The election-year jobs agenda promised by President Barack Obama and Democrats has stalled seven months before voters determine control of Congress.
Democrats have no money to pay for the program. That’s because both Republicans and the Democratic chairman of the Senate Budget Committee objected to taking money left over from the fund that bailed out banks, automakers and insurers and using it for the jobs bill.
Such a move, they insisted, would add tens of billions of dollars to the $12.8 trillion national debt.
An $80 billion-plus Senate plan promised an infusion of cash to build roads and schools, help local governments keep teachers on the payroll, and provide rebates for homeowners who make energy-saving investments. Two months after the plan was introduced, most of those main elements remain on the Senate’s shelf.
Obama’s proposed $250 bonus payment to Social Security recipients is dead for the year, having lost a Senate vote last month.
What’s going ahead instead are more modest initiatives. That includes some help for small business or simple extensions of parts from last year’s economic stimulus measure. None is expected to make an appreciable dent in an unemployment rate, stuck at 9.7 percent.
Even legislation to help the jobless has run into trouble.
The idea of a jobs agenda arose late last year when the unemployment rate hit 10 percent and Democrats voiced concern that the majority party wasn’t doing enough to spur job creation.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?w=840&ssl=1)
11 thoughts on “Obama’s jobs program stalls in Congress”
Looks like a great big jobs program to me… and wrongly appropriated, as well, if Americans are the ones who should benefit from the largesse of their govt (fellow citizens’ taxes).
https://www.examiner.com/x-35821-Immigration-Reform-Examiner~y2010m4d11-With-1-in-5-Americans-out-of-work-Obama-issues-over-a-million-green-cards
Wonderful!
How about a 3.2% drop in income since Sir Obama took the helm?
What I’d like to know is where has the $787 billion “stimulus package” money gone.
Of course the money has to be borrowed in the U.S. Treasury auction, but just the same the amount has been authorized so what’s happened to this massive amount of money earmarked to ‘stimulate’ America…?!
Carl Nemo **==
The bureaucracy, where else?
Thanks griff for the link and a big OUCH too…!
It makes me truly sick when I went over the long list of misappropriated funds.
I guess to Obama and Company stimulus means doing so for government while the greater productive private sector is forgotten. This is a classic case of government gone both bad and wild; ie., voraciously feeding on its citizens, assuring an end of days for the Republic. : |
Carl Nemo **==
You said it Carl, thanks Griff.
Veterans affairs, O.I.G. $ 1,000,000.
I now see clearly what amounts to the support and commitment rendered to our troops lost in red tape. I’m supposing this agency has been modeled after the insurance industry. Take money in, give nothing back.
Real convenient to say your records have been lost and we haven’t the funds to find them.
Pretty cheap pickins unless you’re on the guvmint payroll..Hack..
“misappropriated”
You certainly have a way with words. Too bad it is the wrong way.
Misappropriated means appropriated illegally or fraudulently. An act passed by Congress is legal. Your agreement or disagreement with the law doesn’t mean s–t.
Yo G-lawyer…
“Your agreement or disagreement with the law doesn’t mean s–t” …extract from post
With your unquestioning, lockstep with the man mindset, something passed by Congress is legal; but, with the collection of crimpols on both sides of the aisle that are milking this nation dry, I still call it misappropriation of “tax debtor” dollars…period! I’m sure millions of angry Americans would also agree with me.
What are you a plant on this site; ie., an agent provocateur that nitpicks anything and everything coming from our keyboards?
To put it simply, who cares what you think… : |
Carl Nemo **==
Perhaps misallocated, misspent, misdirected, misinvested would be more to your liking?
How about just plain missing? Yeah, I think that’s about right.
If word games is your thing, perhaps Scrabble is more your speed. But to use your definition, I think fraudulently might fit the bill any way.
More reason to modify the filibuster rule.
“Democrats have no money to pay for the program.”
So what else is new?
Comments are closed.