Stimulus package is about spending, not creating jobs

Column by Jacob Sims

When is the last time you read a book that was over 1,000 pages? Better yet, have you ever read a document over 1,000 pages and written by attorneys? What if I handed you this document at midnight and told you it had to be read by noon?

That’s insane to think about. Oh, right, except that is exactly what happened in Congress about a week ago. Congress was handed this plan at midnight and had 12 hours to read it all, make a decision on it, and vote on it. Not only was it 1,000 pages of complex wording and multifaceted implications, but it was an $800 billion plan that was supposed to save or create 4 million jobs for American citizens.

Needless to say, with our politicians exemplifying their usual incompetence, no member of Congress read the document.

What kind of loonies would propose such a crazy idea? The Democrats in Washington did.

During the campaign season, Obama promised to let the American people see the bills that would be voted on for 48 hours before he would sign it and injected all kinds of rhetoric about transparency in his administration. He even went as far as to say that he would look at the bills “line by line” to cut wasteful spending and ineffective projects.

Apparently, Obama, like the members of Congress and the American public, didn’t get a chance to read the bill because the one that he described on television demonstrated very little resemblance to the one that passed Congress after Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi got a hold of it. He claimed that there were no earmarks. There was no pork. As Bill Clinton would say, “Define pork”.

When the bill was originally introduced, the Democrats claimed it was about creating jobs and stimulating the economy. Unfortunately, this bill is not primarily about either of those; it’s about spending.

How is $15 billion to save a mouse in California (Pelosi) going to help create jobs? How is $8 billion to build a high-speed rail line from Los Angeles to Las Vegas (Reid) going to stimulate the economy? Both of these are conveniently in the districts of the Democratic leadership in Congress. Maybe it is just a coincidence.

In an election, the people exercise their right to political participation, and their voices are heard at the voting booth. They cast their vote, and through tradition, whichever party wins, to the victor goes the spoils. I have no problem with the nature of these political cycles. What I do find disheartening and, quite frankly, deceitful is when the Democrats, coupled with the ultraliberal Huffington Post and others, say Republicans are hindering Obama’s effort at every turn; that we are being partisan for not supporting bad legislation; that we are being the Party of No; that Capitalism failed and our ideas didn’t work. It is nonsense, fraudulent and beyond naïve.

Government intervention was at the origin of this economic collapse. More specifically, Democrats created, expanded and defended the role of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which had a huge impact on the crisis. Capitalism was undermined by the Democratic Party and the Republicans that betrayed conservative principles (including George Bush).

During this Stimulus debate, Republicans brought a proposal to the Congressional Democrats that would create twice the jobs at half the price, but the Democrats already threw Obama’s call for bipartisanship out the window and didn’t even allow Republicans in the room for a discussion.

The Republicans were trying to stimulate the economy while the Democrats were driving up the debt for us and our kids and simultaneously half-heartedly throwing money at the problem. Republicans believe individuals know how to handle their money better than the bureaucrats and want to help the citizens instead of helping to expand the size of government and our federal deficit. Maybe we elected “more of the same” after all.