Lummis: Second Stimulus Proves First One Failed

Press Release

U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., said that passage of a second stimulus bill proves that the widely touted first stimulus plan failed. Lummis voted against the $150 billion so-called "Jobs for Main Street Act."

"In January, President Obama and Speaker Pelosi told the American people that their $787 billion stimulus plan would put people back to work and get this country back on track," Lummis said. "People in Wyoming knew that more government spending would not get us out of our economic troubles. Today's passage of a second stimulus plan proves that the President and Speaker Pelosi were wrong and people in Wyoming were right.

"Washington spending will only make matters worse and will bring little to no relief to those Americans suffering from job losses and financial hardship. This new stimulus plan embraces the failed stimulus policies of the past instead of relying on proven methods to get our economy back on track. Instead of providing relief to those who are struggling to create and maintain jobs, the legislation expands government spending and saddles future generations with more debt.

"Since the passage of the first stimulus, more than 7 million Americans have lost their jobs bringing the unemployment rate to a 26 year high -- 10 percent. It's no wonder Democrats are eager to try to re-brand their failed economic plans by passing a new so-called jobs plan."

The legislation was written under a completely closed process largely out of the view of the public. The bill did not receive congressional hearings or markups, was not subject to non-partisan budget analysis, and was not allowed to be amended on the floor.

"I believe Republicans have offered better solutions to the economic woes facing Americans. Our plan would have cost $500 billion less than the Democrats' plan and would have created twice as many jobs by cutting taxes and giving individuals and small business back the money they've earned. This is a true stimulus for the economy."

The following are low-lights of the Democrats' "Stimulus II" bill:

* $75 billion in additional spending on discretionary programs, despite the fact Congress just last week passed a massive half trillion dollar spending bill providing a 12 percent increase for non-defense, non-veterans discretionary programs for Fiscal Year 2010.

* $23 billion to bailout state and local governments through FY 2011. This is on top of the $53 billion the Democrats approved in the first Stimulus to bail them out in FY 2009 and FY 2010. By extending these bailouts for yet another year, it appears that even the Democrats who championed "stimulus" measures as economic solutions don't seem to have a lot of faith in their own policies.

* $2.3 billion for various programs funded in the Interior bill, including EPA water and wastewater grants and various other programs. These programs got $8.4 billion in the first "stimulus," of which only 4 percent has been spent. And, the regular FY 2010 Interior bill approved by Congress this fall -- which also contained funding for these programs -- contained a 17 percent increase over last year.

* $2 billion to "repay" money taken earlier in the year from an alternative energy loan guarantee program to pay for "Cash for Clunkers." This loan program has spent less than one-tenth of one percent of the $4 billion provided in the first "stimulus" bill.

* $500 million in immediate funding for Summer Youth Jobs in December. Congress provided $1.2 billion on youth training in the first "stimulus," and only about 60 percent of the original funds have been expended.

* $154 billion in deficit spending. While the Democrats claim to have "offset" $75 billion with unused or recycled funds from the TARP program, this is merely a gimmick to spend TARP funds that otherwise are being used to pay down the deficit. For the remaining $79 billion, Democrats would once again simply waive their much touted "pay-go" rules to spend tax-dollars on entitlement programs expansions. Therefore, nothing in this bill is "paid for," the spending in the legislation will still come out of the treasury, and taxpayers will still be footing the bill.

Source