Archive for Thursday, February 19, 2009

GOP governors consider refusing stimulus money

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, joined by legislators, exits a news conference Wednesday at the State Capitol in Baton Rouge, La. Jindal is considering turning down some money from the federal stimulus package.


February 19, 2009


— A handful of Republican governors are considering turning down some money from the federal stimulus package, a move opponents say puts conservative ideology ahead of the needs of constituents struggling with record foreclosures and soaring unemployment.

Though none has outright rejected the money available for education, health care and infrastructure, the governors of Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alaska, South Carolina and Idaho have all questioned whether the $787 billion bill signed into law this week will even help the economy.

“My concern is there’s going to be commitments attached to it that are a mile long,” said Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who considered rejecting some of the money but decided Wednesday to accept it. “We need the freedom to pick and choose. And we need the freedom to say ‘No thanks.’”

U.S. Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., the No. 3 House Democrat, said the governors — some of whom are said to be eyeing White House bids in 2012 — are putting their own interests first.

“No community or constituent should be denied recovery assistance due to their governor’s political ideology or political aspirations,” Clyburn said Wednesday.

In fact, governors who reject some of the stimulus aid may find themselves overridden by their own legislatures because of language Clyburn included in the bill that allows lawmakers to accept the federal money even if their governors object.

He inserted the provision based on the early and vocal opposition to the stimulus plan by South Carolina’s Republican governor, Mark Sanford. But it also means governors like Sanford and Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal — a GOP up-and-comer often mentioned as a potential 2012 presidential candidate — can burnish their conservative credentials, knowing all the while that their legislatures can accept the money anyway.

Jindal said he, like Perry and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, is concerned about strings attached to the money even though his state faces a $1.7 billion budget shortfall next year.

Barbour spokesman Dan Turner, for example, cited concerns that accepting unemployment money from the stimulus package would force states to pay benefits to people who wouldn’t meet state requirements to receive them.

In Idaho, Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter said he wasn’t interested in stimulus money that would expand programs and boost the state’s costs in future years when the federal dollars disappear — a worry also cited by Jindal and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

A spokesman said Sanford, the new head of the Republican Governors Association, is looking at the stimulus bill to figure out how much of it he can control.

“We’re going through a 1,200-page bill to determine what our options are,” Spokesman Joel Sawyer said. “From there, we’ll make decisions.”

But state Democratic Party chairwoman Carol Fowler says Sanford’s hesitation is driven by his political ambition rather than the best interests of a state that had the nation’s third-highest unemployment rate in December.

“He’s so ideological,” Fowler said. “He would rather South Carolina do without jobs than take that money, and I think he’s looking for a way not to take it.”


jaywalker 5 years ago

Dumb da dumb dumb Dumb da dumb dumb daaaa!


Orwell 5 years ago

Interesting choice. Now we'll see which of them are idiots and which are hypocrites.


CarterFaucheaux 5 years ago

they wouldn't be refusing the money if they were the ones being kicked out of their homes and laid off of their jobs.

but of course they can sit in their mansions and turn down the money, no problem.


GardenMomma 5 years ago

Does anybody have a better idea? I've been reading all the posts about what a huge mistake this stimulus bill is and how it's all going to blow up and fail and death and drama and what have you , but has anyone come up with a better idea? SOMEthing needs to be done. If you don't like it, why don't you come up with a better idea??


Thinking_Out_Loud 5 years ago

ArumerZwarteHoop wrote "They need to refuse all federal funds and succeed from the ponzi scheme union." But appears to have meant "secede," not "succeed."

Similary, logicsound04 wrote that "Republican governors sure are hording a lot of" idiocy, but appears to have meant "hoarding," not "hording."


rooster 5 years ago

"Out of power they're conservative, in power they become spend-happy liberals."



manus_flexibilis 5 years ago

Publicans need to go back to the Pub to discuss more idiocracy of a democratic democracy and how W. would have handled the national recession.


Commenting has been disabled for this item.