Tag Archives: Stimulus

Democrats propose 23 billion bailout for teacher unions

Story here from the leftist Washington Post. (H/T Ace of Spades via ECM)

Excerpt:

As public schools nationwide face larger class sizes and cuts in programs, the Senate’s leading Democrat on education issues proposed a $23 billion bailout Wednesday to help avert layoffs of tens of thousands of teachers and other school personnel in the coming academic year.

[…]Education Secretary Arne Duncan estimated that school layoffs could total from 100,000 to 300,000 unless Congress acts.

“It is brutal out there, really scary,” Duncan told reporters on Capitol Hill. “This is a real emergency. What we’re trying to avert is an education catastrophe.”

Duncan stopped just short of endorsing Harkin’s bill. But he said efforts to improve schools will suffer if class sizes rise, summer school is cut and other programs are jettisoned.

Harkin, chairman of the Appropriations Committee’s panel on education and of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, said time is running out because states are starting to issue layoff notices. “We must act soon,” he said. “This is not something we can fix in August. We have to fix it now.”

[…]Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said he worried about where the government would find $23 billion for a bailout in a time of growing federal budget deficits. “I wonder from whose schoolchildren we are going to borrow this money, because we have a looming debt crisis in this country and we’ll need to debate this,” he said. “We all want to help our children and our schools, but that is a deep concern.”

A fitting follow-up to today’s earlier education policy post. This is why you don’t put silver spoon liberals in charge of the country – they just keep spending and spending to bail out their greedy special interest groups.

Veronique de Rugy shows that stimulus money was allocated for political gain

Veronique de Rugy

Story here on National Review. (H/T The Other McCain via ECM)

Excerpt:

As it turns out, when controlling for state capitals and a host of other potentially relevant variables, we find that the original findings still hold. We learn a few other things, too:

  • First, how and where the money is spent doesn’t seem to be related to unemployment or decline in employment in the district where it is spent.
  • Second, the district’s party affiliation matters in where the money is spent. (We still don’t know how much it matters compared to other factors.) The average Democratic district receives 81 percent more than the average Republican district. Even after taking out the money spent through state capitals, the average Democratic district receives at least 30 percent more than the average Republican district.
  • Third, whether a district has part of a state capital in it is an important factor in how stimulus money is spent. However, controlling for this factor, or even taking the money going to state capitals out altogether, doesn’t negate the finding that the district’s party affiliation matters in where the money is spent.
  • Finally, how long the district’s representative has been in office seems to have a small but significant impact on how the money is spent (this is a new finding, as well).

There is still much more to learn on the question “How are stimulus funds being spent and why?”

The more I dig into this, the more important the question seems.

George Mason University is a pretty moderate school, but they boast a fine conservative economics department. Jennifer Roback Morse used to teach there, and Walter Williams still does. It’s probably the best place for a conservative or libertarian student to do an economics degree.

Now seems like a good time to re-post Michele Bachmann’s denunciation of gangster government, too.

Michelle Malkin calls them Corruptocrats. It fits.

Related posts

Federal conservatives in Canada aim to cut spending and waste from budget

Political Map of Canada

Article from the National Post.

Excerpt:

The Conservative government sketched out on Thursday its initial plans to return to budget balance, by targeting cuts in the public service, a freeze on foreign aid, limited growth in military spending and higher EI premiums.

The spending restraint, outlined in its 2010 budget, would net $17.6-billion in savings over five years and bring the deficit down from a high of $53.8-billion this fiscal year, ending March 31, to a low of $1.8-billion by 2015.

Before the cuts kick in, however, the Conservative government said it was committed to spend $19-billion as part of year two of the two-year $47-billion stimulus package aimed at resuscitating the economy after the global financial crisis.

The 451-page budget sets out how the Conservatives plan to meet all its goals — of creating jobs and bolstering Canada’s long-term competitiveness, while at the same time returning to surplus without tax increases, nor cuts to transfers to provinces and individuals. The government also said it would go through with cuts to corporate income taxes, from 19% to 15% by 2012, despite calls from opposition politicians to cancel them and use the money to help seniors and the poor.

“We are building Canada’s reputation as an investment-friendly country,” Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said in his budget speech. “A country committed to free and open trade, unburdened by massive debts and [the] higher taxes of our competitors.”

[…]Even though Canada’s economy is recovering at a rather robust clip of late — 5% growth was recorded in the final quarter of 2009 — Mr. Flaherty said following through with more stimuli is the right thing to do as the global recovery is in its nascent stages.

Measures linked with the stimulus plan will expire as of March next year, and with it comes a plan to return to budget balance.

It’s like their entire country is being run by grown-ups! Why can’t we have that here?