Evaluating the Senate Stimulus Plan

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


The Senate stimulus package released this week is a solid improvement over the House/White House compromise plan. The primary reason is that the Senate proposal, tailored by Democratic Senator Max Baucus of Montana, provides low- and moderate-income working families with rebates that are the same size as the rebates going to families at higher income levels. The House package gave low- and moderate-income families smaller rebates than their wealthier counterparts.

Senator Baucus also raised the ceiling on the rebates. Whereas the House plan capped eligibility for the full rebate at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for couples, Baucus puts the caps at $150,000 for individuals and $300,000 for couples. The rebates themselves are slightly smaller, however. The House plan gave individuals a maximum of $600 and couples a maximum of $1,200. The Senate rebates max out at $500 and $1,000.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

Under the House bill, a mother with one child who works full time at the minimum wage would receive a rebate of $600, while a mother with one child and an income of $75,000 would receive a rebate of $900, and a married couple with no children and an income of $150,000 would get $1,200. The Finance Committee proposal [pushed by Baucus, the Senate Finance Committee Chair] would reduce or eliminate these disparities.

Another comparison is a little less flattering to the Senate plan. Under the House plan, a couple making a very comfortable $250,000 a year doesn’t get a rebate. Under the Senate version, the couple gets the full rebate of $1,000. Giving the rich rebates is generally considered ineffective stimulus, because they are unlikely to immediately spend the of money given back to them (thus not pumping money into the economy, the purpose of any stimulus plan).

The Senate plan inserts another provision that is particularly progressive. It extends unemployment insurance for 13 weeks for jobless Americans who have exhausted their regular unemployment benefits. And job seekers who live in states with very high unemployment would get an extra 13 on top of that, for a total of 26 additional weeks.

Extending unemployment benefits is considered a key method of economic stimulus, because dollars given to the unemployed are likely to be spent immediately on necessities.

According to the CBPP, America’s unemployed need help:

In January 2008, the overall unemployment rate was 4.9 percent, and the percentage of all unemployed workers who had been unemployed for 27 weeks or more was 18.3 percent. At the start of the last recession in March 2001, by contrast, the unemployment rate was 4.3 percent and the percentage of the unemployed who had been out of work for at least 27 weeks was 11.1 percent.

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate