The latest congressional action to stimulate the economy came on February 13, 2009 when President Obama's economic "stimulus" package came to the floor. I, along with 183 other Members, voted against this measure. During the short amount of time the House considered this legislation, I developed many concerns with the lack of bipartisan consideration, large price tag, and misguided spending. After a meeting with President Obama on January 27, I sent him a letter expressing these concerns with no reply.
Foremost, I am disappointed with the lack of bipartisanship surrounding the development of this bill. Republicans have had very little input with the policies and have been blocked from many closed door discussions. A piece of legislation of this size and gravity deserves support from both sides of the isle. In addition, the final 1,000+ page Conference version of the bill was released at 11pm – only 10 hours before the House began consideration the next morning. This did not allow for enough time to read the bill in its entirety.
Second, the price tag of this bill is just too high. Last year's budget deficit was $455 billion. According to the Congressional Budget Office outlook, the federal budget deficit will nearly triple to an unprecedented $1.2 trillion for the 2009 budget year. This national debt and expanding federal government is the direct inheritance of our children and grandchildren. As I am sure you are aware, Congress has made numerous bailout attempts in the past year including personal rebate checks ($152 billion), Bear Stearns ($3.2 billion), AIG ($85 billion), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ($240 billion), Wall Street ($700 billion), the Presidential Auto Bailout ($17.4 billion). The National Debt has risen to $11.3 trillion, only showing spotty results at best. In addition, the House was asked to vote on this $789 billion stimulus package; including the interest which must be paid on the debt created by the bill, the total cost of the Stimulus will reach over $1 trillion.
Lastly, I have concerns about what programs are being funded. Only 13% of the funds in the House version go to bridge and road infrastructure projects with the balance going to expanding existing social programs and creating brand new programs. This is not the infrastructure spending and job creation bill we were all promised. Instead, this bill includes large spending provisions unrelated to job creation and economic revitalization including $25 million for the Smithsonian Institution for maintenance backlogs, $30 million to save a marsh rat in the district of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and $8 billion for a high-speed railway for Las Vegas, a city in the home state of Senate Leader Harry Reid.
Instead of spending-packed stimulus bill, I think we should focus on the common goal of encouraging job creation. Infrastructure spending paired with middle class tax cuts, small business tax cuts, and home buyer incentives will help energize our economy. The alternative economic stimulus plan, which I support, would allow small businesses, families, home buyers and job seekers to keep more of what they earn. This plan would have created nearly twice as many jobs at half the cost. This alternative plan would create 186,000 jobs in Georgia alone - 73,000 more than HR 1.
Once again, thank you for your letter. If you have any additional comments, please do not hesitate to contact me again.
