The Stimulus

It's admirable, I believe, that, in the current economic crisis, Barack Obama wants the government to leave behind its tendency to play politics as usual.

But I wonder whether very many Democrats or Republicans are taking that recommendation to heart.

As David Goldman reports for CNNMoney.com, the House is expected to vote on the $825 billion stimulus package later today — provided the wintry weather in the region doesn't interfere with the lawmakers' ability to get to Capitol Hill.

I wrote in this blog last night about the urgent need for a stimulus bill, and I encouraged both Democrats and Republicans to study the stimulus package and make logical recommendations for changes.

Such changes should be sensible. They should not be guided by political dogma and rhetoric.

Too many people seem to be losing sight of who needs to be helped in these troubled times. It isn't always who you might think.

But there are some who see the benefits that are there.

Sam Dillon writes, in the New York Times, about the ways education will benefit. I have no children, but I have many friends who do. And I think it's a good thing that the stimulus package "would shower the nation's school districts, child care centers and university campuses with $150 billion in new federal spending." Education got the short end of the stick under the previous administration, and if big corporations can get billions in bailout money, only to squander it on a new private jet or office renovations, the government can provide some long-needed funds to help education.

At the very least, government should be able to help create some jobs for people who can rebuild schools that are crumbling. It's got to be hard to concentrate on lessons that are being taught if you're worried about the roof above you caving in.

Robert Pear writes, also in the New York Times, that the stimulus package "is also a tool for rewriting the social contract with the poor, the uninsured and the unemployed." These are the people, not the corporate executives, who have been hurt the most and have the most to lose.

I understand the necessity of holding hearings on these matters, but as I've said before, time is of the essence. We can't dawdle and nitpick. Lives hang (literally) in the balance.

I wrote last night about the tragic murder-suicide that was being reported in the Los Angeles area yesteday. Initial accounts suggest that the apparent perpetrator, the patriarch of the family, may have been distraught after he and his wife lost their jobs. Some bloggers on the internet were writing that the tragedy was the result of the man's obsession with material possessions and money. Perhaps that is so, but I've neither seen nor heard any evidence of that.

I do, however, know about the desperation that can lead people to commit irrational acts.

As a California congresswoman told the New York Times, "This is as urgent as it gets."

Our government is supposed to exist for many reasons — one of which is to provide a safety net, but it permitted too many holes to go unrepaired in the last eight years. Now those holes must be mended. It is wrong to complain about the cost.