| The stimulus bill passed the House -- without a single Republican vote. Why? They wanted no spending, all tax cuts.
I suppose I could write something pithy, like, "I guess they don't give a d*mn about the economy or their constituents," but of course the vote is political. An effort to defang Obama's "bipartisan" rhetoric -- can't you hear them now? "it was a partisan spending bill!" despite the myriad concessions made to the GOP -- an attempt to paint Congressional Democrats as the bad guys, and all done without a single bit of pressure. The bill didn't need any Republican votes. If it had -- like it will in the Senate -- it would have attracted Republican votes. Trust me, no one wants to be the guy who blocked the stimulus package.
In short, it's the perfect "no" vote for Dennis Rehberg.
As promised in a press release a few days ago, Rehberg voted against the bill. Here's the rhetoric:
"Despite the name, this isn't a stimulus bill - it's an unprecedented attempt to advance the interests of very few special interest groups at the expense of hardworking taxpayers."
"There's no reason to permanently medicate a temporary illness," said Rehberg. "It's a mistake to use this legislation as the launch pad for a lot of new government programs and government jobs that we'll be paying for long after the economy has recovered. We need to quickly get the medicine where it will do the most good - in the hands of the small businesses that create jobs and the taxpayers who will keep them in business. And we need to take all necessary precautions to guard against the fleecing of the American taxpayer."
The usual fare. Note, of course, how fantastic Rehberg's claims about the bill are. As mentioned in previous posts, this bill deals little with "special interest groups" and mostly with bridges and roads. H*ll, Montana got $607 million, and here's how it'll come down:
The largest portion of the Montana money - $280 million - would be spent on highways and bridges.
Another big chunk of the stimulus money goes toward health care, jobless benefits, food stamps and other programs that benefit victims of the downturn. The state government, which administers those programs, would get almost $200 million in stimulus money.
The rest of the state money is split up among school modernization, wastewater treatment, transit, education, Head Start and low-income heating assistance.
Doesn't sound like the weird ramblings from Rehberg's press release, but it does seem like projects that Montanans would overwhelmingly support. No doubt if Rehberg's vote had been meaninful, he'd switch it in a hurry, just like he did with, say, CHIP.
Enough about our flip-floppin' gutless Representative, and on to more details about the stimulus package! First...drum roll, please...Jerrold Nadler's $3 bill amendment for mass transit...passed! On a voice vote!
Additionally, as Elana Schor notes, some good, progressive expenditures made it into the bill. Notice that most of Schor's list -- increased money for food stamps, expanded unemployment benefits, etc. -- are the most efficient means of adding jobs to the economy. And behind them, are the infrastructure projects...
The bill seems to be what's needed, but let's face it, there's nothing in this bill that's new or transformative. No overhaul for our transportation system. No carbon tax. No massive investment into green tech or energy efficiency.
I realize I may just be impatient, but this bill looks like a list of projects and programs that Democrats have favored for years, but haven't been able to implement because of Republican rule. Now, a lot of this stuff is good spending -- on schools, bridges and other things you and I will use and benefit from (unlike corporate tax cuts, say) -- but let's face it: it's the same ol' game so far... |
