What Part of ‘Stimulus’ Don’t They Get?

[babylonsister]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/opinion/24tue1.html?_r=1

What Part of ‘Stimulus’ Don’t They Get?

Published: February 23, 2009


Imagine yourself jobless and struggling to feed your family while the governor of your state threatens to reject tens of millions of dollars in federal aid earmarked for the unemployed. That is precisely what is happening in poverty-ridden states like Louisiana and Mississippi where Republican governors are threatening to turn away federal aid rather than expand access to unemployment insurance programs in ways that many other states did a long time ago.

What makes these bad decisions worse is that they are little more than political posturing by rising Republican stars, like Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. This behavior reinforces the disturbing conclusion that the Republican Party seems more interested in ideological warfare than in working on policies that get the country back on track.

Fortunately, as President Obama prepares for his first address to Congress on Tuesday evening, voters of both parties have noticed. About three-quarters of those polled in a recent New York Times/CBS News survey — including more than 60 percent of Republicans — said Mr. Obama has been trying to work with Republicans. And 63 percent said Republicans in Congress opposed the stimulus package primarily for political reasons, not because they thought it would be bad for the economy. It should be sobering news for Republicans that about 8 in 10 said the party should be working in a bipartisan way.

The Republican Party’s attacks on the unemployment insurance portion of the stimulus package are a perfect example. States that accept the stimulus money aimed at the unemployed are required to abide by new federal rules that extend unemployment protections to low-income workers and others who were often shorted or shut out of compensation. This law did not just materialize out of nowhere. It codified positive changes that have already taken place in at least half the states.

snip//

Governors like Mr. Jindal should be worrying about how to end this recession while helping constituents feed and house their families — not about finding ways to revive tired election-year arguments about big spending versus small government.

[ejpoeta]

1. the thing that gets me is....

where was the concern for the past eight year when bush was spend spend spend!!! it's not like the deficit ballooned on its own. It's not like this just happened on a whim!!! for no reason. bush took the surplus and gave his rich friends a tax cut. then we went into a war..... the republicans don't worry themselves about paying for anything, I guess. we had tax cuts AND a war. how do you get deficits with THAT!!! it's like if I have a monthly bill I have to pay, and instead of paying it, I let the charges rack up while I go out and throw money into a crowd of wall streeters. that makes a lot of sense doesn't it!! then when they start calling me about what I owe, I just keep throwing even more money at rich people. here ya go. take more money!!!

[liberal N proud]

2. These governors are more worried about politics than their constituents

Jindal thinks this is a political game and by playing dumb ass he will win the hearts of Americans in his 2012 bid for the White House.