GOP Governors Can Reject Stimulus Money
A non-partisan Congressional Report just released concludes “that it likely would be unconstitutional for a legislature to supplant a governor in accepting and using economic stimulus money.”
The Congressional Research Service analysis could imperil tens of millions of stimulus dollars reserved for South Carolina and Texas, whose governors have said they will reject some of their states’ shares of the money.
I’m thrilled over this report. These Governors need to stand by their decision to reject the stimulus. Until now it appeared they would be able to make their ideological pronouncement and then count on their State Legislature bailing them out. Agree with their decision, or not – either way they now own it.
Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry followed Sanford’s lead last week in spurning a share of his state’s stimulus funds. Other Republican governors, among them Sarah Palin of Alaska, Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, have criticized the stimulus plan and indicated they might reject some money meant for their states.
Guess we’re about to see who was bluffing… or not.
Rock on GOP governors! You show us who is boss.
Also, I’ll bet Rick Perry does not know the first thing about staining a deck. I’ll bet I could give him the stain and the brushes and he would not know that first thing about putting stain down.
Agreed; letting states accept stimulus money a la carte is the correct policy choice.
But on political grounds, Repub govs are going to have it both ways – getting political credit for rejecting a few items, while benefiting economically (and politically) from the money they accept.
The Burris posts in September 2010 just write themselves: “East Virginia rejected Obama stimulus money, and now they are the hoppin’ place to be!”
Not sure how to keep them from getting away with this.
Can we ask them to give back their earmarks too?
Actually the authority for all appropriations resides in the state legislature. Nothing in the federal constitution even recognize the governor except in the 17th amendment. It is a perfectly constitutional scheme put in the bill. The analysis is non binding. Only a court case would be binding. It depends upon the state laws.
The state can set its own protocol in its constitution and the federal government can’t override it. That would be unconstitutional.
The states have to see what makes sense. Some of the provisions could hurt in the out years. There is nothing wrong with that.
Governor Sanford is on the shakiest ground. His state unemployment rate is over 10%. He may face a revolt from his own party which controls the legislature.
Gov. Sanford is pretty revolting.
Yep, I would sure like to see who stands against stimulus money but I feel for the people in their state that will suffer the consequences.
Speaking of stimulus stuff… what the f*ck is up with THIS? C’mon, Jack – tell me it ain’t so! Didn’t you just put Denn in charge of this? What do you need a hack like Meconi for?
Jeff Montgomery and Ginger Gibson
The News Journal
DOVER — Weeks after leaving his job as state health and social services secretary and sometimes lightning rod, Vincent P. Meconi has returned to the state payroll, this time as a federal stimulus package wrangler.
Meconi, a former state representative and cabinet officer under two governors, was called in on a part-time basis to help assure that Delaware gets its share of the program.
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090318/NEWS/90318059&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
Just trying to get this noticed…
heyheyhey, Sanford is doing a lot more for his unemployed. he already said he is PRAYING for them… what more do you
Gay-ACORN-Communist-Femenazi-Zionist(why not)-baby killing-Godless people want?
And to think I would have done it for a gas card and EZ pass…so much for citizen service.