http://cnsnews.com/…

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted on Thursday that none of his Senate colleagues would ”have the chance” to read the entire final version of the $790-billion stimulus bill before the bill comes up for a final vote in Congress.

“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com.

The final bill, crafted by a House-Senate conference committee, was posted on the Website of the House Appropriations Committe late Thurday in two PDF files.

The first PDF was 424 pages long and the second PDF was 575 pages long, making the total bill 999 pages long.  The House is expected to vote on this 999-page bill Friday, and the Senate either later Friday or Saturday.  [Editor's note: The first PDF, as posted on the House Appropriations Committee website as of 8:20 AM Friday morning, had grown by 72 pages to 496 pages, increasing the length of the total document to 1,071 pages.]

Of the several senators that CNSNews.com interviewed on Thursday, only Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) claimed to have read the entire bill–and he was speaking of the preliminary version that had been approved by the Senate, not the final 999-page version that the House-Senate conference committee was still haggling over on Thursday afternoon.

When CNSNews.com asked members of both parties on Capitol Hill on Thursday whether they had read the full, final bill, not one member could say, “Yes.”

And only one–Voinovich–volunteered that he had actually read the version of the bill that had passed the Senate.

Both Republicans and Democrats told CNSNews.com they were eager to read the unseen bill–once they could get get their hands on a copy of the final legislation.

Nonetheless, members from both sides of the aisle in both the House and Senate admitted they doubted they would have adequate time to read the bill before they actually voted for it.

“Certainly I hope to have the opportunity to go through [the bill] before the vote takes place,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told CNSNews.com. “But that’s something I’ve found doesn’t always happen around here.”

http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/27

http://arstechnica.com/…

Within two weeks Congress will consider a massive investment bill that includes an infusion of $6 billion for broadband and $650 million to get the government’s cash-strapped DTV coupon program back up and running. It’s part of a $550 billion proposal that House Appropriations Committee Chair David Obey (D-WI) calls the only way to handle the nation’s financial crisis.

“The economy is in such trouble that, even with passage of this package, unemployment rates are expected to rise to between eight and nine percent this year,” Obey declared in a press statement released Thursday. “Without this package, we are warned that unemployment could explode to near twelve percent.”

The “American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009″ is designed to create and save between three and four million jobs, Obey says, “and begin the process of transforming [the United States] for the 21st century.” It is also packed with tech- and science-related investment programs. The broadband plan will target high speed Internet access “so businesses in rural and other underserved areas can link up to the global economy.” And the proposal includes $10 billion for science and research.

“We need to put scientists to work looking for the next great discovery, creating jobs in cutting-edge-technologies, and making smart investments that will help businesses in every community succeed in a global economy,” the proposed law’s summary explains. There’s also $32 billion allocated for the development of renewable technologies, $31 billion to make public facilities more energy efficient, $10 billion for transit and rail construction, and $19 billion for water purification, flood control, and environmental restoration programs.

Not surprisingly, questions are coming in fast about how this tsunami of money will be spent, especially regarding broadband. Obey’s statement promises that the appropriations bill will come with “unprecedented accountability.” Programs with “proven track records” will be favored for the cash. Information about the grantees will be published on a Web site. The Government and Accountability Office will get funding to watch the programs. And the package comes without earmarks.

But the advocacy group Free Press has already filed comments on the broadband aspect of the plan. The group says it’s happy about the bill, although it doesn’t think $6 billion is enough. Beyond that concern, it wants Congress to require any new network funded by this program to adhere to open access and nondiscrimination principles, or possibly open them to providers at wholesale access rates. In addition, some government agency must oversee the program to “enforce concrete administrative accountability.”

It bugs me that even a fairly reputable news organization such as Ars Technica takes the government’s and interest group’s line down without a question. No counter argument to Obey’s (what an appropriate last name for a politician) claim that such a so called stimulus package is the “only way to handle the nation’s financial crisis.” Or that it will “create and save between three and four million jobs.” Well if the government can do that… why can’t it just go for broke and double that. Get rid of unemployment all together. And can someone explain how rural businesses will benefit from being linked up to the “global economy?” Aren’t most companies hosting sites on 3rd party machines? Especially small companies? One could easily use dialup to maintain such a site. In the least they could get a T1. A little pricey but so is business broadband.

The best part of this whole government stimulus package is that “For every dollar invested in broadband the economy sees a ten-fold return on that investment.” That comes from page 2 of the press release linked above. If that is true… why aren’t people tripping over each other to invest in broadband? A 1000% increase is one hell of a return. Can I get in on that investment… you know… besides the money the government is “investing” on my behalf with my money which they’ve stolen? Perhaps I can put my 401K into some broadband fund?

If broadband as a whole or even a subsection of the market offered that kind of return on investment you can be absolutely sure that entrepreneurs and private investors would be taking advantage of it. That’s how the market works. It ebbs and flows into greater efficiencies. The fact broadband is not where these people want it is an indication that it is not currently profitable to do so. Whether that’s due to it’s nature (current technological imitations, etc.) or due to restrictions and regulation by the State is a topic all its own.

http://www.foxnews.com/…

House Democrats responded to President’s Bush’s call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.

Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.

They also reasserted that the reason the Appropriations Committee markup (where the vote on the amendment to lift the ban) was cancelled so they could focus on preparing the supplemental Iraq spending bill for tomorrow.

At an off-camera briefing, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the same. And a senior Republican House Appropriations Committee aide adds that “there were multiple reasons for the postponement” including discussion on the supplemental. But the aide said there was the thought that Democrats may wish to avoid a debate today on energy amendments.

Here are the highlights from briefing

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling

We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.

Oh boy. I don’t see this going anywhere but if people are pinched hard enough at the pump they may actually let it happen. Someone recently was telling me how they could see a New Deal part II coming from this current mess. I’m afraid to agree.

http://www.cnn.com/…

Top House Democrats Tuesday proposed a “war surtax” to pay for the war in Iraq, a plan quickly condemned by Republicans and opposed by the House leadership.

The surtax would be “a percentage of your tax bill,” said House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey, D-Wisconsin. “And if you don’t like the cost, then shut down the war.”

The measure — sponsored by Obey, Rep. Jack Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, and Jim McGovern, D-Massachusetts — would require low- and middle-income taxpayers to add 2 percent to their tax bill, while higher-income taxpayers would add 12 to 15 percent, Obey said.

Isn’t ending the war Congress’ job? Isn’t that why they were given the majority in the legislative branch? Does anyone actually still believe that the D’s foreign policy isn’t the same as the neocons? This anti-intervention, anti-war lip service is most frustrating because the far left like MoveOn.org think the problem is Bush and the Republican neocons. The Democrat neocons are just as bad. The neocon ideology stems from the liberal’s heros like Wilson and FDR.

http://www.reuters.com/…

A campaign by more than 200 U.S. mayors to repeal an amendment they say makes it harder for police to trace illegal firearms between states was dealt a setback in Congress on Thursday.

The House Appropriations Committee voted by 40-26 against removing a provision that dates back to 2003 and imposes confidentiality limits on firearms trace data compiled by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Bloomberg vowed to keep pushing to eliminate the amendment.

“As happens too often in Washington, common sense didn’t carry the day — special interests did,” the mayor said.

Special interests? Yes… it’s called the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights. While not explicitly declared in those documents, the right to privacy has been found to be implied in them.