Informative, Troubling Call With Senator Sessions On Stimulus Bill

Update II: Right Wing News was also on the call and posted here.

Update: Some classic examples of bad spending for which the bill would provide from the AP. Their article cites the same budgeting avoidance rationale for their inclusion as did Sessions.

To discuss a stimulus package he stated was highly misunderstood by the public while moving America perilously close to having a "state dominated" as opposed to a Free Market economy in the future, Senator Jeff Sessions R-AL held an informative though deeply troubling conference call today for conservative bloggers.

He claimed a significant portion of the spending was added as it would normally be subjected to routine budgeting processes where competitive budget pressures and politics across party lines would prevent the spending from ever being approved. Additionally, such monies would dramatically increase baseline spending on various programs and because those baselines are rarely if ever reduced, the bill would ensure increased government spending on a host of programs on what amounts to a permanent basis.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office puts the interest on this one bill alone at $430 billion, making it a $1.3 trillion dollar bill. A look at actual economic indicators suggests we are not more significantly worse off than several past recessions from which the nation escaped without anything like this amount of spending on the part of government.

In terms of misunderstanding he cited that fact that only $30 billion or 1% of the bill was actually targeted at roads and bridges, or "infrastructure", and any notion that this is somehow an infrastructure targeted bill is misleading at best. Another concern on that note would be that a sudden increase on infrastructure spending across the many states would undermine the competitive bidding process, allowing contractors to charge premium prices for whatever work did get done. The supply demand metrics of contractor demand versus availability would shift significantly to favor contractors in that sector, meaning even those monies would be poorly spent.

Calling the bill "unprincipled, un-targeted and irresponsible" he also pointed out that Senators voting for cloture while suggesting they would later vote against the bill for political cover would be accomplishing nothing, as the bill would likely garner the 51 votes needed for passage on the Floor.

Comments

[mark l.]

the gop should agree to any spending for the year, to address our current needs, but they should push for the goal that all spending that is not immediate should be addressed within a budget plan for later this year.

Love to see democrats defend an 'emergency stimulus bill' that has nothing to do with an emergency. Given the weighting of the spending, the implication is that we will have a state of emergency for the economy for the next three years.

[templar knight]

Yes, mark, it will take years, not months, for the Democrats to reward the thugs and criminals who helped elect Obama.

Ok, Todd, here it is. %1 of the spending is actually on roads and bridges. You might want to take off your mask and let us see that you were never a moderate but an Obama lackey all along. As if it weren't obvious. LOL.

[mark l.]

judd gregg needs to leave for his post on the obama admin, immediately.

at that point the gop can begin its pressure on red state democrats. They should avoid coming into conflict with obama, and instead target the other senators. 39 gop senators could offer that they would seek to block such a behemouth of spending but (insert democrat seantor's name) approves of the plan.

It is absolutely essential that the democrat senators who will vote against the bill out of a need for political survival, be forced to the surface. Letting them vote against spending, without supporting the gop's 'token' attempt to stop it must be made into untenable ground.

making the criteria for passage of any massive spending fall squarely on the 5 to 6 dem senators who will be running in red states is a great way out of the weakness that the minority provides.

If the massive spending continues...the gop can't lose-it will be the moderate dems fault. If the spending bills fail, it will be because of moderates within the democratic party opposed their president.