H.R.1 - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes. view all titles (38)

All Bill Titles

  • Popular: Economic stimulus bill as .
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act as introduced.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Official: Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Official: Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as introduced.
  • Short: Health Insurance Assistance for the Unemployed Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: HITECH Act as introduced.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act as passed house.
  • Short: Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as passed house.
  • Short: Health Insurance Assistance for the Unemployed Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: HITECH Act as passed house.
  • Short: Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Cap Executive Officer Pay Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: Employ American Workers Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Help Families Keep Their Homes Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: HITECH Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Jobs Accountability Act as passed senate.
  • Short: M-HITECH Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Medicare and Medicaid Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as passed senate.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act as enacted.
  • Short: Employ American Workers Act as enacted.
  • Short: Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as enacted.
  • Short: HITECH Act as enacted.
  • Short: Jobs Accountability Act as enacted.
  • Short: TAA Health Coverage Improvement Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: Trade and Globalization Adjustment Assistance Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Popular: Economic stimulus bill.
  • Short: TAA Health Coverage Improvement Act of 2009 as passed senate.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 674 total comments.

  • Anonymous 01/26/2009 5:22pm

    Who knew that reading the stimulus package could be so stimulating?

    We’ve been scouring the $825 billion House version 1 (PDF) of the pending economic stimulus bill this morning, and here are five curious clauses we’ve found so far. While we’re making phone calls, please contact us with any others you find.

    1. Blago Out, Stimulus Bucks In

    No Illinois state agency can spend stimulus money without the state legislature’s approval, the bill says, until a certain “Rod R. Blagojevich no longer holds the office of Governor of the State of Illinois.” Ouch. We’ve put a call into the governor’s office to see what he thinks of this.

    2. Sorry, Las Vegas

    The bill specifically prohibits stimulus funding “for any casino or other gambling establishment, aquarium, zoo, golf course, or swimming pool.” No mention of roller-skating rinks.

    3. At Least We’ll Have Our Health

    A variety of allocations in the bill go to health-related projects that do not appear to be directly related to the country’s economic health, including $500 million to the Department of Health and Human Services for “evidence-based interventions in obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, tobacco cessation and smoking prevention, and oral health," another $335 million for “domestic HIV/AIDS, viral hepatitis, sexually-transmitted diseases, and tuberculosis prevention programs,” and $420 million for flu vaccine.

    4. One Less Thing to Worry About

    What’s worse than the Great Depression II? Lava. The bill specifies $200 million to the U.S. Geological Survey for maintenance projects including “equipment replacement and upgrades including stream gages, and seismic and volcano monitoring systems…”

    5. It Is Rocket Science

    The bill sets aside $400 million for NASA, $250 million of which is for climate research projects. But the remaining $150 million is for “aeronautics.” If they told us, we probably wouldn’t understand.

    http://www.propublica.org/article/proposed-stimulus-bill-blocks-funds-for-blago-090126

  • donnyshaw 01/27/2009 12:39pm

    Another resource from ProPublica – check out this excellent interactive visualization of everything in H.R. 1:

    http://www.propublica.org/special/stimulus-bill-treemap

    Very helpful for wrapping your head around this massive legislation.

  • Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 01/28/2009 8:02am

    It’s not quite as black and white as it seems here. I’ve been a raving Democrat all my life and I worked my neighborhood for Obama. But try checking out the forum for HR 6867, where thousands of people who are the long-term unemployed on unemployment benefits extensions are wondering why the Democrats in the House voted against a measure proposed by the Republicans on the Ways and Means committee to exempt unemployment benefits from taxes for two years.

    So now about 3 million long-term unemployed are facing the total loss of any further extended benefits—that’s almost one third of the total unemployed in this country—around mid-April, just in time to get their tax bills that they can’t possibly pay. And all the while the speeches are touting how great this bill is for the unemployed. Apparently those on their last legs don’t count. The bill delays the application time for extended benefits for the newly unemployed coming down the pipe, not current recipients.

    I’m thrilled at the projects and energy components of this bill; in fact I helped campaign on these very things. But when I need help, I guess I fall through every crack in this bill. And the Senate is also not addressing this issue of extensions. I seriously think that many of these Congressmen haven’t even read the bill or understand what this means for 3 million of us.

  • Spam Comment

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 01/28/2009 12:56pm

    I was not implying that you were a kool-aid drinker, but many who follow Obama around aimlessly are. Many people thought this bill would actually stimulate the economy; however, 90% of the bill is appropriations for crap.

    As for Wall Street restarting the economy, since when is the economy driven by the stock index. The converse is actually true, the secondary valuation of companies (i.e. the stock market)is driven by peoples perception of a business. Granted many have invested poorly, banking on the idea that buy now pay later is a perpetual business model.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 01/29/2009 7:27am

    I don’t agree about the 90% for crap part. But I agree some of it hasn’t been thought out very well. Such a huge bill and they are trying to do it so fast. Maybe a series of smaller bills would have made more sense.

    As for Wall Street, what I should have said and was really referring to was the total ineffectiveness and blatant waste of the bank bailout. I understand the difference between Wall Street and the banking system, but there’s a lot of crossover, especially when you have investment banks in the mix.

    Waiting the last few years for private industry to provide adequate jobs hasn’t worked too well either. These bills, in spite of my objections to some features, will at least get a sizable number of people working, which is more than the last administration can say. And in the end I seriously think the jump-start, even though it might take longer than a lot of people might expect, will eventually draw in more and more private sector opportunities as the economy starts to even out just a bit. Look at what is happening in Germany with their alternative energy boom, for one example.

  • Comm_reply
    bravjim 01/29/2009 1:59pm

    I too disagree with the 90% crap comment. 2/3 of this bill is what was needed, it’s that last 3rd that is a bunch of crap, and the exact stuff that prevented Republicans from voting for it. This is a stimulus bill, and that is what it should be used for, not the left wing agenda. As an independent, I would not have voted for this either. Either trim out the pork and redistribute those amounts to more tax cuts and actual stimulus, or cut the 3rd of the bill that was pork altogether.

    What do you mean waiting the last few years for private industry to provide adequate jobs? This time last year the unemployment rate was under 5% nationwide. This bill may provide enough jobs to stimulate the economy to a point where it stabilizes, but I do not expect it to be sufficient to help the economy rebound. If they redistributed the pork to tax cuts, providing immediate stimulus, and the other items that will produce jobs in infrastructure and providing the foundation for the new energy grid, then it would have been a much better bill, and one that I wouold have supported.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 01/30/2009 12:14am

    The key word in that sentence is “adequate,” i.e., 5% doesn’t tell you everything. I could see the job market diminish in pay scale year after year while employees became slaves to extended hours without pay in many industries, with fewer benefits from the employer, to say nothing of an expansion of part-time workers to avoid paying for benefits. So much so that it came to be the accepted norm.

    I’ve lived long enough to see enormous contrasts between what was expected vs. what was paid on a job in earlier decades vs. what the employment situation is now, and even two years ago. Millions of Americans were seeing recessionary effects while the politicians were still basking in the glory of a booming Wall Street, which benefited only a small percentage of the population.

    Don’t get me wrong. I don’t expect the government to employ everyone. This huge package is probably only like a little kindling, if we’re smart and lucky, to change the economic environment just enough to possibly kick the gears of commerce into turning again.

    I think generally we agree.

  • Comm_reply
    apageor2 02/17/2009 10:02pm

    It is not the government’s job to employ people, wake up!! Small business must be created to build jobs, period. Small business is what builds economy because as people buy it stimulates the GDP, the GPA, and there are a few others which I cannot think of at the time.

    Business to business exchange is what changes the numbers on the Dow, the Nasdaq, the NYSE, the S and P, Moody’s, and a few others that I cannot think of at the time. Why are they important? Because those numbers are what stock holders, investors, and day traders pay close attention to. When the numbers investors watch really start to drop, traders get nervous. What happens when they get nervous, they dump investments (sell off) before loosing their shirt financially.

    Conservatives did know how to manage Congress as they were able to pay off the deficit and actually bring this country out of the red and keep us out for many years. As for our children paying for a bill that never should have been passed, that is very wrong! Those who need to die off need to fade out in business. There are those who never should of been given a house because they could not afford it to begin with, that is Fannie and Freddie’s fault. Now it is all falling on the tax payer to pay off the mortgage.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/10/2009 9:14am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    YES THEY ARE DOING IT TO FAST THE BILL WILL BE OVER 3 TO 4 YEARS TO DO ALL THAT IS PLANNED I THINK THEY SHOULD ALSO HAVE OUR KIDS AND GRAND KIDS HELP PAY FOR THIS

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/10/2009 12:28pm
    Link Reply
    + -3

    Are you going to ask your grandkids to also pay for the Bush multi trillion dollar deficit and the bailout money he gave to the banks with no strings attached??????

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/11/2009 1:57am

    Oooo … good one.
    However, if memory serves me correct Obama and a lot of other Democrats voted the original economic stimulus bill through as well, which helped the “Bush multi-trillion dollar deficit”.

  • Comm_reply
    YvonneMO 02/20/2009 1:35pm

    Thank-you so much,finally someone mentions that Obama and the OTHER
    Democrats voted with majority control during Bush’s last administration and the first month of this administration(Socialism,)er pork!

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/12/2009 12:58am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Why should our grandkids have to pay one penny for cleaning up our mess. They might not even be born yet, its not their responsibility. If we are going to face plant here lets do it and get it over with. Let the banks tank! My measly savings will be missed but it won’t criple me and with measures like this the price of failure will be the devaluation of my savings to the point where it is worthless anyway.
    If the government really wants to stimulate the economy it should 1) legalize and tax ALL ilicit drugs.(prohibition laws have at least a 20,000 year track record of colossal failure) 2)Provide investment capitol not to businesses or banks but to FARMERS. Growing FOOD is what we need to be doing right now. Forget the pie in the sky ideals we are plowing up the country with this economic over the handlebars digger anyway, why not throw a few seeds down while we can.

  • Comm_reply
    DianaAmerican 04/12/2009 5:06pm

    Creating jobs in government does not help the economy. It makes it worse. This bill creates jobs in government.

    You, if you are a tax payer you will be paying the wages of the people in these jobs until they retire, then you will pay their retirement and the wages of the person replacing them.

    How does that help the economy? It doesn’t, it just adds to the amount of $$$$ the Government will need each year to meet the budget.

    If all taxes were lower, including business taxes for small business, and the government did not put such rediculous regulations on them, there would be more jobs in the USA, not paid for by taxpayers.

  • Comm_reply
    gkhirsch 02/04/2009 12:46pm

    As long as the bill is full of spending that has nothing to do with anything that will actually stimulate the economy, it is crap. In this case, you pegged it for what it is. Basic economics dictates that merely spending does not stimulate the economy. Providing incentives for businesses to hire and people to spend is what stimulates the economy. In the simplest terms possible, Congress must put more money in the pockets of businesses and the people in order to get the economy going. Put the pork projects into other bills at a later date.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 01/30/2009 7:26am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    “drinking the Kool-aid” is a euphemism that directly comes from the 900+ people in the Jim Jones Cult in South America. who died from drinking the cyanide laced kool-aid and is not a racial reference to the love of Kool-aid (red) that is a typical stereotype of blacks.

  • Comm_reply
    Godheval 01/30/2009 11:34am
    Link Reply
    + -2

    Did anyone think otherwise?

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/16/2009 9:12am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Umm…. It was Flavor-Aid that Jim Jones served up to his ardent and not-so-ardent followers.

    Please do not besmirch a great brand like Kool-Aid.

    BTW, Flavor-Aid is made by Jet Sert, a company in, you guessed it, West Chicago, IL.

  • Comm_reply
    JeremiahIII 04/06/2009 9:22pm

    Look at Obama’s Cabinet and “advisers”. They ARE WALL STREET!

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/06/2009 10:44am

    Why do they keep reporting on all news sites that this bill will provide an extension of emergency unemploment benefits . It is only putting some money into the already established fund. It is for new people that are filing now . It does not provide for another extension for people who can not find work, and their current extensions are either running out, or have run out. I have worked for 30 years and have never had to go on unemployment until now. It is not the case of not wanting to go back to work. They need to revise this bill for another extension.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/10/2009 9:10am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    yes because Hussin Obama said that he will create jobs and we all will have jobs so we dont need unemployment

  • Comm_reply
    TomKi 02/21/2009 12:14am

    Of course the democrats voted against the measure proposed by the Republicans on the Ways and Means committee to exempt unemployment benefits from taxes for two years. Democrats simply do not like tax cuts of any kind!

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 01/28/2009 4:15pm
    Link Reply
    + -5

    agreed

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 01/29/2009 7:30am

    No. Republicans voted this down because they couldn’t get particular items they wanted in the bill, some of which I also wanted, and there were also some items that they wanted out. In other words, they couldn’t control the writing of the bill. Most likely, at least some Republicans in the House and probably more in the Senate will have at least some agreement on the final compromise version that will be hammered out between the House and Senate.

  • Comm_reply
    Jan_T 02/02/2009 12:44pm

    Excuse me, I’m an independent voter who watches both sides play their games, at the expense of our country, and I’m tired of it. People’s lives aren’t games to be played and won so a particular party can control anything. My House rep. voted no because I and an overwhelming number of his constituents called and told him..NO MORE! If he wants to keep his seat, he works for us and not Nancy Pelosi.

    Now, why did we have to go through this mess only to – hopefully – be rescued by the Senate? That implies that the House, alone, is playing “Power Trip”, i.e.,untrustworthy. If they were truly doing their jobs, we wouldn’t have been handed this bill as it passed. Arguing whether it is 90% or 33% full of crap is ridiculous. It should be 0% full of crap.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/12/2009 1:05am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    I agree totally with one exception regarding my representation in Washington. I do keep tabs on and write to both my congressment and senitors regularly, however their voting records speak as loud as the “%-off” letters they write me back. They will tow the party line all the way and could honestly care less about cranks like me who think for themselves. Their seats are totally secure because they have for many years passed out their own kool-aid and enough people drank it to keep them safe.


Vote on This Bill

12% Users Support Bill

278 in favor / 1981 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments