Are you liberals proud of this new administration?

meta4 wrote:I want to know how much has been spent and which provisions have received the first disbursements. To me, that would show a lot more of what the administration is thinking.

Here's one project getting off to a fast start:

'Shovels hit the ground' on stimulus project, Obama says
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/03/stimulus/index.html

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said, "The work begins today in Montgomery County, Maryland, where a work crew is starting on a project to resurface Maryland State Highway 650 -- a very busy road that has not been fully repaired in 17 years."

The resurfacing contract is going to a Pennsylvania-based family-owned company, America Infrastructure, LaHood said.

He said the project will support 60 jobs. "And that's how we're going to get the country back on its feet," LaHood added.

Mark Compton, director of government affairs for American Infrastructure, said his company received $2.1 million in federal funds, by way of the Maryland State Highway Administration.

Better lower than unemployment rate Meanwhile locally FW Foundry (Lima Rd) is closing and 157 are out come June.

Markwes wrote:I'm at a loss why anyone would defend this stimulus bill. I don't help my family financially by taking out a loan to buy materials to add on a room and then hire my kids to to do the work. Sure, I have created "jobs" and the room is nice, but how have I helped the family financially as a whole?

Does anyone here know someone who is out of work? Now, does that person benefit by this bill? I know that my brother doesn't know anything about building high-speed rails, so $8 billion for that isn't going to help. He isn't going to make any money from the $400 million for global warming research, or the $2.1 billion going to Head Start, or $200 million going for birth control. Can someone tell me how these things are going to stimulate the economy?

markwes... I guess you bring up a good point... i personally would make my kids build the damn thing for free... but barring that... you are paying a hopefully discounted price for the labor, and you are giving that money to your kids to presumably do with as they please. In that vein, you are benifitting the economy in the same way that Obama creating jobs will benefit the economy... by putting money into it to buy good and services. Your kids will blow that money on something at walmart... you get my drift.

That out of work person benefits from the bill from the extension of unemployment benefits... money cant do research, so that money will actually go to people who will do that research, and ultimately the goal of that research would be to provide for an agenda by which we can adress global warming, which will likely require people to do the work. The 2.1 billion to head start will pay dividends in 10 years... the 200 million for birth control will help prevent unwanted pregnancy and disease, especially among the poor and uninsured. While that wont stimulate the economy directly, it will do so indirectly by saving more than that $200 million in defaults On uninsured.

LTRT wrote:Better lower than unemployment rate Meanwhile locally FW Foundry (Lima Rd) is closing and 157 are out come June.

Point taken, what are the auto manufacturers going to do?

How much, and how long ago did we give aid to the auto industry? The money's been made available, but GM still needs to sell cars with water pumps to save our boys and girls jobs here at home.

What's Mitch been doing with GM lately?

Mark Compton, director of government affairs for American Infrastructure, said his company received $2.1 million in federal funds, by way of the Maryland State Highway Administration.

Job creations - an example from the industry I work in.

Recovery Act (ARRA): Community Health Center Grants by State
http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/hrsa/napawards.html

Totals... $150 million dollars to be spent equates to 126 new healthcare centers for uninsured, providing 750,000+ people with comprehensive, and preventative healthcare and 5500+ jobs averaging $27,788 per job.

www.recovery.gov

Estimated Job Creation Effect: http://www.recovery.gov/?q=content/estimated-job-effect

meta4 wrote:

Markwes wrote:No you're sounding like typical Bman - "anti-Obama", "regurgitated right-wing radio chatter". Just google 'stimulus bill pork' if you want examples. That's what I did.

You totally missed my point. Look it up yourself, from the source... read the bill. See, I googled "stimulus bill pdf" - you googled "stimulus bill pork"... (in poker, that'd be called a "tell")

It doesn't matter how much, or what percentage of pork is in there, we know it contains some... it was created by CONGRESS for Santa's sake! Besides, most of that money hasn't been spent yet.

Maybe that's the difference between you and I... you seem to be looking for what others are saying. I'm interested in the telltale signatures, like which programs are prioritized "first". I want to know how much has been spent and which provisions have received the first disbursements. To me, that would show a lot more of what the administration is thinking.

Contrary to popular (or your) belief, I'm not basing my opinion on Fox News or Rush. Yes, I have looked up "stimulus bill pdf" and found articles in favor of, opposed to, and indifferent to, the stimulus bill. But obviously, if I'm trying to make the point that I think it's full of pork, that's what I'm going to look up. Sorry but when it comes to this much money, I'm not willing to give Congress a pass just because it's been their nature throughout history.

Edit: And for the record, here is an interesting site:
http://www.readthestimulus.org/
1588 pages, and you want me to look it up!

Hey Markwes, maybe you should just be like the Democrats and become a speed-reader because I'm sure they read every single word of this thing before voting/pushing/jamming it down our throats.

Markwes wrote:

Contrary to popular (or your) belief, I'm not basing my opinion on Fox News or Rush. Yes, I have looked up "stimulus bill pdf" and found articles in favor of, opposed to, and indifferent to, the stimulus bill. But obviously, if I'm trying to make the point that I think it's full of pork, that's what I'm going to look up. Sorry but when it comes to this much money, I'm not willing to give Congress a pass just because it's been their nature throughout history.

Edit: And for the record, here is an interesting site:
http://www.readthestimulus.org/
1588 pages, and you want me to look it up!

Well, on Tuesdays I love contrary, so you had me from word one.

I found a link to the final stimulus bill that was approved off a Google link to Huffingtonpost. I don't have that site bookmarked but it ranked the highest. That version was 680 some pages. I'm scratching my head over the 1500+ page version. I wonder what the diff is? I think some Democrats use diff, but not me.

Anyhow, I found CNN's site very well done and interesting, I'm sure they don't make money on the boring stuff However, the recovery.gov site shows the most potential to deliver the kind of info I was looking for. I will check back there often.

Senate Votes to Keep Earmarks in Spending Bill
Sen. John McCain's attempt to strip out an estimated 8,500 earmarks failed on a vote of 63-32
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/03/senate-votes-earmarks-spending/

"How does anyone justify some of these earmarks: $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa; $2 million "for the promotion of astronomy" in Hawaii; $6.6 million for termite research in New Orleans; $2.1 million for the Center for Grape Genetics in New York," he said.

Taxpayers for Common Sense estimates the legislation contains 8,570 disclosed earmarks worth $7.7 billion. House Democrats declined to provide an estimate of the number of pet projects in the bill, and put their cost at $3.8 billion.

Democrats also say the value of earmarks is 5 percent lower than the last time Congress approved spending bills for an entire year.

The earmark issue has been a thorny one for Obama, who successfully urged lawmakers to pass an economic stimulus bill without them. He deferred to lawmakers on the legislation now moving through Congress, but his aides have worked to make it appear that he is merely acquiescing in what lawmakers and the White House had been prepared to do at the end of the Bush administration.

McCain ridiculed that argument in an animated speech on the Senate floor in Monday, asking, "does that mean that last year's president will sign this pork-barrel bill?"

At the White House, Gibbs was deflecting questions on the same subject.

Asked why Obama would sign the bill when he was overturning numerous policies put in place by former President George W. Bush, he said, "I think that you'll see that the President is going to draw some very clear lines about what's going to happen going forward."

Oops, the link is from FoxNews, so I guess it's all made up.

Obama's promise to go after earmarks 'line by line'
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/mar/03/obamas-promise-go-after-earmarks-line-line/

The $410 billion Omnibus bill for 2009:
The Omnibus, however, is loaded with earmarks. Obama and the White House could have used the bully pulpit to criticize them. But they have not been very critical, nor have they indicated any attempt to go "line by line" through the bill to look for wasteful programs, as Obama pledged during the campaign.

Administration budget chief Peter Orszag said, "We want to just move on. Let's get this bill done, get it into law and move forward."

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:Hey Markwes, maybe you should just be like the Democrats and become a speed-reader because I'm sure they read every single word of this thing before voting/pushing/jamming it down our throats.

You discovered it! Our heretofore secret master plan to cripple the government, and weasel ourselves, using every moment of opportunity, into every single facet of your peaceful life of American freedom, to exploit every gap, and assume ultimate power in the world.

...and will become known simply as "we". as will you, "my friends".

Muahahahahahhahh Muahahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Fear leads to Anger...

Joke:

What's the difference between jam and jelly?

"We" can't jelly this stimulus bill down your throats! (badumbum)

keeping in mind approximately 40% of the earmarks were requested/required by republicons..which is normal for the minority party.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090303/pl_politico/19539_1

Taxpayers for Common Sense, a government spending watchdog, has released its breakdown of the biggest earmarkers.

Not surprisingly, former Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) tops the list.

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the ranking member of the Finance Committee and the Senate’s highest-profile critic of the bank bailouts, snagged the No. 2 spot, representing one of the nation’s poorest states — and a state where even the smallest tax hikes have to be submitted to a public vote. Missouri Sen. Kit Bond, a senior Republican on the Appropriations Committee’s transportation and housing subcommittee, was the third-largest recipient of earmarks.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) brought home around $26.6 million — only about half the bacon delivered to Kentucky by Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

Following are the top 20 Senate earmark recipients — 12 Democrats, 8 Republicans.

1. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.): $122,804,900
2 Richard Shelby (R-Ala.): $114,484,250
3. Kit Bond (R-Mo.): $85,691,491
4. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.): $76,899,425
5. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.): $75,908,475
6. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska): $74,000,750
7. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa): $66,860,000
8. James Inhofe (R-Okla.): $53,133,500
9. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.): $51,186,000
10. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii): $46,380,205
11. Patty Murray (D-Wash.): $39,228,250
12. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.): $36,547,100
13. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.): $36,161,125
14. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.): $35,577,250
15. Robert Casey (D-Pa.): $27,169,750
16. Harry Reid (D-Nev.): $26,628,613
17. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.): $25,320,000
18. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.): $23,832,000
19. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.): $21,952,250
20. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), retired: $19,588,625

and yes i am proud of this administration. was anybody proud of the previous one?

Gotta love the Republicans, who bash earmarks and the budget, then praise to their constituents how much money they're getting... disgusting. If you're going to pretend to stand for something, at least pretend to follow through with it.

Jugomugo wrote:Gotta love the Republicans, who bash earmarks and the budget, then praise to their constituents how much money they're getting... disgusting. If you're going to pretend to stand for something, at least pretend to follow through with it.

Bayh, Lugar voting nay to own projects
http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090304/NEWS03/303049945

WASHINGTON – Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., will break with most of his party and vote against a $410 billion domestic-spending bill that critics have called bloated and overstuffed with lawmakers’ pet projects.

Most Republicans, including Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., are expected to vote against the bill, which is likely to pass.

to Sen. Bayh & everyone who votes no.

LTRT wrote:

Jugomugo wrote:Gotta love the Republicans, who bash earmarks and the budget, then praise to their constituents how much money they're getting... disgusting. If you're going to pretend to stand for something, at least pretend to follow through with it.

Bayh, Lugar voting nay to own projects
http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090304/NEWS03/303049945

WASHINGTON – Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., will break with most of his party and vote against a $410 billion domestic-spending bill that critics have called bloated and overstuffed with lawmakers’ pet projects.

Most Republicans, including Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., are expected to vote against the bill, which is likely to pass.

to Sen. Bayh & everyone who votes no.

Yes, a lot of them are voting against these bills. But then run home to gloat about how their states or districts are getting money. Disgusting.

that fact wont be addressed by the nobama crowd tho jugo, just like anything else that doesnt support their hope of failure they want so desperately to happen.

If we want to talk about party lines, the vote breakdown from readthestimulus.org:

House:
Democrats - 246 yes votes to 7 no
Republicans - 0 yes votes to 176 no

Senate:
Democrats - 57 yes votes to 0 no
Republicans - 3 yes votes to 38 no

And I don't care who or what party is adding the pork. They need to be voted out.

Jugomugo wrote:
Yes, a lot of them are voting against these bills. But then run home to gloat about how their states or districts are getting money. Disgusting.

All of a sudden you have ethics?

Markwes wrote:If we want to talk about party lines, the vote breakdown from readthestimulus.org:

House:
Democrats - 246 yes votes to 7 no
Republicans - 0 yes votes to 176 no

Senate:
Democrats - 57 yes votes to 0 no
Republicans - 3 yes votes to 38 no

And I don't care who or what party is adding the pork. They need to be voted out.

What's your point? Are you trying to show an obvious pork bias with these vote numbers? I guess I'm just a broth and bread kind of guy so can you simplify a little?

Also, are you referring to pork in the stimulus bill or the "Omni" spending package that needs to pass by Friday?

Markwes wrote:If we want to talk about party lines, the vote breakdown from readthestimulus.org:

House:
Democrats - 246 yes votes to 7 no
Republicans - 0 yes votes to 176 no

Senate:
Democrats - 57 yes votes to 0 no
Republicans - 3 yes votes to 38 no

And I don't care who or what party is adding the pork. They need to be voted out.

its old news the repubs didnt vote for anything...during the dem administration. they are banking on failure of the stimulus..because if it works they will not be voted back in, and if it doesnt they MIGHT get voted back in. heck of a strategy brownie! they want to stick with tried-and-failed policies. what again is the definition of insanity---trying the same thing over and over and expecting it to turn out differently?

how amusing that you dont care who added pork since its proven your party added almost half of it.. but your big complaint is the pork?

The Republicans are putting in pork just as the Dems are. They know they will get their pork when the bills pass, whether they vote for it or not.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123612000246123253.html

President Barack Obama enjoys widespread backing from a frightened American public for his ambitious, front-loaded agenda, a new poll indicates.

He is more popular than ever, Americans are hopeful about his leadership, and opposition Republicans are getting drubbed in public opinion, the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll suggests.

The poll found a sharp jump in the proportion of Americans who say the nation is "generally headed in the right direction" since Mr. Obama's January inauguration, a period when economic indicators and financial markets have suggested the opposite. The survey shows that 41% of Americans say the country is headed in the right direction, up dramatically from 26% in mid-January, before Mr. Obama took office, and up from 12% before the election.

The number who say the country is on the "wrong track" is still higher at 44%, but given the economic conditions, pollsters expected it to be much higher.

In the past, similarly sudden improvements in national mood were recorded only after national emergencies that prompted a rallying effect, such as the 2001 terrorist attacks. In this case, the boost is being driven by Democrats and other Obama voters who are pleased with the opening weeks of the administration. Overall, two-thirds of all Americans say they feel "hopeful" about Mr. Obama's leadership and plans, compared with 28% who say they feel "doubtful."

Yet a record 70% are very dissatisfied with the economy, and half of all adults are dissatisfied with their own financial situation. Three in four say economic conditions have "a ways to go" before they hit bottom.

"These numbers capture where America is today -- apprehensive about the future, but willing to undertake big, bold policy initiatives," said Peter D. Hart, a Democratic pollster who conducts the poll with Republican Bill McInturff.

The survey of 1,007 adults was conducted Feb. 26 to March 1 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

The rise in optimism has important implications for the president's agenda, said Mr. McInturff, who has long tracked data on national mood. Typically, he said, presidential approval ratings hover about 20 percentage points above the national "right direction" number. With that figure at 41%, he said, Mr. Obama's approval rating, at 60%, is sustainable and high enough to allow for major victories.

"For most major social change to happen, you need a very strong president with very strong numbers," he said.

The survey of 1,007 adults was conducted Feb. 26 to March 1 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

not quite representative of 300 million

Doesn't seem that a large percentage of the responses feel the same.

Markwes wrote:

meta4 wrote:

Markwes wrote:If we want to talk about party lines, the vote breakdown from readthestimulus.org:

House:
Democrats - 246 yes votes to 7 no
Republicans - 0 yes votes to 176 no

Senate:
Democrats - 57 yes votes to 0 no
Republicans - 3 yes votes to 38 no

And I don't care who or what party is adding the pork. They need to be voted out.

What's your point? Are you trying to show an obvious pork bias with these vote numbers? I guess I'm just a broth and bread kind of guy so can you simplify a little?

Also, are you referring to pork in the stimulus bill or the "Omni" spending package that needs to pass by Friday?

Funny how Republican bashers can "defend" something by bringing up the "republicans did the same thing" argument. But when I post something showing an obvious divide between parties, I am supposed to have a point.

No, my point was that I don't see an obvious divide between the parties... if you can look at numbers like this - considering no other outside info and see an obvious divide, you could be the next celebrity psychic.

I suspect what we've got going on in this thread is a bunch of GOPers beating their chests because they want to derail the efforts of Democrats. That's OK, they can try that because they know what it produces.

I understand that plenty of congress-people are trying to react to outrage from their base, but I think it makes absolutely no sense to put up a bill, then dissect it for 3 months before finally passing a bill that will be thrown as a "wild pitch" in the next congressional election. That kind of partisan behavior will happen in any election, it's not certain that chopping up the Omnibudget will produce any less pork, in fact I predict it would be worse!

LTRT wrote:Senate Votes to Keep Earmarks in Spending Bill
Sen. John McCain's attempt to strip out an estimated 8,500 earmarks failed on a vote of 63-32

7.8% of the Omnibudget is pork... go figure.

Ok, nix the grape genetics, keep the pig emissions research for Idaho - it's something they need and want. Gotta put yourself in their shoes. $1.2M is pennies compared to $410B but it literally sounds "porky".

Anyone ever live near a pig farm? Then you know what I mean. I'm not just advocating for the farmer, but making the point that all this pissing and moaning about pork is nothing new... if they had more time to scrutinize the Omnibudget, of course they would trim *some* of the fat but not all! Some people need to get a grip. What do you expect?

Just wait, it'll all snap back into place within a year or four.