Cars and Parts Springfield Swap Meet
Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > April > 28 > Entry
Martin Gottlieb: Warren flap over stimulus is all about the posturing
Let’s talk about Warren County rejecting some stimulus money. What a bunch of phony, silly posturing, both at home and in Washington.
The $373,000 would have been used mainly to replace vans the county now has in place to give people rides they call ahead for.
Says county Commissioner C. Michael Kilburn, “All I want the government to do is leave Warren County alone. If we need something, we’ll take care of it, and we’ll buy it.”
But if the federal government left Warren County alone, there would probably be no van fleet to replace. The current vans were 80 percent paid for by the feds. That’s the usual deal on local transit vehicles.
All that’s happening now is the feds are offering this one-time deal whereby they’ll pick up the other 20 percent, too.
The stimulus money would replace vans that will have to be replaced soon enough anyway, and the county would get vans that need less upkeep than the old ones and are probably more fuel-efficient, saving the county more money.
Sounds like a pretty good deal. That’s why the county staff applied for the money. It was the obvious thing to do, in behalf of the county’s taxpayers.
No other county has turned down any stimulus money coming through the Ohio Department of Transportation.
But the commission voted unanimously to not accept the money.
One commissioner, Kilburn, is reportedly against accepting any stimulus money. You’ve probably heard his theatrical line: “I’ll let Warren County go broke before taking any of Obama’s filthy money.”
But the other two commissioners, Pat South and David Young, are taking stimulus offers one at a time. They’re saying that road work or other such infrastructure help might be OK.
By the way, the other projects being talked about look much bigger than $373,000. If some of the posturing by the commission looks a bit odd, enter Congress to top it.
Republican U.S. Reps. Mike Turner and Jean Schmidt, who represent Warren County, cheered on by Republican House leader John Boehner, a neighbor, have submitted legislation to “rescind” the $373,000 from stimulus package that Congress has passed, thereby supposedly using the money to reduce the federal deficit.
Never mind that Congress and the president have already specifically decided to spend a certain amount of money — $787 billion, of which the $373,000 is part — on the stimulus, and have not changed their minds, near as anyone knows.
Never mind that the $373,000 has already been slated for use elsewhere by ODOT, the conduit from Washington.
Never mind that $373,000 is one two-millionth of $787 billion, which would fall even below the official definition of symbolic if there were such a definition.
Never mind that whether Warren County needs this money is irrelevant to the question of whether the money should be spent.
Warren is a fortunate county. It has not had to make the cutbacks in programs and staffs that have characterized local government in so many other places in this recession.
So the stimulus money should be concentrated elsewhere. But imagine the flap if the feds didn’t offer help to the affluent, solidly Republican counties that border metropolitan areas: Washington would be accused of trying to reward the Democratic counties and bribe the swing counties.
Sometimes, when Republicans bash the stimulus, that is exactly the charge they make about it: that it’s an effort to reward political friends. Some even call the process “filthy.”
The “rescind” idea is partly a smokescreen. It’s designed to get the county commissioners out from under the charge that they are sending perfectly good money to another county.
Kilburn has scoffed at the proposal, but the other two commissioners are on board, saying the stimulus involves too much borrowing, too big a burden on future generations.
They’d look better if they just said the money could be better used by somebody else, because that’s what’s going to happen.
Permalink | Comments (17) | Post your comment | Categories: Columns, Martin Gottlieb, Miami Valley Politics, Rural Communities, Suburban Communities, Transportation
Comments
By Washington Township
April 28, 2009 6:38 PM | Link to this
Aha, so it comes out that these were replacement vans! Very good commentary there about the lack of common sense in accepting a one-time-good-deal in replacing vehicles that are about to become maintenance headaches (costing Warren County govt. more money). Another good example of how ideology (or was it mere posturing) trumps common sense.By George
April 28, 2009 7:49 PM | Link to this
Rejecting the “stimulus” funding is the ONLY Constitutionally legitimate response to the Democrats’ vote buying Ponzi scheme commonly known as the stimulus plan. Why should US taxpayers, and their children and come to think of it,THEIR children,in St Louis, Peoria, Cleveland or Pittsburgh have to pay for “transit vehicles” in Warren County, Ohio? The whole premise of the arguement is based on a distorted vision of the legitimate function of the federal government painted by liberal politicians (not to mention liberal editorial columnists). Remember, the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money. When will voters wake up!By Matt
April 28, 2009 8:31 PM | Link to this
Partisan Hack!By joe_mamma
April 29, 2009 7:42 AM | Link to this
I think you just can’t stand the fact that someone said “No” to the Central Government, which of course is their right. By the way I loved your “373K is one two-millionth of 687 Billion”. Where were these math skills when President Obama tasked his cabinet to cut 100 Million out of the Budget?By joe_mamma
April 29, 2009 7:45 AM | Link to this
I think you just can’t stand the fact that someone said “No” to the Central Government, which of course is their right. By the way I loved your “373K is one two-millionth of 687 Billion”. Where were these math skills when President Obama tasked his cabinet to cut 100 Million out of the Budget?By Sheriff AJ Rodenberg
April 29, 2009 8:20 AM | Link to this
If Warren County doesn’t want any federal money they can send it here to the south (Clermont County). We’ll take it!By RAW
April 29, 2009 9:39 AM | Link to this
Why is it always about spending with the liberals? I would really like to know where the logic is to all this spending by the federal government. In the last six months, the federal government has borrowed over $1,000,000,000,000, with nothing to show for it. This article is evidence that with liberals, it is all about spending, no matter what the long-term affects will be. I will admit there is some posturing going on by Kilburn and other Republicans in this particular matter, but that does not make them wrong. The fact that no other county refused the money does not make those counties right. If all your friends jumped off of a bridge, would you follow? And yes, the Republicans started the spending spree 7 years ago. I did not agree with it then, and I certainly do not agree with it now. Let the local governemnts govern and keep the federal governemnt in Washington where it belongs.By Doug
April 29, 2009 11:30 AM | Link to this
Martin, you didn’t mention any of the strings attached with taking the stimulus money. The government has laid out certain guidelines for Counties accepting the money. For example, Montgomery County is getting a couple of million dollars to improve 3 bridges from the stimulus package. However, because they are taking that money that have to update all of their road signs costing the county roughly 280K and the caveat to that is the County can’t use the stimulus money to update the road signs, that money has to come from somewhere else. Is it possible that the “attached strings” in Warren County were not cost effective?By jimmie
April 29, 2009 1:13 PM | Link to this
Gottlieb- How stupid is this comment? “Never mind that whether Warren County needs this money is irrelevant to the question of whether the money should be spent.”By Jeff
April 29, 2009 4:19 PM | Link to this
Posturing or standing on principle? The article also conveniently forgot to mention that Warren County has already budgettted for replacement vans in future years. That’s how responsible leaders work. They plan for the future so that Big Brother doesn’t have to come to their rescue.By Davidss2
April 29, 2009 5:31 PM | Link to this
I want to know what the strings were for the Warren money. gottlieb seems to be so busy being partisan that he forgets about journaism .————————Is it possible to get the Enquirer to start circulating a Dayton edition?By Davidss2
April 29, 2009 5:32 PM | Link to this
I want to know what the strings were for the Warren money. gottlieb seems to be so busy being partisan that he forgets about journaism .————————Is it possible to get the Enquirer to start circulating a Dayton edition?By Martin Gottlieb
April 30, 2009 12:08 PM | Link to this
The county commissioner I talked with said nothing about any strings. That simply is not part of the rationale for the rejection. (I have access to the Enquirer. It, too, has mentioned nothing about any strings figuring in here.)By joe_mamma
May 1, 2009 8:20 AM | Link to this
The money had to be spent on transportation needs in the county. If there were no strings attached then the County could have used the money to pay down the national debtBy Lynn
May 1, 2009 1:16 PM | Link to this
It’s a shame you have to twist the facts. They just bought 3 vans last year, they don’t need 3 new vans. It is borrowed money from China. If the fed govt did not take all of our money and let us keep the money to invest in our communities to begin with, we wouldn’t have strong arming by the fed govt.By Lynn
May 1, 2009 1:29 PM | Link to this
The don’t need the vans, they bought new ones last year. No one is being hurt by them rejecting the money. We don’t have the money it is from China. The fed govt takes our money, instead of keeping it in our community, and then they strong arm us to get it back. We wouldn’t have all of these problems if we kept our money here and took care of our communities. We the people of the community no how to spend our money better than the fed govt does. We also care about our community and the fed govt doesn’t. They use our money to control us.By Martha
May 2, 2009 10:32 AM | Link to this
Martin, you’ve got it absolutely right! I did some “investigating” on my own and there were NO “strings”. This decision was pure posturing. When o