he understood what Sinistral and Cavelcade and you don’t seem to care about - politicains of either party don’t like it when you piggyback spending on a bill, especially when it’s done so quickly that it doesn’t give politicians the ability to become acquainted with the legislation.
When we were engulfed in the Great Depression, FDR had a bill that passed unanimously through the Congress in a span of six hours - he was able to do that not just because “he had won” the election but because he understood that he needed to make this legislation as focused on an immediate reaction to the economy as possible. The next bill he brought through was a thorough concession to the Republicans on the issue of tax cuts, and from then on, the issue of partisanship was hardly something FDR had to worry about during his first 100 days.
Instead, Obama tried to pull an omnibus of legislation that we don’t know will work (just like TARP), that was rushed through (just like TARP), and doesn’t have a pre-established committee to watch it’s progress and moderate where the money goes (just like TARP).
Ah, that’s another thing FDR did; he had a very efficient and disciplined infrastrucutre for governing his legislation and stimulus - that’s a lot more effective than just putting it on the internet.
Those people that are going to be talking about how this was a direct insult to Obama or something like that have not been aware of the House deliberations and the distinct tone of the Democrats in a great deal of those proceedings. Obama may be trying to focus on unity but the Democrats are not. It’s an antagonistic environment - Obey, Pelosi, and a great deal of the other Democrats in the chamber have chided nearly every amendment that the Republicans question or to try to add to the legislation. I’m well aware of the fact that you will find that to be laudable, but you can’t expect that to cause unity to form in the chamber.
Either way, this could fail as badly as TARP did, or it could work wonders on the economy. I hope it helps, but while I agree with the bill in principle, I’m disheartened by how the Democrats in the Congress have maligned the very clear message of immediate action that Obama has been articulating.
Oh, and I love this.
If you can explain to me when else it would have a chance to pass, I’m all ears.
This is the kind of thinking that results in earmarks being amended into legislation that they have no business being put into. This is the kind of thinking that fuels wasteful spending in the Congress. This is the kind of thinking that abuses the legislative process and distorts it’s purpose.
You don’t amend an agenda, even a principled and effective one, into legislation just because the political climate makes your party capable of doing so. The entire purpose of the Congress is to be a deliberative body, because one legislation gets passed, and once money starts flowing, its incredibly difficult to rewind the clock. A massive infusion into the education sector is admirable, but Congressional members are entitled to take the time to view it, understand it, set up iron-clad controls over how the money will be moderated and diffused. Congress didn’t get that. Instead it was ram-rodded through because it’s good.
Yeah, we know it’s good. The House Republicans weren’t angry because they hate education or whatever partisan perspective some Democrats might believe, they were angry because they saw it a piggyback amendment that had not been thoroughly vetted and scrutinized and amounted to more spending that we can’t afford.
Go back into the archives and see how much time it takes for the Omnibus bills to be passed - it takes a lot of time and a great deal of deliberative consideration before it’s finally passed. That’s because it’s a massive spending bill and the Congress’s job is to make sure that those funds are being appropriated efficiently right out of the gate. They make sure there’s a pathway, a route for that money that’s already secure before the President’s pen approves it. That didn’t happen with this bill.
That’s not democracy playing out Xwing; that’s inefficient government. Mark my words; there was a time when the Republicans had the same attitude concerning the opposition as you do. There was a time, before I actually got excited about politics, when the conservatives could say, “we won” and be pompous enough to see that as the end of the debate. They paid for it and so will the Democrats if they choose to walk that same path. But it seems like you’re far removed from the bipartisanship your victorious candidate was so concerned with.
By the way, the Republicans didn’t ignore the tax cuts in the legislation. They realized that it was a concession to their principles; what they were upset about was how a great deal of the remaining money was appropriated.