Pawlenty will take stimulus money, unlike other republican governors.
Gov. Pawlenty has a unique situation when it comes to the stimulus money to be sent to Minnesota from the recently passed American Recovery & Reinvestment Act. Though many republican governors are considering refusing the funding for programs like unemployment benefits and retrofitting government buildings, Pawlenty says he will take his state's share of the money. In a statement to the press, he said:
"In Minnesota's case, we are a major net subsidizer of the federal government, and that's unlike some other states. For every dollar we send in, we only get 72 cents back. So we're paying the bill either way. We're going to take our share of the money," he said, adding that his state won't be hurt by requirements on unemployment benefits because those rules have already been in place for years."
Other republican governors such as Bobby Jindal (LA) and Haley Barbour (MS) have expressed concern with what they see as "strings attached" to the funding. In the case of Mississippi, Barbour says,
"The unemployment insurance reform, if you will, would require the state to pay people who are not willing to take a full-time job," Barbour told FOX News, saying his state is not going to expand benefits to part-time workers. "We're not going to change that. ... We're going to give up about $50 million of federal money."
Several other republican governors are speaking out about their disdain for the bill including Sarah Palin of Alaska and South Carolina's Mark Sanford. They say the bill will institute programs that will require continued funding once the stimulus money is long gone.
Comments
The title of this piece says it all. "MN Governor breaks from the GOP pack; says he'll take his state's share of the stimulus". Would this be a political issue? Aren't Governors indebted to their states? It is outrageous that some Governors whose states are in the "red" and having to cut vital programs are showboating by saying they will refuse ... Read Moremoney from the stimulus plan. It is perfectly okay for them to express their opinions; however, not accepting the money when they obviously need it is a betrayal of the oath they took to be mindful of the well being of their citizens. Congress passes the bills and the President signs them into law. Should we just amend the constitution? These states may elect no longer to be part of the union? The cream will rise above the crop. Pawlenty is the Republican Governor of a "so called" liberal state for a good reason. The state senate will override any"needy states" Governor's decision not to take the money anyway. Im tired of the politics
Does Pawlenty look a little porky? I think he looks a little porky. However, I don't think anyone cares if Pawlenty looks a little porky. So no biggie. I was just wondering.
The larger issue stemming from the federal act is that it doesn't mesh with state law. And don't say that fed trumps state because that isn't the case for things like unemployment and education. I don't know anyone who would doubt that we need better infrastructure in all of our states, but the rediculous spending could very well put some states even further in the hole.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!