Video Summary
Bill Statistics
The Middle Class Position
How They Voted
Grades
The Senate receives a grade of C for its support of the middle class on this piece of legislation.
60 Senators voted for the middle-class position; 38 voted against.
The House receives a grade of C for its support of the middle class on this piece of legislation.
246 Representatives voted for the middle-class position; 183 voted against.
Share This Report Card
HR 1. (Economic stimulus) On adopting a bill that would allocate $787.2 billion in economic stimulus spending/On passing the bill
- Alternative minimum tax
- Child care
- Child tax credit
- College tuition
- Consumers
- Corporate Accountability
- Earned income tax credit
- Economic stimulus
- Education
- Efficient technology
- Elementary school
- Energy & Environment
- Energy conservation
- Executive compensation
- Global warming
- Government Accountability
- Green buildings
- Green jobs
- Head Start
- Health Care
- High school
- Housing
- Income taxes
- Medicaid
- Medical research
- Middle school
- Pell Grants
- Preschool
- Public housing
- Public infrastructure
- Renewable fuels
- Sales taxes
- Shareholder rights
- TANF
- Tax cuts
- Tax Fairness
- Unemployment
- Workplace & Job Creation
01.26.2009 [House]
Rep. David Obey [D-WI]
This vote was on passing a $787.2 billion economic stimulus conference report. It also counted as the vote on waiving a procedural objection against the bill. Both the House and Senate had previously passed different versions of an economic stimulus bill. When the two chambers differ on a measure, members of the House and Senate meet to work out those differences in what is known as a conference committee. The conference committee produces a conference report, which contains the agreement reached on the final bill.
The conference report is less than what the Senate had passed earlier ($838 billion). It also would allow extra bonus depreciation for certain businesses, suspend bolster and expand unemployment benefits, grant a tax credit for the first $400 in Social Security withholdings on an individual’s paycheck, and expand the first-time homebuyer tax credit to $8,000. The measure also contains spending to increase Medicaid payments to states, additional funding for health insurance assistance to individuals, grants to states and local schools for education, grants for public housing, transportation-related projects and nutrition assistance.
John McCain, R-Ariz., raised what is known as a "point of order" against a portion of the conference report that designates its spending as emergency spending (which is not counted as increasing the deficit). A "point of order" is a procedural motion senators may bring up when they feel a bill, amendment or other motion violates certain rules set out by Congress to govern itself. Unless senators vote to waive those rules – which usually takes 60 votes, a large margin in the Senate -- the bill, amendment or motion in question can be killed by the point of order. McCain raised a point of order against the bill that it violates these rules. Baucus then made a motion that the rule be waived in this case, which is what this vote was on. This vote also counted as the final vote on the conference report itself.
Republicans spent much of their time arguing that the bill, which would spend an unprecedented amount of money, will saddle America’s children and grandchildren with astounding amounts of debt. They spent most of their time offering amendments that would have slashed the bill’s spending and instead bolstered tax cuts and tax credits. Some also complained that they were not included enough in the process of drafting the final legislation.
“What I am concerned about, at my deepest level, is that this step, as huge as it is, is only one of many that we are going to see. We had the Wall Street bailout of $700 billion. We hear there may be another $500 billion coming on housing and that kind of thing, because there’s not much housing benefit in this. This endangers our heritage. It is not a little bitty matter. I am proud of my colleagues who have said no. I believe it is the right vote and I hope and pray that yet it might fail,” said Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said critics of the bill haven’t put forward any workable solutions, and that the tax cuts that Republicans keep proposing didn’t work under President Bush’s first bailout round, so there’s no reason to try it again.
Republicans “cannot have it both ways. They cannot ask us, as Democrats, to stand with President Bush when he tried to solve it and then walk out the door when we face this crisis under President Obama. We have invited the Republicans to join us, and three stepped forward. I salute them for their courage in doing so. I hope more will do that in the future,” Durbin said. “A lot of the arguments are about the impact on the next generation. Consider the impact on the next generation of Americans if their parents lose a job. Consider the impact on kids in the next generation if their home is foreclosed upon. Consider the impact on the next generation if they are forced out of college because their parents cannot pay the bills. In this bill, we address each of those issues, providing tax relief to working families, creating up to 4 million jobs, giving people a chance to stay in their homes and trying to help them pay for a college education.”
By a vote of 60-38, the Senate passed the conference report. This same vote also counted as a vote on waiving the procedural objection against the measure. Every Democrat present voted for the motion and for the conference report. All but three Republicans present voted against the motion and against the conference report. The end result is that the rules were waived, allowing the conference report to survive. The same vote also passed the conference report, which would provide $787.2 billion in tax cuts and other spending to help stimulate the economy.
Middle Class Supports.Economic conditions are bleak. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that if the economy continues on its current course, both the length and depth of the current downturn will be the worst since the Great Depression. For middle-class Americans, this means job and wage cuts, loss of health insurance, and, simply, a daily struggle to keep up with everyday costs like mortgage payments and college tuition.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that if current economic conditions persist the unemployment rate could reach as high as 9.2% by 2010. With 46 million Americans already uninsured, the Kaiser Family Foundation reckons that if unemployment averages just 7% in 2009 (the current rate is 7.2%), the number of uninsured will increase by 2.6 million with an additional 2.4 million individuals enrolled in Medicaid and SCHIP. Indeed, state governments are struggling to provide the increased services needed to keep the swelling ranks of unemployed, uninsured individuals from falling out of the middle class. But the current economic climate has left states with decreased revenue from income, sales, and property taxes: 46 states face budget shortfalls with combined budget gaps of $350 billion through 2011. To confront these gaping budget holes, more than 20 states have implemented or are considering cuts to health insurance programs; the same is true of K-12 and early education programs and of funds for public colleges and universities.
Beyond the decidedly dire short-term outlook, economic improvement is probably quite far off. Douglas Elmendorf, director of the Congressional Budget Office, has testified that “economic recovery is likely to be slow and protracted.” Thus, programs that address longer-term concerns – investment in infrastructure and green technology are two primary examples – are as important as an immediate, stimulative jolt to the economy.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ties together measures designed to assist middle-class households struggling to make ends meet, provisions that will provide an immediate economic stimulus, and investment that can help set the stage for an economy built on energy efficiency and durable infrastructure. Economists generally agree that the legislation will save around 3 or 4 million jobs by 2010, while increasing economic output. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office, Mark Zandi of Moody’s Economy.com, and White House economic advisers all project that the legislation will reduce the unemployment rate by around 2%. Extended unemployment insurance will allow 6.7 million people to collect benefits. Importantly, aid to state governments for Medicaid and education programs would shore up budget gaps and help prevent cuts to vital services.
While assisting those most at need during the economic downturn, extended unemployment insurance and state fiscal assistance also generate the most “bang for their buck” in terms of stimulus because they funnel money into the hands of the people most likely to spend it. Extended unemployment insurance generates an estimated $1.63 in economic activity for each dollar spent; aid to state governments generates $1.38. In contrast, though they act more quickly than spending measures, tax cuts generate less stimulus. The Making Work Pay, Child, and Earned Income tax credits will help keep more than 2.3 million Americans out of poverty and the American Opportunity credit will make 3.8 million more students eligible for a higher education tax break. These are important measures that will assist aspiring middle-class and middle-class Americans struggling to make ends meet. But the expansions are temporary and tax cuts, even when refundable and directed at the low-income individuals most likely to spend them, are less effective stimulus measures. Worst of all, though, are tax cuts for businesses like accelerated depreciation and carryback loss provisions that have little economic benefit.
Despite concern that the spending included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will be delayed, perhaps a valid concern due to the legislation’s size and complexity, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 74% of spending would occur between 2009 and 2010. Indeed, funds for investment in infrastructure and energy efficiency, though perhaps more complicated to spend, are a critical step in longer term economic recovery. Beyond its stimulative value – infrastructure spending’s “bang for the buck” is $1.59 – the United States desperately needs new infrastructure to compete in the global economy. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that $2.2 trillion in infrastructure spending is now necessary. The funding for infrastructure projects included in the legislation is a first step in addressing this deficiency and funds devoted to high-speed rail are particularly welcome. Similarly, spending on a modernized electricity grid, retrofitted low-income housing, and weatherized homes creates the framework for a future economy less reliant on fossil fuels and, indeed, based on green technology.
Limitations on executive compensation and bonuses are a first step in establishing the accountability that has been missing from the financial bailout. Still, the bill does not set forth a comprehensive plan to address the foreclosure crisis that includes a moratorium on foreclosures, a mechanism to require modification of mortgages, and a change to the bankruptcy code to permit modification of mortgages on primary residences. Funds for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program are a necessary, but insufficient, step in mitigating the widespread negative effects that foreclosures can have on entire neighborhoods and communities.
“Whether it’s teachers or people on road crews helping our infrastructure, those in the health care arena as it might relate to Medicaid, all of these areas are important, all of them can produce jobs,” Mr. Crist said, adding, “Regardless of what your party is, Republican or Democrat, it really doesn’t matter. We have a duty and an obligation to the people who elected us, no matter what our position happens to be, to work together to get through this thing.”
– Governor Charlie Crist, R-FL (February 16, 2009)
“The upcoming economic recovery package is a critical step in getting the economy moving again and laying the foundation for future growth. But make no mistake—the economy is in such a dramatic free fall that this legislation by itself will not prevent additional job loss or rising unemployment. Nevertheless, reducing the loss of jobs can prevent a catastrophic loss of income and economic opportunity that could affect every segment of our society and be especially painful for the low-income and minority communities that are most vulnerable. This package will save or create at least three million jobs over the next three years, and that will be a major achievement.”
– Lawrence Mishel, President, and John Irons, Research and Policy Director, Economic Policy Institute (February 12, 2009)
For all its benefits, the conference agreement on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act falls well short of the original House proposal in significant ways and includes several provisions that will do little to help middle-class Americans. The compromise legislation includes $54 billion in aid to struggling states to prevent cuts to education services, a significant reduction from the $79 billion included in the House proposal. The Economic Policy Institute warns that such cuts could lead to a longer and deeper recession. As described above, aid to struggling states is one of the best ways to stimulate the economy. The bill also omits $20 billion for school modernization, renovation, and repair that was included in the House text. Additionally, the conference report includes only one of several important expansions of COBRA and Medicaid, incorporated in the House version, that would have kept 8.5 million individuals from losing insurance. As the unemployment rate rises, more and more middle-class households will find themselves not only jobless, but without health insurance. The compromise tilts slightly more heavily toward tax cuts than the House bill. On the other hand, the conference report includes fewer tax cuts than the Senate version and limits an ineffective tax break that was included in both prior versions.
Two tax credits originally included in the Senate version are particularly poor stimulus, though they were made less generous in the final conference version. An $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers home purchases will have a very limited stimulative impact but might, in effect, prop up house prices, helping to reinflate a housing bubble that was at the heart of the current financial crisis. Another tax provision permitting deduction of sales taxes on new car purchases would have a similarly limited stimulative effect.
In general, the inclusion of tax cuts for businesses in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act might have been a deft political maneuver, but these provisions will do little for middle-class Americans. Indeed, one such tax break, accelerated depreciation, provides only $0.25 in stimulus for every dollar spent. Funds devoted to tax cuts for businesses would have been much better spent on mass transit, which was shortchanged in comparison to the funding provided for highway construction. Transit authorities are strapped for cash and cutting service even as ridership increases, so government funds would be put to immediate use, while spending on new transit projects and equipment would provide a cost-effective alternative to car travel. At the same time, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act involves numerous government agencies and even more government programs. Ensuring that spending provisions are carried out quickly and efficiently is key to the legislation’s success.
The conference report excludes a provision included in the Senate version that would have required the Treasury Secretary to use $50 billion of TARP funds for foreclosure mitigation activities. Though the Secretary has committed to using a similar sum for such activities, this provision would have put the force of law behind his promise.
We recognize that there is a limit to what this stimulus package can and should attempt to accomplish. But we must be mindful that many of the measures included in the legislation make up – temporarily – for problems that have not been addressed in recent years. Modernization of unemployment insurance, health coverage for unemployed workers, infrastructure investment, and, indeed, investment in science and health technology should be the beginnings of a new policy regime that works to include more Americans in the middle class, not a passing reprieve in a time of economic gloom.





