Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Some good news from the final stimulus plan

By

No, it’s not everything that some people wanted, and maybe it’s not everything that it should’ve been.  But there is nonetheless some good news in it.

Perhaps the best news, at least locally, is more money than was expected for Medicaid.  MBPC says:

Massachusetts is expected to receive approximately $3.09 billion in FMAP (Medicaid) increases. The FY 2010 amount is estimated to be $1.46 billion (estimates from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities here), which is substantially more than the $711 million in increased FMAP funds that Governor Patrick included in his budget proposal.

What this means, one hopes, is that some of the more painful cuts proposed in the FY 2010 budget can be averted.

There is also reason for optimism in education:

States will receive $39.5 billion in federal education grants based both on total population and on state population between the ages of 5 and 24. Massachusetts is estimated to receive approximately $813 million for these purposes click here…. If Massachusetts were to use the Education Block Grant money to provide enough Chapter 70 aid to allow every district to fund at the foundation level in FY 2010 and FY 2011 and to maintain higher education funding at FY 2008 levels through FY 2011 the total cost would be approximately $823 million (depending on the cost of funding the foundation budget in FY 2011).

And one final bit of good news: the mean-spirited amendment submitted by Senator Tom Coburn (Wacko-OK) that would have forbidden the use of stimulus money for certain arts organizations was deleted from the conference report, and the final bill does contain $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts.  The vast majority of that money is expected to be transmitted to state arts agencies (like the Mass. Cultural Council), which in turn uses it to keep struggling arts organizations afloat.  That’s jobs too, folks — arts organizations are an important sector in many local economies (certainly ours (pdf)), and they are hurting as bad as or worse than many other sectors.

Disclosure: As a professional musician, I receive income from non-profit arts organizations, some of which may benefit from the NEA money in the stimulus bill.  Also, my wife and I both serve on the (unpaid) boards of non-profit arts organizations, which may benefit from the NEA money in the stimulus bill.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • …which I believe is in addition to the money David describes (the $813 million).  

      <

      p>I don’t have the MA total numbers, but you can look up your district’s numbers here (pdf).  

      <

      p>I checked out Boston.  The district will get:

      <

      p>$24 million in Title 1 (which is money to serve poor kids)

      <

      p>$50 million in construction

      <

      p>$13 million in special education

      <

      p>And then

      <

      p>the Title 1 and special ed money again in 2010

      <

      p>So $126 million total to BPS.  

      <

      p>I hope the feds added some language to make the spending flexible.  I mean if you have a one-time amount of $13 million that you have to blow (while making cuts in every other area), and then slash it all the way back in 2 years, that’s crazy.  

      <

      p>

      • Where is the heck did you find this or even know to look for it? Very cool.

        <

        p>Nonetheless, we should be mindful of the disclaimer on the first page:

        <

        p>

        Notice: These are estimated grants only. These estimates are provided solely to assist in making comparisons of the relative impact of alternative formulas and funding levels as part of the legislative process. They are not intended to
        predict specific amounts LEAs will receive. In addition to other limitations, much of the data that may be used to calculate final grants are not yet available.

  2. who is baffled by the “bipartisan” inside-beltway crap that befouled this effort, and goodness knows I think economists like Paul Krugman have it right about this being too little.

    <

    p>But there is more than a lot to like about this bill, both for what’s in it and for what isn’t. $50 billion for energy efficiency! Sure it ought to be more, but still, it’s as though Congress was temporarily living in the same country that I do.

    <

    p>And by the way, even though her public persona sets my teeth on edge, three cheers for Nancy Pelosi and the team on which she relies. They made the difference here. Just imagine if the House had a leader of the caliber of, say, Harry Reid.  

  5. Does anyone care that the GOP says that members of congress did not have enough time to actually read the bill? Or is that the normal process?

    • The GOP should be able to make the argument that the bill is terrible knowing what we know. They want to pick apart the wedge issues like how much is going to illegal immigrants. It’s much more obvious that Obama is in over his head on the economy and this bill won’t really help end the recession.

        • I know this because Obama is using fear as much as Bush used fear to invade Iraq. Vote now, we can’t wait.

          <

          p>I’ve been in politics for over 20 years on both sides. I’ve seen the worst Republican wishful thinking ever, on the Iraq War, and now I get to come here and read the latest Democratic wishful thinking.

          <

          p>The scariest thing was reading Republican bloggers and other dimwits with their twisted view of the world, and then realizing that Bush believed all the same things as these guys. But it also scares me to read BMG and imagine that Obama believes all this stuff unquestioning.

          <

          p>Obama’s economic speech was weak. He is obviously in over his head, does not know what to do, is ready to twist and turn and run off in every direction at once. Obama used fear to get some spending on liberal programs.  

    • I can’t imagine members read a fraction of a fraction of the bills that make it.  It’s a 1,000 page document — you’d need weeks to read it.  If they’re doing what they need to do, I can’t imagine Congress reads too much of any bill.

      <

      p>And in any case, I can’t imagine the Republicans voting yes no matter what was in it, so I’m not sure how much of a difference it made.

      • For anything that involves money or legal obligations.

        <

        p>Business people read, review, and understand 100-page loan documents every day.  We make sure we know what we’re signing.

        <

        p>You expect anyone to believe congress doesn’t have 100’s of staffers to pour over this?  You mean 100’s of other staff throughout the public policy universe inside and outside the Beltway didn’t bother to look at the bill?

        <

        p>That’s simply bulls**t, and you know it.

        <

        p>The bill wasn’t made fully public, and time for a thorough review was not given, ON PURPOSE because congressional leaders and the president DIDN’T want the bill scrutinized too carefully.

        <

        p>Public opinion damage from the arrogance of Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et. al., in ramming this bill through with insufficient review will accumulate over the next months as its contents are revealed.  This is opaque, inside politics at its worst, and exactly the opposite of promises made by candidate Obama.

        <

        p>I suppose the ends justify the means.

        • Business people read, review, and understand 100-page loan documents every day.  We make sure we know what we’re signing.

          <

          p>No way Jose.  Business people make sure that their employees read documents.  Their attorneys, accountants, etc.  The decision maker doesn’t read every document — he’s big picture.  He hires good employees, and then relies on them to make good decisions.

          <

          p>What makes you think that legislators are any different?  They’ve got staffers, advisers, and the like.  They don’t need to personally read the bill any more than John Henry needs to read the fine print on every guy that get’s called up from AAA.

        • We do?  Seems a colossal waste of time.  Even when I’m reviewing contracts, I’m looking for variants from the boilerplate.  Final review is almost always checking  the change bars.

          <

          p>Your argument seems applicable to say, the Patriot Act, but this bill has been up in draft form for weeks.  They may have changed some of it, but it’s hard to imagine they changed every word.    

        • The fact that you can’t tell the difference between the numbers 100 and 1,000 worry me more.  That’s the size of the bill.  And if you’ve ever read an actual bill (hah!) then you know the manner of writing:

          <

          p>

          In GLC 4.2, the words ‘before the 30th of June’ will be added to the fourth sentence after the words ‘in cases of fiduciary conflict’.

          <

          p>Legislation is a lot harder to understand when FoxNews isn’t telling you what you think of it.  But you can maintain your self-righteousness about your imaginary jobs.

      • This is a pure political grandstand.
        The larger bill(s)debated by both the House and the Senate have been online for a couple of weeks. Members need only note what was removed, and they have staff for that.

  6. Disclosure: As a professional musician, I receive income from non-profit arts organizations, some of which may benefit from the NEA money in the stimulus bill.  Also, my wife and I both serve on the (unpaid) boards of non-profit arts organizations, which may benefit from the NEA money in the stimulus bill.

    <

    p>I was wondering why you would bother to applaud the $50 million NEA add-back when $50 million is just background noise against a trillion dollar spending plan.

    <

    p>Now I know.  

    <

    p>You, too, David, have your snout in the public-sector trough, however modest your subsidy.  Listening now to you opine on the biggest spending bill in US history is just like listening to double-dipping Beacon Hill hacks discuss “pension reform.”

    <

    p>Good to know.

    <

    p>Who else on BMG receives public money?  Hoyapual, Laurel, Sabutai?

    • But really shep you know what’s coming…”you drive on roads, you send your kids to school, you get to listen to the music…”

      <

      p>I’m OK paying for what I get but I don’t want my children to have to pay for it. I’d rather drive on roads I can afford.

      <

      p>I can hear Kirth and Ryan clicking away already.

        • Average about $1.2 million per mile.  Strange how this board’s conservatives ping-pong between claiming that they work harder than anyone else anywhere, and stating that they are filthy rich.  Hilarious.

          • If you’ve got to displace current infrastructure (the Robert Moses style) you’re looking at $20M – $200M per mile.

        • It’s obvious that he’s saying he’d rather drive on roads the government can afford using today’s debt limits rather than relying on borrowing beyond current debt limits that will burden future generations.

        • You know I am paying for the road I use and so are you and everyone else who buys gasoline which is taxed.  I think you got the point.  As for the potholes, well ..”when the phone don’t ring, you ‘ll know it’s me”.

    • If you actually knew anything about the way arts organizations operate, you would know that they do not and cannot sustain themselves on government support, because even in the best of times it represents only a tiny fraction of their budgets.  The NEA stimulus money will help some struggling arts organizations stay afloat, though the likelihood that it will directly affect any organization with which I am affiliated is relatively remote.  But I put up that disclosure because I’m trying to be up front.  

      <

      p>But, obviously, you don’t know, or don’t care to know any of that.  You’d rather score a cheap talking point, facts be damned.  Well, knock yourself out.

      <

      p>We’ve all got our “snouts” in the public sector “trough,” shep — you too, and I don’t know or care what your profession is.  (You in real estate?  How’s that mortgage interest deduction working out for ya?  Scientist?  NIH grants much?)  I probably have mine in it to a considerably lesser extent than most, and equating that with “double-dipping Beacon Hill hacks discuss[ing] ‘pension reform'” is bullshit, as you well know.  So you can take your piety on “public money” and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

    • Who else on BMG receives public money?  Hoyapual, Laurel, Sabutai?

      <

      p>We all do, if only indirectly.  Next question.

    • I’ve taken Laurel’s advice and started checking out Red Mass Group and I’m tickled to paste here a pretty good description of who gets public money from Startedoutrepublican.
       

      The smallest Government that works  (0.00 / 0)
      and most effectively and efficiently protects the public safety, public health, and basic American right to be free and get rich. Building and maintaining the public systems to accomplish that — from a strong military to a public health system to inspect peanut butter plants to a public safety plan to respond to and rescue planes that land in the Hudson River takes public planning and public resources. And we all pay taxes to build and maintain all of those systems. This ain’t no vending machine government here.

  7. we were supposed to get in our school district will materializes.  Keeping my fingers crossed that the sum is intact.  

  8. Who considers this good use of the funds?

    <

    p>Discuss amongst yourselves while I go to my third job.

Archives