Why Should the Senate Pass the Stimulant Package?

It should not be passed! I don't feel that the current package, in any form, should be passed. They need to start from the beginning and develop a plan - line by line- which evaluates the spending for the impact it can have on the economy. While this process will take longer - the outcome would be projects that could be implemented immediately and that are not just "pork" spending.

ParaTed, As I see it, this "stimulis" package has about 30 percent of it that can be really attributed to economic stimulis. The other 70% is pure pork and most of that is election campaign paybacks! How else can you get over 5 billion to ACORN for getting the "messiah" elected?

Because they want to reward the minions who voted for them, the people who never voted until Obama was a candidate because they wanted a black candidate, the people who had their hands out and never did much work, the people who came in America illegally, the people of same gender who wanted their lifestyle given legitimacy and made more important than the traditional families, the women who felt looking good and having a care more important then saving the unborn, etc. So do these people need rewarded? No way. Send the bill back, get rid of the excess fat, and make it just to start people working and protecting jobs.

The answer is obvious. They have to do SOMETHING. They don't care if it's the right thing. They don't care about taking time to determine what the right thing is. They are just pushing this sense of urgency because it's their big chance to pay off all those organizations that funded the campaigns that got these crooks into office. We've already talked about how this is enough money to buy the biggest corporations in the country. If they were focusing it PURELY on helping the economy it would be about a third of what it is right now.

It is funney how we had all this talk about getting rid of earmarks and pork in the election (and beyond) and then they push this bill which is at its core, just pork and earmarks for the sake of pork and earmarks. At least they are being honest this time. Usually they have their pork and earmarks tacked on to something with some sort of meaning. Like "this bill will benifit the health of children, and oh yes I want some money for a statue of myself in some park in Alabama" This bill at least starts out with the premis "This bill is designed just to spend a lot of money on random junk because we think that will be good" So why should we pass it? Well... we shouldn't but we will, because if there is one thing our congress has shown us in the last couple of years is that they are good at spending money on random junk.

I agree with you Parated2k. As what an old saying goes, "its not how much you earn, but how much you saved makes you rich." If we take a look to our national budget, man, who says philippines is a poor country. Its one hell of a money. I just dont know where it goes. If we could see extremely good projects or very good services then I could understand where these budget go. As I look at it, even though how much money we pour to our government still it would not enough to give-off a good service. Im sorry man, I just feel very bad and frustrated with our government now. Im not particular on the present administration, but the whole government system itself. There's too much corruption. And what matter's most, is nobody hears our cries. Us, who is working in a private company and is giving 30% of our hard earned money to our government just knowing that it would just go to corruption. Sorry man, Im just way off our topic..I just feel bad with our government.

I think Pres. Obama should veto it and send it back.. or no, not if that means the Dems and Ms Pelosi will be forming it again! Hopefully the Senate will cut all but the 30% that's actually stimulus (maybe leave in for contraceptives as that will decrease brutal abortions, and presumedly save the state money when less children are born and aided by the state). As it is now it's mostly money that will be invested to support the dems political base(s)! When I think of that, coupled with their desire for open borders in order to register more democratic voters (and truly take over the U.S.) I am truly boggled by anyone still thinking (this) democratic party is "for the people" a reputation I'm not totally convinced it ever lived up to anyway!

Hello ParaTed, Ya' know, I've thought long and hard on this issue. Not just this 'non-stimulus' package, but the propensity for our elected to abuse The People's trust on a regular basis. How long has "pork" been a standard? How long have ethics violations been given a blind eye by the only agency authorized to police the House and Senate -- the House and Senate themselves? How long will the William Jeffersons on The Hill be allowed to accept bribes, then continue to serve because Congress has no appetite to uphold our Constitution? How long will crooks like Diane Feinstein be allowed to rob the Veterans Services programs, while filling her husbands bank coffers, then when called to task by her own constituents, be allowed to simply resign from oversight of the committee that she had been using as her own personal source of personal revenue -- for years? How long will the Denny Hasterts of the Congress be allowed to set themselves up for life on repeat land development deals? How long will every member of Congress be allowed to legislate themselves a 'get out of jail free' card as it relates to insider trading? The list goes on, and on, and on, and on, etc... As I said, I have thought long and hard about this. The only feasible answer that I have come up with is that on some level our elected desire for us to cut them off at the knees. You know, much like when a serial killer or rapist eggs the police on. How else but as a direct challenge can this consistent, habitual abuse of The People's trust be viewed? I am becoming more and more convinced that our elected must secretly desire a second U.S. Civil War. To your specific question: "Why Should the Senate Pass the Stimulant Package?" The answer is quite simply -- THEY SHOULDN'T! And, it is incumbent upon us, the voters, to let them know that in no uncertain terms!!!

I do not think that we should pass the stimulant package as written, since it contains money to help the banks and big businesses (many of whom are using the money as bonuses for their big executives). The money should be used to provide help to homeowners who are in danger of losing their homes. It is better to help the poor people who need help instead of helping the rich people who do not need help. Also, I would like to see ARMs(adjustable rate mortgages) outlawed so that people would not get them and later on lose their homes when interest rates go back up/

They shouldn't pass it without trimming all the fat and explaining to the American people, item by item, how each one will stimulate the economy and what and how many jobs will be created. Annie

Earmarks and port not withstanding, this is the wrong way to heal this country's financial woes. I wish those who make the decision would take a look at history to see what worked in the past and what didn't. After praising FDR for 70 years, people are now admitting that he did more harm than good for us. I'm afraid Obama and the Democrats and maybe even some Republicans will make the same mistakes FDR made. I don't know what the solution is, but what's been proposed doesn't seem to be it.

First of all we have to get all those government buildings fixed up as some of them are starting to look like shacks. We must remember that the mind of the government is not always neccesarily the mind of the public. It might seem like useless spending to you although they are looking at the big picture and can't agree with what you are thinking. After all if the prime minister doesn't get his house fixed up they will think he doesn't live like the kings and queens. Crocket.

Does anyone really know what is in the stimuless plan? I havn't read anything. Maybe I missed it because I am, let's see the current term is residntially challanged (Homeless). Obama has said that there are things in it that can be streamlines or cut out. I heard that today on the TV. If you look at the map that shows the states that are in real trouble well it's most of them. I'm 63 and I have never seen anything like this. I hope somehow all the useless spending is cut from it. It is really bad when states are saying they are going to have to cut their part of Disability and SSI (disability for those that don't have the points for regular disability). I stick with my original idea, "All politions take a 20% cut in pay until this country is back up. Like that will ever happen but it's a great idea!!!

The only thing "stimulating" about it is it is going to "stimulate" rational sane and broke Americans into having a freaking stroke or coronary. Ever feel like you're just beating your head against the wall? I sure do, but I won't give up - if I say it loud enough and often enough maybe somebody will hear me, hear all of US and stop the insanity. Too bad we can't just "throw the bums out" for a few more years, and their replacements are not likely to be much better. sigh