Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
There is an interesting provision included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Our accidental governor, Jan Brewer, is going to have to go on the record whether she will accept the federal stimulus money or not. If she declines the stimulus money (an act of political suicide when the state has a $3 billion deficit gap to close), the Legislature can overrule her decision. Some of our ideologically deranged legislators have already said that they would decline the stimulus money because there are federal "strings attached."
This puts Jan Brewer in a box – does she agree to accept the stimulus money and incur the wrath of the ideological extremists in her own party (and draw a primary opponent), or does she stay true to her old form and behave like the ideological extremist she always was when she served in the Legislature and decline the stimulus money, incurring the wrath of Arizona's taxpayers? What is more important Governor: ideological purity and loyalty to the GOP, or doing what is in the best interests of the state of Arizona?
The political reporters who read this blog should be asking the Governor "what's it going to be Gov, "yes" or "no"? Jan Brewer must go on the record. Please publish her response.
Four, possibly five Republican governors, each with dreams of being on the presidential ticket in 2012, are talking about not accepting money for projects in their state, money from the stimulus plan.
Putting their national partisan future desires ahead of their constituents‘ bipartisan immediate needs. To say nothing of the reality gaps, state lawmakers in each case could overrule them and take the money anyway.
The chairman of the Republican Governors Association, Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina, has led this charge among certain GOP governors against the stimulus, quoting, “The spending plan will prove to be an absolute disaster. The bottom line is, it‘s horrible.” Today, Sanford did confess that being against the plan, quote, “doesn‘t preclude taking the money.”
Governor Sanford‘s prior bloviation on this, actually inspired a special provision in the stimulus bill, Democratic Congressman James Clyburn included language that basically forces governors to publicly accept or decline the federal aid. The provision then empowers the state‘s legislature to accept the money even if the governor does not.
So, certain Republican governors can take the time to complain about the so-called “strings” attached to the money even when their states are experiencing crashing shortfalls in balancing their budgets—like Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, his state faces a budget gap of more than $1.5 billion next year. Governor Rick Perry of Texas, quoting, “We need the freedom to say ‘No thanks.‘” And Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi.
It is no coincidence that many of these governors may be presidential or vice-presidential contenders in 2012 including Governor Palin, who also griped about the stim. “I wish he,” that would be the president, “would veto it and send it back until our lawmakers can read it and know what‘s in it.” We‘re holding our breath on that.