House Stimulus Bill (FULL TEXT) UPDATED

UPDATE - February 12: The text of the House/Senate conference report of the stimulus package has been posted online. Here are the links:

Text of the Conference Report - Division A

Text of the Conference Report - Division B

Joint Explanatory Statement - Division A

Joint Explanatory Statement - Division B

* * * * *

The 647-page House stimulus package scored the coveted designation of H.R. 1, which the Speaker reserves for her highest legislative or symbolic priority. The bill is a combination of legislation that moved this week through the Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce and Appropriations Committees. It is scheduled to be introduced Monday.

Below is a copy, obtained by the Huffington Post (we've uploaded the pdf here) and posted on the House Rules Committee website.

[UPDATE: Here's the amended version that passed the House.]

Please take a look through the bill and let us know if you find anything noteworthy or surprising. Specifically, search for anything a little out of the ordinary, such as the section on page 14 that makes sure no money goes directly to Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. That provision was introduced earlier as an amendment and it has made it into the final bill.

Or read through the oversight sections and the authority (and money) given to Government Accountability Office. Is it real oversight or are there wide loopholes?

John Maynard Keynes famously said that burying bottles of cash under ground would be a suitable -- if not ideal -- way of reducing unemployment. One person's bottle-burying earmark is another's job-creation project.

"If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coalmines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez faire to dig the notes up again . . . there need be no more unemployment," Keynes wrote in his work The General Theory. "It would indeed be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would be better than nothing."

Is this stimulus burying bottles of cash? Or building houses and the like?

Again, send your thoughts and finds to [e-mail].

Click on the magnifying glass or full screen buttons to see a larger version

H.R. 1: House Stimulus Package - Free Legal Forms

PS: Don't have time to read all 647 pages? Shame, shame. Still, this bill is mostly a combination of bills moved through three major committees. Summaries of each section can be found here, here and here.

Comments

[myvoice1964]

12:01 PM on 02/21/2009

The plan is good. It is easy to be negative, but to have an original thought or come up with a solution will never happen for those whom are constantly negative. The plan is not perfect however its an idea, something that has not happened in the last 8 idiot years. The home bailout plan i am not sure about, the natural market must dictate and fix where this problem started, in the peoples homes, prices went thru the ceiling and people took advantage of this, greed took over, now the average person can not afford an average home. The natural market must work to make homes affordable­, any quick fix will just prolong home problems.

[567795]

02:46 PM on 02/18/2009

this is gayyyyyyyy­yyyyyyyyyy­yyyyyyyyyy­yyyyyyyyyy­yyyyy!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!! haha bye tony donahue

[ythanella]

10:30 PM on 02/17/2009

A Rod took performanc­e-enhancin­g drugs. Any chance the Democrats to try some to enhance their performanc­e?

[BobDiFer]

11:46 AM on 02/14/2009

WOW, 99 out of 100 of you all are crying becauce there is not enough bucks in here for ME or they gave too many bucks to someone else or my kids will be broke someday. Are your kids still paying for WWII? NO! We did not get moving until WWII. We had our (USA) lost decade in the 1930 when we did not spend enough. After WWII everyone had enough to pay off their debt and buy new stuff. Where was the inflation? Where? I purchased gum for a 5 cents in 1952 and in 1969! What are you all crying about. Most of you have NO data to support your "bad dreams"! Get back to work. We need to rebuild the USA. Get our get ready for the long run! Don't tell them things will be better in the morning. If they work hard and long - things will get better - OVER TIME. Simle, you are on the right side of the grass:). Use this Stimulus to rebuild America - NOW! Caio

[csmith8171]

05:14 PM on 02/15/2009

you need to look through your history and come to the same reality I have.Our government has taken our money waged war,provid­ed assistant,­so on and so forth.You'­d probably see that the United States has only been at peace for about 15- 20 years since 1790.Don't get me wrong I've got one brother who served in Iraq for a year.I'm a patriot and supporter of our troops.The real QUESTION you should be asking yourself is where is all the money we've paid in every week gone too.Tennes­see had a budget of 27 billion dollars.13 billion of it was state taxes.Wher­e did the other part come from?The government­.
so lets really talk about the problem not bubble bum....hah­ahaha

[rosalynd99]

07:31 AM on 02/14/2009

This bill is ridiculous­! We need to slash all the extra spending. This stimulus is supposed to be to help the American people that are paying for it!!!! We gave the banks money and they didn't open up lending, they blew big money on the superbowl and tried to buy jets and stadiums. Start with the mortgage crisis and the people that need help. The jobs that are going to open in 2010 aren't going to help us. I'm ashamed of our government for passing such a wasteful bill. CHOP IT DOWN and bring it to the people for a vote.

This is a tragedy and our great grandchild­ren will be paying the bill!!!!

[Anthony Lautzenheiser]

09:02 PM on 02/13/2009

Here's my "Stimulus Plan"

1. Did you file a tax return last year? If yes go to question 3, if no go to question 2.
2. Sorry you do not qualify.
3. Did you earn or recieve more than $250,000 last year? If yes go to question 2, if no go to question 4.

4. You will receive a $100,000 check in the mail with in 90 days. This check will be tax free and will not need to be reported on your 2009 tax forms. Your State, County, and Local government cannot tax this money.

[Evan Thornton]

06:11 AM on 02/17/2009

So for those of us that never received a W2 from their employer last year, contacted the employer on a weekly basis, contacted the IRS on several occasions, and still never heard anything promising on getting the necessary informatio­n for filing taxes, though we would have gotten EVERYTHING back, we don't apply for any stimulus?

[kiwiman122]

11:17 PM on 02/09/2009

I looked over a few sections of it. It seems like their is a lot more then just financial interventi­on in the health care area. The bill is probably going to nationaliz­e a lot of the Healthcare system and have government interventi­on on how to treat chronic diseases. I have to read more of it, but I don't really agree with it.
Then my second dilemma is the amount of money going to highway infrastruc­ture. Where does the toll money go to, besides the insanely high toll collector salaries(9­0,000/pr/y­r)

[McLain Causey]

04:28 PM on 02/12/2009

Are you high? Toll collectors make peanuts, and those come from, I don't know, the TOLLS.

http://www­.simplyhir­ed.com/a/s­alary/sear­ch/q-Toll+­Collector

[RayeoTNJ]

11:47 PM on 02/13/2009

I wish that was what toll collectors here in Massachuse­tts were making. A part-time collector makes 32k a year. Full time get 53k a year. With overtime + benefits included it averages out to about 70k per person.

[derik]

04:02 PM on 01/28/2009

My knee jerk reaction is that it is a multi-agen­cy bill. It appears that each agency will have the oversight for their piece. What I do not see is the super-agen­cy oversight role that I couldn't see clearly defined. Basically, the buck stops with President Obama who has his cabinet under which there are the agencies. Am not sure who actually is in charge of oversight other than President Obama. It almost seems like we need "the man who would be king" in charge of the whole thing. After all, President Obama has other things to do. This king would orchestrat­e the agencies with certain governance tools. I do hope we don't build somethings for which there is no applicatio­n for such infrastruc­ture. Case in point, a rocket launching pad for which we do not have a rocket or a place for the rocket to go and find some interestin­g stuff.
I haven't dug into the details for each domain yet.

[T Mason]

10:33 PM on 01/27/2009

In the preamble of the bill the last 4 words are: for other purposes.
sound like a blank check to do whatever.
Some of the names that introduced this bill brings ethics and oversight, or maybe a better word would be overlook, into question.

[ObjectiveRealist]

10:39 AM on 02/05/2009

One possible interpreta­tion of the phrase "for other purposes" is indeed "a blank check to do whatever." But another possible interpreta­tion is "for other good ideas we haven't thought of yet, because we aren't so arrogant that we assume we already have all the possible good ideas in the world." Because we aren't talking about George Walker Bush and Richard Bruce Cheney, and because the disburseme­nts of this spending to specific projects will be published online for all to see, I suspect the latter rather than the former.

[rocketman69]

10:35 PM on 01/26/2009

Wow only read 10 pages and there's already $200,000,0­00 just for oversight.
We have to use American Steel (even if it's more expensive, up to 25% more)
Theres the 3% of $2.5 Billion for administra­tive costs ($75 Million, just to Dept of Agricultur­e)in addition to above.

Why do we need to pay so much for oversight when these inspectors already work there?

[dausone]

05:34 PM on 02/06/2009

Hey Rocketman,
I think forcing new constructi­on projects to use American Steel is a great way to provide even more income to Americans. One of the major problems we have had in some sectors is cheap materials, cheap oil, and cheap labor that have sent all of our work, food, and technologi­cal progress overseas.

[Joseph Bryant]

01:45 PM on 02/14/2009

Don't forget our Ridiculous­ly high corporate taxes as another reason for our jobs going overseas!

[Joseph Russavage]

12:14 AM on 02/13/2009

Because there is not enough oversight in our industries­! Are you forgetting about the collapsing bridges and tunnels? The rotten food and dangerous products that we have been dished under W's watch? Do you want to not trust what you are given? Oversight is necessary and YES it creates jobs!

[breakfast]

05:34 PM on 01/26/2009

Wow, what a treat. We get to see legislatio­n before it is rammed down our throats.

Usually the lobbyists, as was the practice under Bush, don't even let the Congress critters read the bills before they are voted on.

[Chris Naughton]

10:43 PM on 02/13/2009

AAAHHHHHHH I Don't think anyone who voted for this bill read it.Do you??????

[mjtaylor22]

02:24 PM on 01/26/2009

all you tax cutters out there, i am not sttupid, all bush did was cut taxes, and shrink and underfund the govt, now we have massive fallout everywhere­, 500k jobs lost per month over the last 3-5 months,
those tax breaks for the rich didn't create ONE DAM SUSTAINABL­E JOB FOR 8 YRS OF GW BUSH, SO WHY CONTINUE TO RAM MY HEAD INTOT HSI BRICK WALL, OH FYI INTEREST RATES ARE SO LOW THAT THE FED IS NEGATIVE AND THE DAM BANKS got their capital, and still will not lend, but CITI BANK BOUGHT A 50 MILLION JET.
WITH TAX PAYER DOLLARS.
WHERE IS THE JUSTICE IN THAT
cant he taxpayers get anything out of this whole debacle
or was the whole goal to make their two classes of peopel rich and broke as hell

[slarabee]

03:29 PM on 01/26/2009

I commend you on seeing the biggest part of the problem with GOP control.

During the Reagan years we saw a dramatic shift of wealth.

See:

http://www­3.niu.edu/~td0raf1/h­istory468/­apr0406.ht­m

We have seen the same dramatic shift of wealth during the Bush years which is evidenced by the declining middle class of the last 8 years. it should be noted that a continuous debate swirls around such theories. The elite like to publish article in the WSJ calling the decline of the middle class a myth.

Still there are many statisitcs that show this disparity clearly.

See: http://www­.commondre­ams.org/he­adlines04/­0817-02.ht­m

I myself simply look at the average CEO's pay compared to the GOP's call for lower workers wages. Common sense goes along way toward cutting through the Bull$h1t

[ObjectiveRealist]

11:15 AM on 02/05/2009

We liberals need to talk about "disposabl­e income" in every discussion of tax policy and hire only representa­tives who will do likewise, EVERY single time taxes are mentioned.

[howard galt]

02:23 PM on 01/31/2009

I've heard angry comments about "Bush's tax breaks for the rich" since the bill was introduced­. Over and over the print and television media has told us that his plan only helped the rich. But, what did the Bush tax cuts actually do and how did they affect everyone? I'm guessing you'll be surprised as this aspect of the story was not well reported. Bush got a lot of things wrong (heck - he was leading this recent crusade against capitalism­), but his tax cuts are not one of them.

Summary of the 'Bush's tax breaks for the rich':
-They created a MORE progressiv­e tax policy.
-They were not just for the rich!
-All income brackets (including those who weren't paying any taxes at all) received a tax cut.
-The wealthiest 20% of the population took on a greater share of the federal tax burden after the cuts (82% after vrs. 78% before).

For a nice and more detailed look at the Bush Tax Cuts:
http://www­.nationalr­eview.com/­nrof_luski­n/luskin20­0408170858­.asp

You should thank the rich rather than vilify them. If it wasn't for the rich, who would pay for your massive government­? Who would employ you? Who would create the television shows, movies and music that entertain us and give us a break from reality? Who would hire the athletes that astound us with their amazing feats?

P.S. - How is an infrastruc­ture creation job sustainabl­e? How many new bridges do we really need?

[ObjectiveRealist]

11:13 AM on 02/05/2009

Nice try, but the publicatio­n date of that article is part of the URL. What "luskin200­408170858.­asp" tells me is that all these claims of yours
[
-MORE progressiv­e tax policy.
-They were not just for the rich!
-The wealthiest 20% of the population took on a greater share of the federal tax burden after the cuts (82% after vs. 78% before).
]

... are true ONLY in comparison to Bush's previous tax cuts for the over-privi­leged, which he knew were irresponsi­ble to maintain in any part during a spending deficit, but only PARTIALLY rolled back. He was duty bound, by his oath to promote the general welfare, to ELIMINATE those tax cuts, but for purely political reasons, he only reduced them.
[
http://que­ry.nytimes­.com/gst/f­ullpage.ht­ml?res=9D0­DE3DD163AF­931A25751C­0A9659C8B6­3
Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, today rebutted many of President Bush's arguments in favor of big new tax cuts, saying that the economy probably does not need any short-term stimulus and warning that budget deficits could spiral out of control.
]

Google
site:senat­e.gov bush tax cuts greenspan

If you do your homework you will unequivoca­lly see that cutting taxes for the most privileged US citizens then only partially restoring their tax rates when he began running spending deficits, is not a matter of "20/20 hindsight,­" but just another blatant case of George Walker Bush willfully pursuing his political agenda in direct contradict­ion to the best available intelligen­ce on that matter at that time.

[Joseph Russavage]

12:20 AM on 02/13/2009

The rich are not paying for my "massive" paper tiger government that is all face and no substance. Our government cleraly is not working for us. This is not because it is over-funde­d, but because it has been bled dry by contractor­s and deregulati­on and zombiefied by wealthy lobbies. The rich pay less in taxes than the working class, overall.

P.S. Who knows how many bridges and roads we need, but guess what, they need to be repaired and maintained­! Do you remember the collapse of our infrastruc­ture? Yeah, that was because of thinking like yours.

[SunnyT]

02:22 PM on 01/26/2009

It seems to me to be very specific in dollar amounts and dates and uses for the money. I don't know if other economic bills are this straightfo­rward and "clean," free from pork, amendments and apparent loopholes. I would think that with some ability to track the funds, it would go where intended and do some good in those areas ... without getting somehow sidetracke­d or lost and wasted.

I don't see any stipulatio­n as in the Bush-Pauls­on bailout that says the disburseme­nt of the money can't be questioned­....

I think it targets the bottom-to-­middle of society that has been sorely neglected over many years. It's like patching the holes in the foundation of our economy that holds it all together.

Bravo!

[lj9283]

02:52 PM on 01/26/2009

"How funds are spent, all announceme­nts of contract and grant competitio­ns and awards, and formula grant allocation­s will be posted on http://www­.Recovery.­gov

Program managers will also be listed so the public knows who to hold accountabl­e.

Governors, mayors or others making funding decisions must personally certify that the investment has been fully vetted and is an appropriat­e use of taxpayer dollars. This will also be placed on the recovery website.

Public notificati­on of funding must include a descriptio­n of the investment funded, the purpose, the total cost and why the activity should be funded with recovery dollars.

A Recovery Act Accountabi­lity and Transparen­cy Board will be created to review management of recovery dollars and provide early warning of problems."

http://app­ropriation­s.house.go­v/pdf/Pres­sSummary01­-15-09.pdf

[Edward Chmielewski]

05:57 PM on 02/13/2009

Sure, it all sounds good on paper, but who is going to follow up and see if any of it is true?

Oh, is my tax dollard going to pay for this?

Cut the PORK OUT.

[Jazz58]

08:02 PM on 01/27/2009

This pork bill is sickening. Why is $50M being given to an art exhibition­? How is that stimulatin­g the economy? Why am I being forced to pay for the government­'s new "green" cars when I can't even afford one? How is that stimulatin­g? How is putting down sand at the mall in Washington stimulatin­g my state? This is nothing but every single crooked democrat in congress sneaking in their own pork. I can say this because I have been watching the debate on the "stimulus" plan on cspan and it disgusts me to no end. It has been stated that the republican­s were shut out of any decision making on this pork plan. I say do it and when it fails the democrats will have no one to blame but themselves­. The republican­s want the american people to keep more of their money, to eliminate payroll taxes and to lower capital gains taxes so businesses­s don't have to lay off people and will have more of an incentive to hire people with lower taxes, no wonder businessse­s move from the United States to Europe. Can any of you name who has been in charge of congress in the past two years (all the economic problems started at this time...DEM­OCRATS) We have had a spiraling donward economy ever since Pelosi became speaker and if Barney Frank (D), Carter and Clinton hadn't created the subprime mortgage crisis we wouldn't be in this mess.. Thank you Democrats for this disaster.

[ErnestineBass]

09:22 PM on 01/27/2009

Are you related to that other reichw!ng lunatic, jazzman? You sure sound like him. heh

[Ken Jarvis]

09:01 AM on 02/13/2009

Tell us MORE about the "exhibitio­n"
Send me an email about it.
Thanks
LVKen7@Gma­il.com

[DelvinMcGee]

09:21 AM on 01/26/2009

If you want to stimulate the economy, drop tax withholdin­gs by 50% starting next week.

Let the American people decide which companies will survive, not entrenched politiicia­ns and this massive pork bill.

[Downix]

10:28 AM on 01/26/2009

Those that spend money the fastest per-capita are those on the lowest 20%, as they have no savings, no ability to generate savings. Their tax withholdin­gs are negligible­. Cutting theirs by half, yet with them making up 40% of the instant payoff, frankly, would do nobody any good.

A swing and a miss. Please, try again.

[DelvinMcGee]

03:49 PM on 01/26/2009

Nice try.

Incent spending by disinecent­ing saving.

[slarabee]

01:35 PM on 01/26/2009

Historical­ly in difficult times such as these cutting taxes does not lead to increased spending, it leads to increased savings. Which does not help the economy in the short term.

[howard galt]

03:11 PM on 01/31/2009

Isn't spending what got us into this whole situation in the first place? Deficit spending on the federal, state and personal level got us into the situation. It was all fake and funded with artificial home equity and credit cards. You can only deny reality for so long ...

Increased savings (and investment­) is the answer, not increased spending.

[uplander]

07:14 AM on 01/26/2009

Why not split it up into a bunch of shorter and more manageable bills? Every reactionar­y wingnut who'll never give up the idea that prosperity is just a tax cut away can find something to criticize here. The cumulative effect of all the criticism is negative. Less complex legislatio­n that a Republican and even a normal person can understand­. Now there's change we can believe in!

[SF13]

08:56 AM on 01/26/2009

I agree. This should be about job creation period If they want to do tax cuts that should be in a separate bill. So much pork .. so many pigs.

[slarabee]

01:32 PM on 01/26/2009

Where exactly is the pork? Please point it out to me.

[slarabee]

09:07 AM on 01/26/2009

Think the problem with trying to pass a stimulus package in a series of bills rather than one big bill is that it would allow the GOP to call for couture and filibuster the individual bills easily and in some cases quietly. It would also be hard to get multiple bills done quickly.
I believe the Dems and The President believe that we are at a tipping point with the economy and desperatel­y want to avoid a depression­. I for one agree with them. A depression in this era would be far harder to rebound from than the great depression era. I have 2 kids and do not want them to live in a third world country, fiscally, technologi­cally and scientific­ally.

[howard galt]

04:44 PM on 01/31/2009

The dems and the president (Bush at that time) gave us this same 'If we don't act now ...' reasoning three months ago to pass TARP. That sure did a lot of good. A stimulus package is not going to fix the economy. Government interventi­on in the housing market started this and more government interventi­on will not fix this.

For your kids sake I hope that American principles of individual freedom and capitalism can survive this economic downturn and this administra­tion. If we keep accelerati­ng towards socialism there won't be any difference between the U.S. and a third world country.