Criticism from the other side -- bad. Criticism from our side -- OK. How about more independence here?

Excuse me, but how do repairing bridges keep us from returning to gasoline at $4.50/gallon? I think the Congress critters are repairing bridges exactly becaue they want gasoline to return to $4.50 by driving as back to older modes of transportation.

its really good that some Democrats are pushing infrastructure and they are right that it is infrastructure that builds the future. But the really funding source for infrastructure needs to be the $700 billion annual glut and additional hundreds of billions off-budget spent on the military and military adventures. There is a minimum of $100 billion annually available in that worse-than-useless expenditure flushed down the toilet that should be put to use on infrastructure.

republicans have NEVER been fiscal conservatives. They've only managed to control the debate such that no one can publicly call the military budget and adventurism what it is: the biggest, most wasteful pork spending imaginable. It has been the ruin of the nation and a travesty of epic proportions for the waste and lost opportunity we have squandered.

Based on the CBO report from yesterday's post, Lawrence Summers and I have a different definition of "shovel ready". Some of these projects have a long way to go before anyone needs to worry about any hourly workers.

I'm on the DeFazio side. There is a lot of important stuff in this bill, that will keep people from starving, or in some cases, losing their jobs. But I would rather see a big unified project like broadband or green energy, instead of the smaller projects.

Sprry - to clarify, I want the big project in addition to the "important stuff", not instead.

I'm all for infrastructure improvements, but the fact is the bigger the project, the longer it takes to spool it up. Or else you risk $%^-ing it up. Case in point, Interstate 99 extension in PA. They didn't do proper geological survey prior to cutting the highway through a ridge, which resulted in opening up a seam of acidic rock and devastating the surface water, which was mitigated at many more $$$ and time.

These things take careful planning up front that is time consuming but not manpower intensive. So they won't be stimulating the economy much when it most needs it (now).

Of course, if you think we're staring at a many years depression rather than a few years recession, it is a different story.

There are obviously two agendas at work. One is fiscal stimulus to get the economy growing again. That requires short term spending that will end as soon as the effect is produced. Suspending the payroll tax for six months would accomplish this. Incentives for home buying would also be beneficial, such as a tax rebate for buyers who make a 20% down payment.

The second is a long agenda of progressive projects that will turn the US into something that looks like "Soviet Britain."

The second appears to be winning but it will be without most Republican votes. That's fine with me. The public may realize what is happening by 2010.

The only stimulus that will work is a solid

framework for building a future, sustainable and socially just.

It makes no sense to think shovel-ready projects are all that is needed.

The problem is having spent way too many trillions already on greedy fools.

The pie is shrinking, yet the need is growing exponentially.

We are simultaneously dealing with the harsh realities of a post-capitalistic society, and the fact that those who "lost" it have gotten free payments (trillions since Elliot Spitzer was sacrificed) to reward their monumental greed and stupidity..

We cannot magically wish government away, nor the taxes.

What we can wish for is sound, rational thinking that embraces education, sustainability, and sensible healthcare.

Everyone is beginning to realize that for far too long, money making money for itself is a flawed economical pinnacle.

There are obviously two agendas at work. One is fiscal stimulus to get the economy growing again. That requires short term spending that will end as soon as the effect is produced. Suspending the payroll tax for six months would accomplish this. Incentives for home buying would also be beneficial, such as a tax rebate for buyers who make a 20% down payment.

The second is a long agenda of progressive projects that will turn the US into something that looks like "Soviet Britain."

The second appears to be winning but it will be without most Republican votes. That's fine with me. The public may realize what is happening by 2010.

I'm all about long-term investment. Infrastructure and energy are great. I also understand the need to sell this as a short-term stimulus package. So there's a bit of a rock and a hard place, because many of the long-term investments don't provide instant stimulus.

Excuse me, but how do repairing bridges keep us from returning to gasoline at $4.50/gallon? I think the Congress critters are repairing bridges exactly becaue they want gasoline to return to $4.50 by driving as back to older modes of transportation.

Proposed infrastructure improvements aren't limited to projects that encourage individual drivers. For example, DeFazio has correctly pointed out that mass transit is being given very short shrift here.

Interstate 99 extension in PA. They didn't do proper geological survey prior to cutting the highway through a ridge

No one ever accused PA of great planning. I think Tom Ridge's highway strategy was merely to put up signs that say, "Beware of Agressive Drivers" and "Please Slow Down. My Daddy Works Here." It's the only state I've ever been in where a route number meant nothing more than a suggested sequence of roads that lead from point A to point B.

Rep. DeFazio knows the problems of the Pacific Northwest, very well. Archaic "interstate", more like outmoded expressways from the '40s and '50s. In Portland, one better know where they are going and when to make a lane change or they will forced into a much unneeded "adventure".
Bridges in need of either being torn down or retrofitted. Need for light rail to be extended from Portland, across the Columbia, to Vancouver, WA. The I-5 corridor, northward to Seattle, both highway and rail, is a mess. We have had several floods in the past few years, which have closed down both systems in the Centralia-Chehalis area. Many thousands of dollars lost in shipping costs. Because of inferior road beds on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe RR, trains crawl, including the step child of the system, Amtrak. Great for the "Slowskis". But, it is interesting for DeFazio to take this view, in a state where the wonders of the WPA are displayed, to this day, at Timberline Lodge on Mt Hood. Artisans assembled there in the '30s to create marvelous art, cherished by the public.

Obama looks like he is engaged in the same kind of "triangulation" strategy that Clinton took in the 1990s where he does not ally himself too closely with congressional Dems. Therefore, Dems should fight to defend their own interests, even at the expense of Obama.

This stimulus bill stinks. The best bill would be 1 trillion dollars for infrastructure development and block grants to states -- that's it. Instead we get a watered-down, complicated piece of crap that will give a slight boost to the economy. The anemic stimulus will hurt Dems running in 2010. They better start fighting back.

As someone who believes there is a lot to sex that isn't bad I was sorry to see the Administration cave in to Rep. Rick "Dick" Boner's thrusts and withdraw condoms from the stimulus bill.

As many family therapists will confirm, in a stressful economic downturn like we are seeing one of the first things to go is a couple's sex drive. And as many economists are saying, we need bold, new policy thrusts. A strong endorsement of sex, perhaps modeled on last week's Japanese government call for workers to stay home and make more babies, will help not only American condom makers but the entire contraception industry.

Rick "The Stick" Boner claims that government-subsidized condoms would go to support "the abortion industry" (whatever that is) but for the life of me I can't figure out how something designed to prevent pregnancies also encourages them. Rep. Boner, help me out here.

Also, I don't think a full hearing was given to the extra stimulation provided by ribbed condoms. Condom workers are some of the best spenders in our economic system and that's what we're trying to do, right? Encourage spending. And this fits right in line with Detroit's use of sex to sell cars -- buy cars, have more sex. Fits nicely with the bailout of the auto industry.

Come, people, let's get on the stick here. Valentines Day is just around the corner -- let's put the stimulation back in our economic stimulus and restore sex to its rightful role in national affairs. We can be social without being Socialist.

Senators Lautenberg and Menendez, Church & Dwight (the manufacturers of Trojans as well as Arm & Hammer baking soda) are headquartered right there in Princeton. Your constituents are under assault by the forces of abstinence! Senator Vitter don't be shy. New Orleans practically invented sex. Now's the time to put your oral talents to good use -- get up off the changing table and speak up!

in a state where the wonders of the WPA are displayed, to this day, at Timberline Lodge on Mt Hood. Artisans assembled there in the '30s to create marvelous art, cherished by the public.

OT, I knew I liked you. The spouse and I are amateur connoisseurs of WPA art. We seek it out from sea to shining sea.

Trojan packs? Aren't those the ones Mike K passed out for free at University of Southern California football games?

No one ever accused PA of great planning. I think Tom Ridge's highway strategy was merely to put up signs that say, "Beware of Agressive Drivers" and "Please Slow Down. My Daddy Works Here." It's the only state I've ever been in where a route number meant nothing more than a suggested sequence of roads that lead from point A to point B.
Posted by: Danp

When you travel over the massive cut in the ridge, there's a sign that reads "Bud Shuster Highway" just in case you wondered where that pork came from. I think I'd have moved the sign a few miles down the road if I had been Bud.

While it's all well and good to want bipartisan support for this stimulus plan, there comes a point where Obama has to sacrifice short-term appearances for the long-term welfare of the nation, and this is it. Screw the Republicans--they had a chance to hammer out a compromise but have squandered it.

Larry Summers is truly the worst single appointment Obama made. How Obama could appoint a guy who claims women are not as intelligent as men is beyond me - just that alone should have made him "otherwise unemployable."

"..see the stimulus package as something of a down payment on the president's broader priorities, ."

Translation, the so called Keynesian stimulus is now dead.

TCinLA: How Obama could appoint a guy who claims women are not as intelligent as men is beyond me - just that alone should have made him "otherwise unemployable."

That's a fairly entertaining comment from a guy who tags the word "bimbo" onto every single criticism he makes of someone who happens to be female, whether or not lack of intelligence is among the person in question's actual shortcomings.

Republicans say they prefer a small "stimulus package." No wonder they lost the women's vote in November.

Democrats know what's up. The times call for big "packages." I'm telling ya, put condoms back in the bill. Senator Craig, here's your chance for redemption!

"Every penny of the $825 billion is borrowed against the future of our kids and grandkids"

A couple of things
- the people who get jobs or keep jobs because of the spending continue to pay income taxes, sales taxes... A portion of the $825 is paid back within the year
- if the $825 is borrowed within the country [a la War Bonds] you can say "our kids and grandkids are owed $825 Billion".

I believe we should be investing more in short term and long term spending.

I truly wish the senate had the balls to increase spending and decrease tax cuts. The nation will suffer much more from releasing too little money into the economy than from releasing too much. Err on the side of overspending??...practically impossible.