Sweet: Jindal rejects $98 million in stimulus money for Louisiana
posted at 8:30 pm on February 20, 2009 by Allahpundit
In one fell swoop, he’s stolen Sanford’s thunder as stimulus critic-in-chief. Risky, but I like it.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal announced Friday that he will decline stimulus money specifically targeted at expanding state unemployment insurance coverage, becoming the first state executive to officially refuse any part of the federal government’s payout to states…
“The federal money in this bill will run out in less than three years for this benefit and our businesses would then be stuck paying the bill,” Jindal said. “We must be careful and thoughtful as we examine all the strings attached to the funding in this package. We cannot grow government in an unsustainable way.”
NOLA says he’ll accept cash for transportation infrastructure and a modest increase in unemployment benefits but drew the line at unemployment insurance lest it mean a $12 million tax hike for Louisiana businesses three years from now. Needless to say, he’s out of the gate quickly on this for two reasons: to give him fiscal conservative bragging rights vis-a-vis Palin and the rest of the GOP’s rising stars, and of course to give the weekend talk shows a chance to buzz about him before his rebuttal to The One’s State of the Union on Tuesday night. The left will naturally hammer him for hating the poor — or, per Jim Clyburn, black people — but by framing it as a savings to businesses he can sell it as something that’ll produce more employment in the long run. Exit question: Good move or no?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Jim Clyburn = Entitlements
Bobby Jindal = Free Thinker
Racist. Jim, you’re it. Keep em poor. Keep em democrat.
Kini on February 20, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Go Jindal!
States Rights must exist. The States created the Federal Government. The Creator is no less than the Creation.
maverick muse on February 20, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Why would he have to extend the unemployment beyond what the state allows now once the federal funds run out?
AnninCA on February 20, 2009 at 11:34 PM
“Faint Not In Well Doing, For In Due Time You Will Reap”. The Duty Of The Constitution Based US Government Is To Protect The GOD-Given Liberties Of Her Citizens, Not To Destroy Them In Greed, Corruption And Self-Righteous Egomania. Godless, Lieing Whoremongers, When Will You Cease To Pervert Righteousness?
GD on February 20, 2009 at 11:39 PM
I would probably need more details to be sure but what happens is that the democrats start a program like a new classification for unemployment. Then in 3 years you have all these people getting checks and you have a choice either start picking up the tab or end it.
If you end it guess what the democrats say?
“The Republicans are for throwing people who ar unemployed out in the streets!”
“the Republicans want to make cuts in unemployemnt next year”
The reality is that you are ending the program but the democrats have already got you by developing some dependents.
See how growing the dependent class works? If you ever change the rules back to the ones you had you are an evil Republican and sure as the sun shines all welfare programs get some sob stories involved with them that become political ammunition.
The key is to never start the programs that is why you should NEVER trust a democrat that a program is temporary especially welfare or unemployment expansion. There is no way you won’t be cutting off a check to someone if you end it and the obvious fallout follows poltically.
Conan on February 20, 2009 at 11:52 PM
they start these programs and then the courts rule them as “entitlements”
and you must continue to fund them, even when the state can’t afford to do so.
Which was what Palin said in her release. This stimulus punishes states who do things like “forward funding education” and such
joey24007 on February 20, 2009 at 11:55 PM
I’m telling you people, JINDAL is the real deal….
DCJeff on February 21, 2009 at 12:03 AM
JINDAL: “ONP”.
OUR
NEXT
PRESIDENT.
reliapundit on February 21, 2009 at 12:04 AM
So how long was that self-imposed exile? 12 minutes?
Chuck Schick on February 21, 2009 at 12:05 AM
KATRINA?
I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m sick and tired of Katrina being an excuse. America has been wussified by the left. If anyone in LA is still reeling from a hurricane that hit YEARS ago…I mean good lord people…get over it. How about this? It’s like one hurricane gave these people a life-long excuse for not working. MAN-UP AMERICA.
OwlorNothing on February 21, 2009 at 12:07 AM
Unemployment in Louisiana is well below the national average according to the last numbers I could find. (It’s 5.9% in LA, which is the 15th lowest in the country)
The national rate is 7.6% according to the Bureau Of Labor And Statistics.
Louisiana’s biggest industries (shipping, oil / gas, chemicals, etc.) are generally fine right now and can’t easily migrate elsewhere due to geography and/or environmental concerns.
teke184 on February 21, 2009 at 12:10 AM
Definitely a good move. His next is to demonstrate the positives of the conservative solution — not because this issue is still up for grabs but because when we play it back years from now and the economy is in the gutter he will look like a veritable oracle of truth. He needs to clearly sell the alternative cosmology.
As far as the “exorcism” thing is concerned, I think it would backfire if the MSM tried this on someone so talented, acomplished, and disciplined. Catholicism is only the single biggest religion on Earth and, on top of that, most people who are not Catholic, while they would not call their neighbors to enshrine an oil stain on the driveway, do embrace some sort of belief in the supernatural which includes manifestations of evil.
The movie The Exorcist was popular for a reason.
In the end, though, I do not think all the talk about 2012 is meaningful because the man has said himself that he will not run then. Unlike some politicians, he likely believes that the office would best be served by someone with talent and experience.
StubbleSpark on February 21, 2009 at 12:12 AM
That’s what a lot of us in Baton Rouge have been saying for a long time, in part because we’re a lot more familiar with the generations of welfare leeches living in New Orleans public housing than the rest of the country.
That’s partially why a lot of areas in the state got such bad publicity for refusing to take Katrina evacuees… and why places like Houston and San Antonio that took a lot of these people have been trying to stamp “Return to sender” on them for years.
teke184 on February 21, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Is Jindal a Natural born citizen?
PrincipledPilgrim on February 21, 2009 at 12:15 AM
Good move.
Yeah, the morons will tar him….however they want to (racist, hates poor people, is a self-hating minority) but when the stimulus bill fails, with that lovely $1 trillion price tag, he’ll be in prime position for a massive I TOLD YOU SO.
(Hint, Mr. Jindal: Campaign slogan.)
Hawkins1701 on February 21, 2009 at 12:16 AM
Pligrim, meet thy friend
Yngmarine on February 21, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Here’s how i would explain it:
“The Federal Government came and offered us this great deal on expanded unemployment insurance- no money down, and we don’t have to start making payments until 3 years from now. Sounds like a great deal. Except for one thing, three years from now when we have to start making payments we won’t be able to afford it.
Now most politicians don’t care about 3, 4 years down the road, because by then they’ve already won re-election. But that is what got into the mess we are in in the first place. Everyone focused on how great the deal was right now- and nobody worried about how we would pay for it later.
The Federal Government has forgotten the first rule of holes. When you’re in one, stop digging.”
Sackett on February 21, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Yes, he is. His parents moved to Louisiana when his mother was pregnant and he was born in Baton Rouge.
teke184 on February 21, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Yes, he was born in Baton Rouge while his parents were studying at LSU.
Lay-Z on February 21, 2009 at 12:39 AM
Bah, helps if I refresh the page once in a while.
Lay-Z on February 21, 2009 at 12:39 AM
Where will the money go that he turns down?
herrevery on February 21, 2009 at 12:41 AM
Remember when Mayor Kip Holden of Baton Rouge got all that flak for saying he didn’t want criminals creating havok? People from New Orleans got all offended.
I don’t blame Kip at all, he didn’t want a bunch of thugs coming into Baton Rouge creating more problems the police could deal with.
Lay-Z on February 21, 2009 at 12:43 AM
The Katrina mess is weak victimology. Not the first hurricane to strike the mainland, and certainly not the first natural disaster (fires, earthquakes, you name it over the past 2-3 centuries).
Google Galveston hurricane sometime. Some people/business moved to a safer location, some rebuilt higher, but people overcame tragedy and moved on.
I think we’re gonna need to remember how to do that.
cs89 on February 21, 2009 at 12:50 AM
I think we the country moving left like it is now, this will get a lot of buzz for him, but the press is going to beat him up for it. However, four years from now when inflation is around 12% a year, and unemployment has crept back up over 7% and beginning to move up again, it could make him look like a genius and position him for a run at Obama. We’ll see.
paulsur on February 21, 2009 at 12:53 AM
Very good move. One of the problems I had with McCain is that, other than his military service and length of time in the Senate, there really weren’t enormous differences between him and Obama on policy. So why the heck not pick the new guy who, towards the end of the campaign, captured the tax cut message from the supposed conservative. Now, with this move, Jindal is sending the message that this is how true conservatives govern, a message I hope resonates with other Republicans. More importantly, he’s informing voters that there are some principled conservatives left who (1) are smart enough not to buy into hope n’ change and (2) have little in common with the One. Come election time, the differences should be stark.
Erich66 on February 21, 2009 at 12:56 AM
My great-great-grandparents and their children. survived the 1900 storm and moved to Houston. They passed down horror stories of that night, but oddly, no entitlement or self-pity. They didn’t even blame the president! Funny that.
herrevery on February 21, 2009 at 12:57 AM
I loves me some Piyush!
I like Palin, but if Jindal makes the run in ’12, I’ll hafta go with my Guv.
soundingboard on February 21, 2009 at 1:08 AM
Well, can’t respond to unintelligence, BuckeyeSam. Let me know when you have an actual argument instead of just name-calling.
The source of California’s budget problems have nothing to do with accepting or rejecting federal funding, which is what Governor Jindal is doing in this case. The real problem is due to the hard realities that the California government is not facing.
Many Republican legislators in California are not making the tough decisions that need to be made in a timely manner. There needs to be an increase in the amount of revenue that the state takes in. Whether that comes from taxes or another source it needs to happen.
As for American people cheering the actions that Governor Jindal, that remains to be seen. I am sure that it would have been wiser for Governor Jindal to accept the funding to ensure that people in his state has the unemployment benefits needed should they lose their jobs instead of rejecting it because of the tax increase down the road on the businesses that would benefit from more people having money in their pockets.
Everyone seems to be concern about the businesses and that is fine.
What about the person who lost his or her job and needs money just to make ends meet and find a new job?
Are you truly willing to argue that the tax increase in three years would be that substantial as to mitigate the benefit of helping people now?
The very people that will be helped by the unemployment insurance will benefit the businesses more than just not having the tax that won’t be in effect until 2011-2012.
ckoeber on February 21, 2009 at 1:41 AM
You are implying a projection as well. Governor Jindal is taking a risk by not accepting the unemployment insurance benefits. If the economy continues to contract it will undoubtedly affect his constituents.
Will his state be able to cope without all the options offered in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to his state?
That is the important question.
ckoeber on February 21, 2009 at 1:46 AM
I’m still with Palin. She was the first to say she may not accept funds. Also told barry to veto the bill. Also the ADN the main newspaper up in Alaska is bascially saying they really think Palin WONT accept the funds. They aint happy about it either. The paper endorsed obama.
ousoonerfan15 on February 21, 2009 at 1:57 AM
I point to a recent Gallup poll that has remained relatively unchanged at 52%:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/114184/Public-Support-Stimulus-Package-Unchanged.aspx
I am particularly interested in the “socialist elitism” that you refer to. While I have merely commented on Governor Jindal’s actions you have implied that I have “sick ideals”.
I would be more than happy to debate whether providing unemployment benefits to people in a time of economic hardship would be considered “elitist” or “sick”.
ckoeber on February 21, 2009 at 2:02 AM
I never said that Governor Jindal had to take the money. I am saying that it is unwise for him to refuse it.
ckoeber on February 21, 2009 at 2:08 AM
oosoonerfan on February 21, 2009 at 1:57 AM
Judy Patrick, one of Sarah’s closest friends, may have let the cat out of the bag yesterday in Rome by saying that Sarah will probably run for President in 2011 (primary season).
That the ADN is slamming Sarah even before she announces her decision on the stimulus package makes me believe it has heard the same thing.
We are both strong Sarah Palin supporters. If Jindal wants to enter the fray, so be it; but we both know that Sarah will be a major player once she announces (Facebook, Team Sarah, SarahPAC, Sarah Palin radio and other sites devoted to supporting her in 2012).
The way I look at politics is that Sarah must be tested in the primaries to become battle-hardened but by the same token I have consistently called for the base and conservatives to coalesce around one conservative early in the primary process and not dilly-dally, let the primaries drag on without a winner (Obama vs Hillary)and hand the 2012 election to Obama.
technopeasant on February 21, 2009 at 2:11 AM
My argument was that accepting the funding for state unemployment benefits would provide security for the constituents of Louisiana should the economy contract further in the future. There is no downside to providing financial security to people when they need it most; when they do not have a job.
Pandering involves taking a position purely for political benefit. By refusing the unemployment insurance funding he cannot say that he is helping people who are being hit by the economic contraction. And small business would benefit from people still being able to buy basic goods while they are looking for a job.
And basing your conclusion about pandering on my statements is ill-founded. I never said it was OK for any politician to pander.
You are drawing too many conclusions without knowing who you are debating or what positions he or she supports.
ckoeber on February 21, 2009 at 2:18 AM
I totally agree techno. Sarah has much more national experience than Jindal. I wouldnt be surprised in the next few days if she rejects the majority of her stimulus money as well.
ousoonerfan15 on February 21, 2009 at 2:46 AM
ah, Jindal = new Jefferson Davis to Obama’s Lincoln. oh the irony
jp on February 21, 2009 at 2:49 AM
And let us not forget how the gov’t got this money to give to the states…while we were asleep they stole our credit cards and charged it!!!! When we awoke there was pelosi uhbuma reid grinning at us…”Well looky what we did!”
And now we are arguing over whether a Governor should accept the money they stole…SEE THE ABSURDITY OF LIBERAL THINKING???
winston on February 21, 2009 at 4:07 AM
This is probably not a good move for Jindal. The problem with it is that the extended unemployment insurance gives unemployed people an extra $75 to $100 a month in their unemployment checks. Now if you are unemployed that extra $100 a month is meaningful.
Right now, people don’t care about their taxes three years from now, they care about putting food on their tables today.
Of course, we all know that this is the real crux of the problem with this stimulus package. Maybe in 3 years, the economy will see a benefit, but it does nothing to get people working today or from losing their jobs tomorrow.
Now we all might be patting Jindal on the back for this and telling him what a bright and incredible man he is, but what if you lived in Louisiana?
If you were unemployed or you think you may be unemployed in the next couple of years and you lived in Louisiana, would you appreciate your governor turning down $100 a month that you may need to feed your family?
Even if you were a hardcore conservative that hates this stimulus package, would you appreciate your governor turning down an extra $100 a month on your behalf if you were unemployed or will be unemployed in the next three years? After all, your tax dollars are funding this monstrous stimulus already. Yet, you do not get the benefit from it???
If Jindal fails as a governor in Louisiana, his political career is over. There will be no presidential run in 2012 or 2016 if he is seen as a failure. If the people vote him out as governor or he decides not to run for reelection and leaves the state with an incredible amount of debt and in shambles(which is where they are right now) there will be no chance at a successful presidential run.
PS. It is okay to be a Palin fan and a Jindal fan and a Sanford fan. My prayer is that all three of these governors navigate their states through this difficult period.
We need to worry about 2010 first. We need all three of these governors to be successful in order to oust as many Democrats as possible in 2010.
So let’s encourage them all. To have a split Republican electorate going into 2010, because we are worried about 2012, is simply foolish.
kcarpenter on February 21, 2009 at 4:12 AM
Ah….a breath of fresh intelligence!
misslizzi on February 21, 2009 at 4:13 AM
<blockquoteThere is no downside to providing financial security to people when they need it most; when they do not have a job.This may have sounded good bouncing around in your noggin, but did you actually read this after you typed it, and do you actually believe in something that blatantly simplistic?
No, no downside, at all. Like removal of incentive to actually get a job, or that once such an attitude (the gub’mint’ll send me mah check, and make it aaaaaaalllll better), you end up with people sitting on their roofs waiting for the Coast Guard when they could have used some initiative and gotten the heck outta Dodge in time.
Short term versus long term, I guess. But then, advocating the short term isn’t surprising, given the willingness to use such a lame point for the simple expedient of winning an internet discussion.
Wind Rider on February 21, 2009 at 4:14 AM
Looks like this is a risk he’s willing to take. More power to him.
misslizzi on February 21, 2009 at 4:16 AM
So, basically, they’re doing for unemployment what’s already been done with home financing (to absolutely fab reviews, dontcha know)!
wunderbar
Thanks for the clarity, Sackett!
Wind Rider on February 21, 2009 at 4:22 AM
Jindal or Palin, I’ll take either.
Bobby, however, has just taken a hold of a major issue and I believe he can lead on this.
Good on ya, Gov.
Sakaki on February 21, 2009 at 4:39 AM
I’m saying I don’t think it’s a good idea to get as excited about Jindal as I see people getting. I understand the impulse, he talks to the base, he’s an articulate defender of our values, but it’s a mistaken impulse. No one who honestly speaks his/her own positions lines up with the party that much, and even if such a person exists, when you see someone with ample political ambition lining up cleanly it’s FAR more likely that they’re driven by the ambition as opposed to general dedication to all of his/her stated principles.
It’s buying into this sort of pandering that got us where we are. When you place more on vocal orthodoxy than on skepticism as to the sort of person we’re putting in the office we wind up with the sort of Republicans who had absolutely no problem with exaggerated stands on social issues alienating everyone other than a few fringe members of the “base” and no economic spine.
We lost track of our values because of the pursuit of orthodoxy, because the pursuit of stated orthodoxy from politicians detaches the policies from the principles. We lost the independents because it reached the point that no one believed one word coming out of our mouths because we had become a party of cheap pandering hacks. This is a democracy and we need to recognize that we wound up where we are because of what we allowed to determine our votes.
We need to return to conservative principles, and that means moving away from placing our value on public displays of orthodoxy. You’ve gotta look at what they’re doing when people aren’t looking, and when people aren’t looking Jindal has been positioning himself to run for President from day 1. You would never see Jindal put his career on the line to get an audit of the state’s distribution of unemployment funds, just like you’ll never see Jindal take a position that looks bad but is the right thing to do.
Now I figure there are some that will take issue with saying this, but people aren’t lying when they say we’ve allowed the Republican party to become an intellectual vacuum. I like Sarah Palin a lot, she’s excelled at every job she’s ever had, but I would be absolutely stunned if she could explain why free markets are good, explain the significance of fed rates, and lay out a plan for our foreign policy. Charles Gibson is a cheap hack who spent a supposed interview giving a pop quiz, but considering that the biggest role of the Presidency is in foreign policy I’ve gotta admit it was disconcerting to see that she clearly had no idea what the Bush doctrine is.
We’re right, and the more you know the more you know how right we are. We’re not hawks out of a lack of concern for the nuances of foreign policy, we’re hawks because of the nuances of foreign policy. We don’t support lower taxes because it gets people excited, we’re for lower taxes because we’re for lower spending because an economy functions better when people control their own money. I don’t oppose someone being concise, but I oppose being concise when it’s a means to covering up that there’s no meat behind the talking points.
Sorry, it’s all a big thing that’s been bugging me for a while, I can only imagine that no one will read this (as I never would).
galenrox on February 21, 2009 at 5:18 AM
I saw Haley Barbour on t.v. saying that he is considering rejecting the “stimulus” unemployment money because it requires states to pay unemployment compensation to people who are unwilling to accept full-time work. He said his state has never paid unemployment to part-time workers who are unwilling to work full time, and he thinks it would set a bad precedent.
AZCoyote on February 21, 2009 at 6:08 AM
good job Jindal, my political hero.
Mercy4Me on February 21, 2009 at 6:54 AM
Louisiana has recently had an increase in jobs here unlike a lot of the rest of the country. When we realized there was going to be a shortfall in the budget Bobby immediately put a freeze on hiring and got all departments to go through and find where they could make cuts and they started making them.
As to the comments about Katrina I can fully understand the frustration. We live in St Bernard parish which was completely wiped out. 100% of the buildings in the parish were damaged and we are coming back strong. Our public schools were restarted when we finally stopped waiting of FEMA and did it ourselves. We are doing much better. We are not completely done yet though. Anyone who has gone through this sort of disaster knows it takes time. New Orleans doesn’t speak for all of Southeastern Louisiana.
sdan on February 21, 2009 at 7:14 AM
Better yet…never start a program you wouldn’t feel comfortable a raving, flaming liberal running. Hence, my issue (only) with Patriot Act and FCC, etc. In the hands of Chicago thug criminals with grandiose delusions, you have major problems. Actually, just look at the public school system. There you have an “organization” completely run by liberals. Same with higher education. We see what happened there.
Mommypundit on February 21, 2009 at 8:37 AM
Check out Jindal speaking at the NRA convention. Stellar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqulJSzEPqM
Mommypundit on February 21, 2009 at 8:38 AM
This may have been explained in a previous comment, but business owners pay a Federal unemployment compensation tax by a certain equation. If your state accepts the extended unemployment benefits your payment equation goes up so essentially all businesses end up paying for the Federal gift down the road.
MRegine on February 21, 2009 at 8:39 AM
ARRA broke welfare reform. Read Mickey Kaus’ various takes on it if you want to understand the problems this is going to create. Jindal was Asst Secy for Planning and Evaluation at HHS. He understands precisely what the implications are for state budgets from that expanded (and let’s be clear about that, expanded) unemployment compensation. The economic literature on this is also very clear — these sorts of transfers prolong unemployment spells, all other things equal.
ckoeber, I understand your concern, but I think Jindal’s view on this is driven by a clear-headed understanding of the issues.
DrSteve on February 21, 2009 at 8:40 AM
That’s all I needed to hear when Sanford was explaining how it affects states. I wonder how paying part-time workers unemployment benefits made its way into the spending bill.
Nancy? Harry?
DrStock on February 21, 2009 at 8:51 AM
He will be considered a racist snake preacher by the end of the year. He is about to be Palin’d
tomas on February 21, 2009 at 9:03 AM
Some of the strings attached can be found in this article at Bloomberg:
Stimulus Would Alter U.S. Unemployment Benefit System
Xiphos on February 21, 2009 at 9:09 AM
miss barry obama will notbe pleased….
Ghoul aid on February 21, 2009 at 9:13 AM
Thanks for replying to my question about why he would say that the state would have to extend these benefits once federal money ran out.
However, if he’s going to truly turn down money on behalf of people there unemployed due to this crash, then he probably better ask them. The extension of unemployment benefits is one of things that will truly help real people in that stimulus bill. I can’t imagine someone telling their state that we didn’t think you’d mind if we say “No” to that help.
I sympathize about some of the school funding stuff on the grounds that the states can’t keep it up.
But not on unemployment benefits.
AnninCA on February 21, 2009 at 9:16 AM
The protests are starting and the refusals are coming in. Pretty soon we’ll have a clear picture of who’s in the quid pro quo group. You can be sure that the ones who accept this bloated piece of BS have done this kind of thing before.
Kudos to Bobby!
hopefloats on February 21, 2009 at 9:31 AM
I like Jindal, but Gov. Palin has been warning of the expansion of social programs since day one.
Of course, you wouldn’t know that reading hotair
joey24007 on February 21, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Good stuff. This is nanny-state implementation and thankfully, we have a sharp, independent, conservative mind like Jindal’s who knows this. No doubt they will organize and attempt to pillory the Louisiana governor, but Jindal appears to be the real deal. Doubt he can be Alinskied into submission.
BTW, I do want responsible, unemployed people to have access to funds they paid if they’re unemployed and need them for a “reasonable” amount of time, but I don’t want a bunch of non-taxpaying, worker-leaches sucking up the dough after they worked for a short time at a part time job and got themselves fired to collect. This is what they’re breeding.
RepubChica on February 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM
wait until they get a hold of his religious history.
It will make the smearing of Palin look like happy fun time
joey24007 on February 21, 2009 at 9:44 AM
This whole “wait till the liberal msm gets to him/her” crap needs to stop. That’s how current GOP leaders and pundits got themselves neutered…by hailing to the corrupt lib media’s dissection of their own. Standing by with their jaws dropped open.
RepubChica on February 21, 2009 at 9:53 AM
A Palin/Jindal 2012 ticket would send the MSM and the left into collective apoplexy. I would really enjoy watching that race.
BPD on February 21, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Give ‘em hell Bobby!!!!
Mr. Grump on February 21, 2009 at 10:06 AM
hey, I’m just stating reality here.
I like Palin and Jindal and I don’t care what the MSM thinks about them.
Just pointing out what will happen to him eventually if he becomes a threat to “The One”
joey24007 on February 21, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Excellent decision on Jindal’s part! I like the direction this man is headed.
Jockolantern on February 21, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Let me first say that it is very nice to see a healthy debate, without the screaming hatefest we see in a Palin post.
I am very mindful of remembering Jindal’s proposal this past November to expand Medicare, government controlled healthcare. His very own proposal would massively increase government controlled healthcare.
I am more than a little curious as to why Jindal wants to expand Medicare, but is unwilling to expand unemployment insurance.
Unemployment insurance is chump change compared to the costs of expanding medicare.
I don’t know. Perhaps one of you guys have the answer to this question.
kcarpenter on February 21, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Obama said, “Government cannot forget the lessons of Katrina”. Jindal agrees. Don’t perpetuate a massive welfare class which can’t even wipe it’s own asses.
marklmail on February 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM
I think Jindal is doing the right thing. Taking that money now would leave the citizens of La. with a bill they would not be able to pay in three years. I lived in Louisiana when he was running for Governor, and he makes a lot of sense. I would support a Palin/Jindal ticket in 2012. Maybe they could fix some of this mess.
tara20639 on February 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM
Good move on Jindal’s part. I think the analysis in the OP is spot-on, except it doesn’t provide its own conclusion.
Scott H on February 21, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal…
…now that’s a Governor every state deserves.
eanax on February 21, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Some of the points being made here are valid ones. I have already made the argument on what the PEOPLE of LA will think about this. Bobby Jindal answers to the people of his state, not the MSM. Jindal does not answer to me, living in Wisconsin either. My guess is that a majority of us posting here do not live in LA.
So the question still remains, if you are living in Louisiana and you are unemployed or you are worried you might be unemployed, and Jindal just turned down $100 a month worth of benefits for you, are you happy about that?
I think this is a fair question to ask.
kcarpenter on February 21, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Risky, and easy to hammer him on the poor/minorities/elderly/puppies etc. But if he can really make the case this is a good move, I like it.
Dash on February 21, 2009 at 11:09 AM
No you are probably not going to be happy about it right now. But by November of 2010 when Jindal is up for reelection, you will either have found another job or have moved out of Louisiana. And you’ll most likely have another job because Jindal is doing the things necessary to maintain a strong private economy in the state.
rockmom on February 21, 2009 at 11:14 AM
I think I speak for just about everyone when I say this:
We take what we can get. And Bobby and Sarah are just as good as anyone. Mitt Romney can go die in a fire.
Sakaki on February 21, 2009 at 11:20 AM
This is how true revolution begins. Not by hoisting a flag, buying a shotgun and barricading yourself in some compound,, but by peaceably refusing to submit! Can you imagine the fits of rage if even half the states refused to accept this??? Can you imagine the hysteria if 40 states refused to submit and accept this fraud and takeover of our country???
Obama is declaring he is now going to even monitor Mayors!! Mayors??!! The President of the United States is going to monitor the actions and spending of individual mayors!! This is incredible! It is none of his business how mayors and communities conduct their affairs!!!
I imagine some in Washington would call for arrests of mayors, governors and state legislators! Maybe a SWAT team or two would go storming into a few state capitals! Maybe tanks would roll into some cities! That is how it begins!!
And it’s only been a month!
JellyToast on February 21, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Jindal, you ROCK!!
tickleddragon on February 21, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Moving out of Louisiana to find a job means that you are not paying taxes to LA, putting the state further in debt.
There is a solution to this. If Jindal is so concerned about private businesses, why are their property taxes one of the worst in the nation for business? Seriously, business, both small and large pay a minimum of 15% to 25% tax rate. Citizens pay about 10%, which is still too high. But for a business, my heavens!!
Jindal could simple take the money and then cut property taxes for businesses across the board to not only offset the costs of an increase in unemployment insurance, but would save private business billions. Saving them billions right now, would also create jobs in LA. Then there are few unemployed people.
In fact, why hasn’t Jindal cut those property taxes? Yes, his state will go further in debt for a time, but business will grow strong with higher profits and pay more in taxes, bringing the state our of the red.
kcarpenter on February 21, 2009 at 11:39 AM
I read this too. They plan on crashing down on mayors for frivolous spending.
Oh please, has Obama even read the stimulus package himself?
They encouraged frivolous spending and then beat up on the mayors for spending frivolously.
kcarpenter on February 21, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Yes, I when I saw him speak about this he went on to say that since States don’t already pay unemployment to part-time who will not accept full-time work they would have to change the States rules to do this and the language in the bill was not clear as to whether the States could then change their rules back when the money ran out. Seems that he must have been right that the States can not change back to not providing unemployment to part-time if Jindal is saying the businesses would have to pick up the tab in 3 years.
That goes beyond a helping hand to people who need help. That goes into usurping State’s Rights. That’s the modus operandi for the DNC, increase the welfare state.
Texas Gal on February 21, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Certainly, it’s fair. But I’m not sold on the premise at face value. I believe Jindal dug deeper than most state governors into this unemployment bennies agenda and it raised a major red-flag.
Yeah, Jindal answers to the people of the state, but he is the executive of that state. He has to govern. And a major part of that governing is budgeting. Why sit back mute if you’re fiscally-savvy enough to see your state in the red years down the road because of this unemployment reworking?
Answering to the people is more the job of congressional representatives and senators, and how has that worked out for us lately?
RepubChica on February 21, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Liberals= No Convictions. “Take The Money, People Need It, It Doesnt Matter Where It Comes From Or What It Will Cost” Benjamin Franklin Said “A Penny Saved Is A Penny To The Lean” Rejecting This Socialist Trojan Pig, Will Give You More Than Pennies To The Lean (Of The Others States Unsurmountable Coming Government Debt!) “If The Roots Be Cursed, How Shall The Fruit Be Blessed?”
GD on February 21, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Great move. He can mitigate the racism smears a bit being a minority himself (not that identity politics is right, but it’s real.)
And it gives him great conservative chops in 2012 primaries. No matter how much people may think he’s not going to run – he’ll be around. If not for 2012 against The One, then 2016 in a landslide.
Grafted on February 21, 2009 at 12:01 PM
At least as far as New Orleans goes, Katrina was just the LATEST excuse for the welfare culture not to work.
Jindal is smart here. Both setting himself up as a fiscal conservative for his run for the Presidency in 2012 and because the state has had so much excess from Katrina/Rita dollars that much of the “recovery” programs have more than enough to move forward.
highhopes on February 21, 2009 at 12:05 PM
Not really. For the same reason that Representative Cao (who is Asian-American) was attacked as racist in his campaign against William Jefferson. For the arbiters of what is racist and what is not (i.e. angry black people who consider themselves perpetual victims) an Indian-American can’t possibly understand the “black experience.”
highhopes on February 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Cuda/Piyush 2012!
BPD on February 21, 2009 at 12:11 PM
First, I do believe that Jindal said he would accept the modest increase to unemployment benefits:
Where he drew the line was in changing the rules in his State to extend that benefit to those who they have never included before because when the fed money is gone the State would have to continue the program by increasing the tax on business.
Second, where did you see anything about a $100 increase? I’ve only heard that example used as a Democrat’s talking point. Jindal himself refers to a modest increase.
Texas Gal on February 21, 2009 at 12:13 PM
One question: Where does the money that he rejected go now?
Sir Corky on February 21, 2009 at 12:26 PM
Those of you linking Palin with this move by Jindal need to read closely.
Sarah Palin did NOT turn down needed funds that would help the people of Alaska.
She said they would take a look and examine the strings attached.
That’s smart.
His move?
I frankly can’t imagine it. Turn down money that keeps your unemployed from starving?
Good gravy, people.
AnninCA on February 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Looks like Charles at lgf wants David Gregory to ask Jindal about his supposed extreme views.
The more Charles talks about creationism, the less I read his blog. Pretty soon he will start to morph into Bill Maher.
ClericalGal on February 21, 2009 at 12:40 PM
AWESOME!!!!
the GOP just keeps getting better and better!!!
maybe his bold acion will help the rest follow suit…
alexraye on February 21, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Bobby for President 2012!
bdeitrich on February 21, 2009 at 12:51 PM
Scratch that, I see you said month and I read it week since that is what the article said.
I don’t think anyone in Louisiana is going to starve just because Jindal doesn’t take the second pot of money. I think he did just as Palin said she would do and look closely at the strings attached to the funding. Like that little sting in there about extending unemployment to those who leave their job for “compelling family reason”. WTF is that all about? Encourage people to become unemployed?
Texas Gal on February 21, 2009 at 12:52 PM
Good move Bobby!
oldleprechaun on February 21, 2009 at 12:53 PM
Go Bobby! All the way to Pennsylvania Ave. Love to see the other Rep. Govs. do the same. No hope here in OH.
Buckeye Babe on February 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »