PDA

View Full Version : Obama Stimulus Spending to Target Roads, Bridges, Public Transit, and Energy Projects


Maikeru-sama
11-20-2008, 07:39 AM
Obama Stimulus Spending Will Target Roads, Bridges, Public Transit, and Energy Projects
By Katherine Skiba
Posted November 19, 2008

Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and policy assistant to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, told reporters Wednesday to expect the Obama administration to quickly propose an economic stimulus package costing a minimum of $150 billion but "more likely" in the $300 billion range. "An economic recovery plan will be the first thing out of the box," he said.

The money would go for infrastructure projects including roads and bridges, public transit, and items in line with President-elect Barack Obama's plan to spend $150 billion over 10 years on renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.

There's much work needed on the nation's electrical grid to efficiently transfer wind and solar power from one part of the country to another, he said.

The package also very likely will feature "substantial portions" of Obama's proposals for tax relief for middle-income Americans, Van Hollen said.

On healthcare, he said, Democrats would like to promptly expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, and within two years move forward on major reforms, which he said could feature discussion of the looming Medicare entitlement crisis.

On the prospect of $25 billion in new loans for the Big Three automakers, Van Hollen noted the reception the proposals received from lawmakers on the Senate Banking Committee Tuesday, saying they "make it look like prospects are tough, but the door has not been shut on it this year—the door has not been shut on doing something."

He said Democrats were "very leery" of dipping into $25 billion in earlier loans OK'd to allow carmakers to retool to produce more energy-efficient cars but would be willing to look at suggestions to tap into some of the money for bridge loans, providing the money would be automatically replenished to satisfy the original intent.

On the 2010 midterm elections, Van Hollen said the DCCC will focus on protecting its freshmen members and also look to districts where Republicans won by less than 55 percent of the vote; where the Democratic candidates were disadvantaged by a mismatch in campaign money; and to the "few and dwindling number of seats" in districts won by John Kerry in 2004 but under GOP control.

Van Hollen said never in history have Democrats won two successive "wave" elections with a pickup of at least 20 seats. He put this year's gain at 22 seats, including Democrat Tom Perriello in Virginia's 5th District, with three other races yet to be decided. The Virginia contest, against Republican Virgil Goode, has not been officially called, but the consensus is Perriello will be declared the winner, Van Hollen said.

link (http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/11/19/obama-stimulus-spending-will-target-roads-bridges-public-transit-and-energy-projects.html)

Maikeru-sama
11-20-2008, 07:41 AM
I hesitate to say this as I don't know how helpful this type of spending has been for the economy in the past, but I would rather see the money go to Forecloser Relief than be spent on bridges and roads.

Also, if the Government can afford to spend $300 Billion, why not lower taxes instead?

CowboyWay
11-20-2008, 08:03 AM
This type of spending has been successful in the past. Helped pull us out of the depression. That and the war.

Also, tell the people in Minneapolis that we don't need to spend money on bridges.

Rowdy
11-20-2008, 09:30 AM
Also, tell the people in Minneapolis that we don't need to spend money on bridges.

Bridge funds had nothing to do with that.

TheCount
11-20-2008, 09:48 AM
I hesitate to say this as I don't know how helpful this type of spending has been for the economy in the past, but I would rather see the money go to Forecloser Relief than be spent on bridges and roads.

Also, if the Government can afford to spend $300 Billion, why not lower taxes instead?

Obama has said repeatedly that he plans to address foreclosures, that being said, foreclosure relief doesn't create jobs. The people that end up working on all these projects are also likely the same people that need income to keep paying their mortgages as well.

JBond
11-20-2008, 10:18 AM
This type of spending has been successful in the past. Helped pull us out of the depression. That and the war.

Also, tell the people in Minneapolis that we don't need to spend money on bridges.

Really? Is this something you believe? You believe that government spending brought us out of the depression and that the bridge fell down in Minneapolis because they did not spend enough money?

This is not good. I wonder how many people agree with you? You must have attended government mandated schools for you indoctrination/education.

I just have to shake my head. No wonder Obama is president elect. Maybe you are trying to be funny. Government spending is how you get out of a depression? The government not spending enough on bridges is why a bridge fell down? That is kinda sad. Please tell me you don't really believe this.

ABQCOWBOY
11-20-2008, 10:23 AM
Well, it's better then having people sitting around doing nothing. However, I don't know that this is the best usage of funds. There is a serious issue in many parts of the country with bridges and roads etc. I am very mindful of that but, it's much like the issue with the Auto Manufactures IMO. You can go and spend all this money, commit all these resources to fixing the problem, and I am not convinced that this will even fix it so much as just improve the situation somewhat, but in the end it's still largely a State issue. The States are not doing what is necessary to fix this problem so we will simply be in the same situation again. I am not in favor of this only because it's a bandaid approach without substantial legislation to provide a good solid plan to fix the problem long term. We can't have the tax payers bailing out the road ways every 20 years. This is madness.

CowboyWay
11-20-2008, 11:20 AM
Really? Is this something you believe? You believe that government spending brought us out of the depression and that the bridge fell down in Minneapolis because they did not spend enough money?

This is not good. I wonder how many people agree with you? You must have attended government mandated schools for you indoctrination/education.

I just have to shake my head. No wonder Obama is president elect. Maybe you are trying to be funny. Government spending is how you get out of a depression? The government not spending enough on bridges is why a bridge fell down? That is kinda sad. Please tell me you don't really believe this.

Yes, I believe it. So does anyone with any knowledge of history. Roosevelt started it with the public works administration. Giving people jobs throughout the country. Roads, dams, bridges, public buildings. The country spent alot of money to make sure people had jobs. This is really common knowledge.

As far as the bridge in Minneapolis goes, it was structurally deficient. Could money have fixed it? I don't know, but I'm guessing it wouldn't have hurt.

I'm surprised so many of you are opposed to fixing the country's bridges. I saw a documentary on the countries bridges on "Modern Marvels" on the history channel a couple weeks ago (great show by the way, watch it if you get a chance), and they estimated that something like 40% of the bridges in the country wouldn't pass inspection.