Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated that the newly “trimmed” stimulus package will go to a vote in the Senate on Monday. The bill now costs approximately $827 billion.
You would have thought that the Senate had found the cure for cancer, as they congratulated each other for finally agreeing on something. They managed to cut nearly $100 billion in spending – a welcome step forward but it’s still a massive bill.
Not all of the Senators were pleased with the deal. Senator John Boehner (R-OH) commented, “Ultimately this bill should be judged on whether it works, and 90 percent of a bad idea is still a bad idea.”
What’s Boehner upset about? Spending. Here’s a brief look at some of the items cut or reduced in the bill:
- $2 billion cut for energy-efficient federal buildings
- $327 million cut for NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- $300 million cut for federal fleet of hybrid vehicles
- $300 million cut for FBI construction
- $200 million cut for Superfund
- $100 million cut for Law enforcement wireless
- $75 million cut for Smithsonian
- All funds cut for historic preservation
- All funds cut for new Coast Guard polar icebreaker/cutters
- All funds cut for pandemic flu prevention
Cuts were also made in educational assistance and new school construction.
The self-congratulatory smugness was nearly too much to take. When did Congress suddenly decide that we should watch our spending? It’s like watching a college student who maxed her credit cards out at Ann Taylor suddenly start caring about how much the cable bill costs. Yes, I’m glad that Congress is finally starting to *get* that we don’t have an unlimited amount of money to spend, but the attitude exhibited by folks like Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) who have talked themselves up by deciding that cutting spending is somehow a remarkable feat is offputting.
Note to Congress: As taxpayers, we *get* it already. What has taken you so long?
So with all of the grandstanding and pruning, what stays? That, they didn’t talk about so much. It’s all in broad terms: “job creation”, tax incentives for small businesses, a once again pathetic one year band-aid on the AMT (alternative minimum tax), and some variation on so-called “tax relief” for low income and middle-income families. We’ll know the details on Monday and you can find it right here at taxgirl.
Looking forward to the details. What I’ve read so far makes me ill… Frisbie Golf courtesy of the U.S. taxpayers, anyone?
Sorry, I just read your commenting policy… I’m April, lawyer gone mommy gone mommyblogger. 🙂 Found you via Blogging Matilda who found me via The Bloggess.
All roads lead to the Bloggess, no? I love her!
How is it that H & R Block ,Jackson Hewitt, Liberty Tax, etc are allowed to charge so much for RALs. Lots of what I see and hear is low income people who get anywhere around,$4,000 and above in EIC are charged as high as 25% of the refund amount to file their taxes. The goverment is paying to have their taxes done. These companies deposit the refunds into their Banks and make interest off of thousands upon thousands of dollars of refunds. These people don’t usuallycare or understand. They only care that they can get lots of money quick. There should be a ceiling on how much they can charge especially for the EIC type returns.
Interesting question about the RAL’s. A whole lot of years ago – about the time I invented dirt – some accountants would advance their clients their refunds and charge a fee for that advance. It was decided by whoever makes those decisions that the accountant could no longer do that as the fees they were charging were considered too high. Back then a refund of 3-4 hundred dollars was really good. Then along came the EIC and the banks saw a way to make a lot of money and whoever makes the decisions decided that was OK. We have not offered the RAL’s until this year. What we really wanted was a way to have our fees taken out of the taxpayers refund. Our reasoning was simple – some of our fees amount to several hundreds of dollars and we felt that in the current economic situation some of our clients would not be able to pay us right away. And we simply do not need nor want a larger receivables then we already have. But to get what is known as an “RT” we had to offer the RAL’s. Two things have simply amazed me – the first is the absolutely disgraceful interest rates for an RAL and the second is just exactly how many people have elected to get them so far. I have one individual who handles these things and his instructions are very, very clear – try to talk them out of the RAL’s. And he does. And they still elect to get them. And these are people who I would not consider stupid or uninformed about interest rates – these are what I would call sensible people on most matters. But they still elect the RAL’s. I did a return today for a young man and his wife (2 kids) – I was doing the young man’s parents return when he was born – and he opted for the RAL. In this case I simply told him he could not do it – I would not allow it. He simply said “Yes sir”, signed his e-file papers and will get his money in a week or so. But I do not have that control over all my clients and it just bothers the devil out of me to have them apply for an RAL. Wish I had never agreed to offer them – wouldn’t be having these bad thoughts about my clients being ripped off. If they really want to be ripped off let them go to Block, or Liberty or whoever – I should not be doing it. There is more to my practice then the money it makes. At least I like to think so.