Is This Stimulus Package Really Necessary?

Only a few months ago, the American people were told that the only thing that would save us from another great depression would be an economic "bail-out" program that would cost approximately 750 billion dollars; a sum that is too mind boggling for most of us to even begin to comprehend.

Our lawmakers briefly debated a hastily constructed measure before acting to pass it, against the counsel of many respected financial authorities, and against the wishes of the American people, because they were pressured by those who insisted that not acting immediately would result in a horrendous catastrophe.

In the ensuing weeks, the average citizen has seen no improvement in the economy. In fact, it has gotten much worse, with millions of jobs disappearing as though into thin air. Home foreclosures have reached record numbers. Some banks have failed; others have been purchased by other banks; but highly paid CEO's of continue to collect obscene bonuses for their "good work."

Once more, we are being told that another, even more costly stimulus package must be passed, and quickly, or there will be dire consequences. How much "dire-er" it can get is hard to imagine, and yet the government's solution seems to be to continue throwing good money after bad---while piling up more and more debt for the taxpayer and his children to eventually pay.

Yesterday I heard that, because they were finding it difficult to convince legislators to pass a bill for 900 billion new dollars, they were going to have to pare it down to the bare bones. Why they hadn't already done that was beyond me.

One of the cuts being proposed was to eliminate 90 million dollars in spending for pandemic flu. There is no pandemic flu anywhere at this time. Pandemic flu is what happened in 1918 when millions of people died as influenza spread throughout the globe. 675,000 died in the United States alone. But that was in 1918. If we are regularly budgeting 90 million dollars of spending for pandemic flu that does not presently exist, we ought to be more than prepared by this time.

A few of the other cuts they are complaining about are 300 million dollars for a federal fleet of hybrid vehicles; 100 million for FBI construction; 40 billion dollars for state fiscal stabilization; and 2.25 billion dollars for neighborhood stabilization.

The list goes on and on. What is neighborhood stabilization anyway? I'm pretty sure I haven't seen any money being used in our neighborhood for that purpose, lately. And what is state fiscal stabilization? Can't the states do their own fiscal stabilization? What is the FBI constructing that couldn't wait a while?

I'm wondering why a large number of the things they are cutting from the bill were in the bill to begin with, and why, with the economy so uncertain, many of these things couldn't be put on hold for a few years until times are better.

I'm also wondering why, if the first stimulus attempt was such a failure, does anyone now think that the new one will be any better?

CNN, "What Got Cut From The Stimulus Bill," http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/07/stimulus.cuts/index.html