Congressional Budget Office: Present Stimulus Package Is Not A Good Bill

As much as I hate to sound like a broken record, it's hard to ignore some things that I truly believe in my heart and the common sense in my head, especially when they both tell me something is not a very good idea. But I am not alone in the world, just out of the loop of influence.

One guy that is not out of that loop is the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf. In the Director's blog on the CBO webite, he states what is becoming painfully obvious to most intelligent people, who also happen to possess the slightest measure of common sense. And he has attempted to communicate this (SEE: Pdf letter) to the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee. Unfortunately for all of us that stand to suffer the full impact of reckless legislation, this ranking member is not presently in the majority party.

For those unfamiliar with Mr. Elmendorf, you can read his resume here (also in pdf form). Those that support this stimulus package lock, stock, and barrel may be ready to jump conclusions about his qualifications, but it is important for them to understand that he is not a right-wing hack. He comes from the Brookings Institution, which is anything but partisan and his appointment had the blessings of a Democratic majority Congress.

Elmendorf doesn't doubt that the current stimulus package will provide a slight boost in the economy for the short-term, which is to say in the next two years. The range he provides is between 1.2 million and 3.6 million jobs. Keeping in mind that this package is now estimated to be at around $800 billion, we can easily use a calculator to do the math. Using his estimate, this means Congress will be spending between $220,000 and $660,000 per job, most of which will pay nowhere near either amount.

So where is the money going? Special interests that Democrats have an unhealthy affinity for, I suspect. More importantly, from where will it come? More government loans, probably from foreign sources that have already loaned us more than we needed to borrow.

To answer both questions in-depth would require a separate post for each. But the outcome of this whole scheme is what people need to hear, because it is apparent they do not care about the questions (or their answers) to begin with. They didn't ask Obama or the Dems how they were going to pay for their grandiose promises during the election, they don't seem to care much now.

Mr. Elmendorf says it will reduce output starting in 2011 and beyond, when these loans will need to start to be repaid. To put it in simpler terms, it will buy us another recession in 2012, coincidentally when the President will be up for reelection. If you are a critical thinker like me, this causes you to ponder some things like whether this is the master plan -- keep the people believing they need him to save them from the same impending doom he says we all are facing, at the present time.

It really doesn't take a calculus whiz to figure this out, just someone that can do basic general math. If you are spending more than you take in, you will need to borrow money. If you borrow that money, you will need to pay it back or risk losing your credit rating. If you have more cash flowing out than in, you either have to find a way to bring more cash in or stop the excess flow of cash out. In other words, you need to increase revenue or decrease expenses.

Never once does it occur to Congress that maybe too much money is flowing out of Washington. But starting in 2011, the independent CBO believes it will really start to flow. In the meantime, there's no need to bring this up. Those that hold power right now, simply do not want to hear it.

One fine example of this is a recent interview with David Obey (D-WI), the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. He helped write the bill and doesn't like being asked about the waste in this bill.

U.S. Rep. David Obey (D-WI), the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, helped write the bill and says he doesn't like being asked about earmarks.

"We simply made a decision, which took about three seconds, not to have earmarks in the bill," he says. "And with all due respect, that's the least important question facing us on putting together this package."

Leaving out the earmarks does mean Congress will have less control over how the money is spent. But, Obey says, "So what? This is an emergency. We've got to simply find a way to get this done as fast as possible and as well as possible, and that's what we're doing."

That doesn't mean Congress will be responsible if the money is spent badly, he says.

"The person who spends the money badly will be responsible. We are simply trying to build as many protections in as possible," Obey says. "We have more oversight built into this package than any package in the history of man. If money is spent badly, we want to know about it so we can hold accountable the people who made that choice. And guess what? Regardless of what we do, there will be some stupid decisions made."

Sounds like this is worse than if it were full of earmarks, because at least there would be some accountability as how the money will be spent. But in this case, Congress can absolve itself of any responsibility if the money is wasted by the recipients. This is something we have already seen from last year's bailout and despite the knowledge of those mistakes, Rep. Obey is saying he doesn't give a damn how your tax dollars are spent.

The House wrote it and wants the Senate to pass it as they crafted it. As we can see right now, the Senate wants to screw it up in their way. By the time it gets to Obama, he will more than pleased to sign it, either way it would arrive. This tells me they are spendaholics who care nothing about money that you earn and must give to them. They spend it like drunken sailors, with no thought about the long-term consequences. They only care about the here and now, which means they must pay off their supporters, while they have this chance.

You see, I suspect they know their time in power is limited. Even Joe Biden knows there will be a backlash, when the outcome of this sausage fry is more plainly known.

So get ready America, your short term fix is coming, but your children and grandchildren are in for some hard times ahead. I hope you think about it, when that time comes. I hope all of you that voted for this bunch of greedy, idiotic bastards can get your short-term thrill now, because you have demonstrated that you have no knowledge of anything and even less compassion for those that must follow your selfish actions.

If you do not fall into this category of egocentricity, I highly suggest you flood your Senator's e-mail box and phone lines with voices of displeasure. Especially those you know will be up for reelection next year, all these jerks will ever fear or understand is losing their power.