A concern about states turning down all or part of the stimulus funds.
Catshrink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:10 AM
Original message |
A concern about states turning down all or part of the stimulus funds. |
|
Will their actions cause the programs to be less effective? And if so, will this give them ammo in the next campaign cycle?
Or will it just make them look like bigger idiots than they are and cause them to be thrown out on their sorry asses? (Hint: I like this outcome best!)
|
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:11 AM
Response to Original message |
Catshrink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. That's what I was thinking... |
|
I think their "no" gives Dems. more ammo to use against them for putting their party meme before the needs of their constituents.
|
pacalo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:15 AM
Response to Original message |
3. In my state, Jindal is playing with fire if he does turn down the money. |
|
I'm counting on NO Mayor Nagin making a big issue out of it.
|
Mika
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:17 AM
Response to Original message |
4. How gullible are Americans to corporate propaganda? |
bluestateguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:19 AM
Response to Original message |
5. I'm guessing that the money would just be redistributed to other states |
|
I'm assuming that's what the law says, anyway.
|
smoogatz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:19 AM
Original message |
No stimulus for red states? |
|
Works for me. Let them turn it down; more for the reality-based part of the country. It's a politically very risky move for them, in all seriousness: Palin has said Obama should veto the stimulus--but will she turn down the money? She costs her state an estimated 8,000 jobs if she does. How many Alaskans could use a decent-paying job right now?
|
Winterblues
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:19 AM
Response to Original message |
6. States are hurting especially those now being Governed by Republicans |
|
Those states will only go from bad to worse without a Capital injection of some sort. There are going to be very few "earmarks" allowed in the General budget Bill and especially for Republicans. I don't believe any will refuse the Federal aid. There are already reports of jobs being saved because planned layoffs are now being shelved due to expected Stimulus funds soon to be coming. There is no way this amount of direct spending can not help our situation at least some..People are starting top scramble already to get in on it..Me included..
|
ejpoeta
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:22 AM
Response to Original message |
7. they aren't going to turn down that money. period. |
|
that would be a death sentence for their political career i think. I mean, if you saw pawlenty last night trying to twist to conform to a logic that makes it perfectly reasonable that a governor that opposed the bill would take the money anyway. it boggles the mind!!
|
ejpoeta
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-18-09 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. oh, and one could argue that if they did turn down the money |
|
it would provide proof of the effect of the stimulus bill if states that took the money see a turn around and ones that didn't continue to struggle.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Dec 26th 2024, 06:02 PM
Response to Original message |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.