More Bipartisanship, Less Stimulus

The Nation posted an article titled More Bipartisanship, Less Stimulus by John Nichols. The House approved the stimulus plan and the Senate is now going over the key elements. The Senate's $780 billion plan is still a budget buster. It's just not focused on spending as much of the money as the House sought to on renewing the economy. In order to get the votes of two Republican (Maine's Susan Collins and Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter) and perhaps another (Mainer Olympia Snowe) that were needed to undermine the threat of a GOP filibuster, Reid surrendered $86 billion is proposed stimulus spending. In doing so, the Democrats agreed to cut not just fat but bone, and to warp the focus and intent of the legislation. The Senate plan is dramatically more weighted than the House bill toward tax cuts (which account for more than 40 percent of the overall cost of the package). The Senate's increased emphasis on tax cuts comes at the expense of the aggressive spending in key areas that might actually get a stalled economy moving. The House's proposal to help unemployed Americans maintain their health benefits has been cut down.

Under the Senate plan:

* States will get less aid.

* Schools will get less help.

* Job creation programs will be less well funded.

* Preparations to combat potential public health disasters -- which could put the final nail in the economy's coffin -- will not be made.

At a time when smart economists are saying that a bigger, bolder stimulus plan is needed, Senate Democrats and a few moderate Republicans have agreed to a smaller, weaker initiative. The White House still wants to advance this measure, as do Senate Democratic leaders. And, considering the urgency of the moment, they are probably right to try to do something. But if the final "stimulus package" proves to be insufficient to jump start the economy -- and if what is left of public confidence in the prospect of turnaround collapses as a result -- this Friday night compromise will be remembered with pained regret.

I think that this article does give some very good points and does bring up a very good argument. I do think the stimulus package is a very good idea. It gives the people money that need it. The economy is in bad shape and it needs to get better fast. The House keeps stalling on getting the plan passed but they need to hurry. I do think this article is wrong in a lot of ways. It says that schools will get less help and states will get less aid. That is not true. The community helps the schools and if people in the community have more money, they could help the schools and help the community. I think the stimulus package is a good idea.