GOP governors consider turning down stimulus money

The problem is this: you're going to pay for it anyway, in dollars and economic effect. What benefit does turning the money down serve, other than shoveling more money off to other states?

This is the philosophy I'm applying to Commissar Obama's mortgage plan, to be unveiled 4 March. I'm against it, but since I'll have to pay for it regardless, you bet your ass I'm going to take advantage of it if I qualify.
 
Texas said:
Except for the fact that most of them run states that have budget surpluses, low employment and low taxes. I live in one of them and applaud the governor's stance.
Click to expand...

Just to make sure, you meant low unemployment right?
 
I find this interesting since many GOP governors were arguing rather emphatically for the economic stimulus plan.
 
FlamingMoe said:
The problem is this: you're going to pay for it anyway, in dollars and economic effect. What benefit does turning the money down serve, other than shoveling more money off to other states?

This is the philosophy I'm applying to Commissar Obama's mortgage plan, to be unveiled 4 March. I'm against it, but since I'll have to pay for it regardless, you bet your ass I'm going to take advantage of it if I qualify.
Click to expand...
Well one example that the Texas Governor is using is that people that just quit their jobs or are fired and not laid off can apply for unemployment insurance under the Obama plan and that since Unemployment insurance is paid by employers it would destroy a lot of small business.
 
FlamingMoe said:
I don't see how turning down "stimulus" money changes that.
Click to expand...
By turning down the money they are not obligated to adhere to the Federal mandate. If they accept the money they are forced to do it. Federal money always comes with many strings attached.
 
FlamingMoe said:
Oh, it's a state unemployment insurance program then?
Click to expand...
Yes. Unemployment insurance is always a state program funded by the state's employers. Emergency extensions are Federally funded but they are temporary. This new mandate is not temporary and if Texas or any other state accepts stimulus dollars then it is a permanent tax levied on employers. As I said earlier it would crush small business.
 
Texas said:
Yes. Unemployment insurance is always a state program funded by the state's employers. Emergency extensions are Federally funded but they are temporary. This new mandate is not temporary and if Texas or any other state accepts stimulus dollars then it is a permanent tax levied on employers. As I said earlier it would crush small business.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I was unaware of the federalism enshrined in the unemployment insurance scheme. I guess you take federalism wherever you can get it these days.
 
Rika said:
I am waiting for facts, of course. Facts? Got any?
Click to expand...
For a person that excells in oneliners with NO facts ever I will give you facts:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/400153_unemployment14.html

The stimulus legislation would revamp the 74-year-old U.S. unemployment compensation program by encouraging states to give benefits to those who quit their jobs to care for ailing relatives.
<snip>

"It's fundamentally at odds with the basic tenets of unemployment insurance: temporary cash payments for people who lose their job through no fault of their own," said Douglas Holmes, president of UWC-Strategic Services on Unemployment and Workers Compensation, a Washington, D.C.-based group that represents employers. "Unemployment insurance is not public assistance, it's not a family support program, it's not food stamps."
<snip>

Unemployment insurance is paid by states from taxes collected from employers, and was enacted as part of the Social Security Act of 1935. To qualify for a share of the $7 billion in incentives, states would have to meet a list of requirements.
Click to expand...

This is a backdoor effort to make the "Family leave act" a paid leave of absence.
 
Smackety said:
How does this give unemployment to people who were fired?
Click to expand...


From the author of the plan:



"We're telling single mothers who have to quit their job to care for their child, or women in an abusive relationship who have to quit to get away, you can draw unemployment insurance checks when you are ready to go back to work," McDermott said in an interview. "Most states say you can only draw a check if you are fired. We're giving states incentives to move beyond that."
 
Texas said:
From the author of the plan:



"We're telling single mothers who have to quit their job to care for their child, or women in an abusive relationship who have to quit to get away, you can draw unemployment insurance checks when you are ready to go back to work," McDermott said in an interview. "Most states say you can only draw a check if you are fired. We're giving states incentives to move beyond that."
Click to expand...

Ah.. I think he means laid-off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom