Dems Fighting to Restore School-Building Aid to Stimulus
The overall dynamic of stimulus negotiations between the two chambers of Congress, which Democrats are aiming to finish by the end of the week, involves senators pressing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to accept the $100 billion or so in cuts that were insisted upon by three GOP centrists.
But Pelosi's side of the Capitol isn't going totally unheard by the Senate. Democrats are growing confident that the final stimulus package will include some, if not all, of the $16 billion in school construction aid that was sliced by centrist senators last week.
"We feel that the wind is at our back on that one," one Democratic source told me. And there's good reason to think so -- President Obama made a strong case for preserving the schools money during his press conference last night. Here's how Obama put it:
The suggestion is, why should the federal government be involved in school construction?Well, I visited a school down in South Carolina that was built in the 1850s. Kids are still learning in that school, as best they can ... [but] it's right next to a railroad. And when the train runs by, the whole building shakes and the teacher has to stop teaching for a while. The auditorium is completely broken down; they can't use it.
So why wouldn't we want to build state-of-the-art schools with science labs that are teaching our kids the skills they need for the 21st century, that will enhance our economy, and, by the way, right now, will create jobs?
One thing Obama forgot to mention: The school construction money is more rightly called "modernization, renovation, or repair" aid. That's the term used in the House stimulus bill to define how local school districts are allowed to use their federal funds.
As much as Republicans enjoy portraying the $16 billion as paying for shiny new schools in already wealthy areas, that wouldn't happen if the money is restored.
Josh
Elana
Matt
Eric
We promise not to use any of this money in any of the 177 districts where the representatives voted no.
February 10, 2009 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice informative post, thanks for it.
February 10, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I do believe that once the Governors - it doesn't matter which political flavor - get wind of what's they will not getting in the stimulus package- courtesy of the repugs - there will be a few Come-to-Jesus meetings with their Congressional delegates demanding they be tested to see if they were under the influence of any illegal substances.
February 10, 2009 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
True, states need this money.
February 10, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sanford of South Carolina, where the corridor of shame is located, has already said that he won't take any money. That's why Clyborne, also of S.C., inserted a provision that will force states in need to take the money.
February 10, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, not that there's any shortage of ideas where Democrats discourse, but here's another: acknowledge the simple actual true fact that the 70 billion dollar annual short term AMT fix is not stimulative, and thus is one of those things that don't belong in this bill according to the Blue Dog/GOP/"Moderate" defintion. Then, having acknowledged that actual fact, cut it the hell out of this bill, and replace it with an equal amount of spending on stuff that's actually stimulative like, say, foodstamps, unemployment benefits, infrastructure repairs, public transit, vehicle fleet replacement with energy efficient cars, NASA spending--YOU KNOW, THE STUFF THE IDIOTS CUT TO MAKE ROOM FOR THE AMT FIX!!!!!
February 10, 2009 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
"simple actual true fact"
Do you have anything to support that? Without this millions of middle class taxpayers would be seeing a large tax increase. Are you really going to assert that taking $70B out of the pockets of middle class families is not counter-productive to what we're trying to achieve?
February 10, 2009 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why does the "ACLU Tests Obama Openness With Lawsuit On Bush Docs" link end up here?
February 10, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
School construction is exactly the kind of infrastructure this bill is all about. Indeed, it's a better economic multiplier, since schools use manufactured products like windows, doors, and floors, all made in the US by companies adding value along the way.
We need pressure on Senators Collins and Snowe to allow this money back in the final version; Ben Nelson already made it clear he apparently still has some "school issues" that haunt him; he's not moving.
I like the metaphor from Rachel Maddow's show last night: You can take a shortcut on your morning jog, but then what's the point of the jog? Cutting a stimulus package means less stimulus.
February 10, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
A failure to invest in school construction and renovation is not only a failure to create jobs for hundreds of thousands of architects, designers and construction workers, it's a failure to invest in our nation's future leaders - the students who desperately need improved educational facilities. My client, the American Institute of Architects, laid out their recommendations for the stimulus plan last month, and AIA members visited Washington last week to meet with members of Congress and further promote their agenda and recommendations. Learn more at the AIA's blog, The Angle (http://blog.aia.org/angle/).
February 10, 2009 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink