* The Financial Times (among others) reports that President Obama’s speech tomorrow will include a proposal for increased federal aid to hard-hit state and local budgets…
According to people who have been studying the White House’s possible options, Mr Obama’s proposal is also likely to include measures that would directly boost cash-strapped states and local governments. States and municipalities this year have been forced to slash employees, including public school teachers and police, dragging down national job creation figures. Depending on its structure, an infusion of funds from the federal government could help prevent some of those lay-offs.
* US News & World Report looks at the numbers…
The August jobs report shows that the 17,000 public sector job losses last month completely wiped out the private sector’s 17,000 job gains. Since the end of the recession, government employment–including federal, state, and local jobs–has fallen by roughly 600,000. State and local governments have particularly felt the pain, according to a report released this week by the Census Bureau, which shows that there were over 200,000 fewer state and local government jobs in 2010 than in 2009. Outplacement firm Challenger, Gray, and Christmas also reported this week that, while U.S. layoffs on the whole slowed last month, public-sector layoffs accelerated, from 9,389 in July to 18,426 in August. […]
Behind those government job losses are budget cuts, particularly from states and local governments, many of which have lost revenues as lower incomes and lower property values lead to lower tax income. Those budget cuts mean fewer government contracts, which also leads to pain in the private sector. The winding down of the stimulus package also contributed to these losses, as federal assistance to state governments for things like extra Medicaid funding has disappeared, leaving many states with substantial budget gaps.
* But the National Journal says Obama’s idea is a no-go…
Aid to state and local governments would by far be the most stimulative action, but since that would lead directly to an expansion of government payrolls, it doesn’t have a prayer of passing the House.
…Adding… Roundup…
* Regional superintendents say jobs are necessary
* Illinois Perry, Romney backers clash on Republican primary vote
* IL GOP State Central Committee Meeting: Sound and Fury Signifying No Changes
* Illinois GOP rejects delegate selection plan in victory for Romney
* Illinois Orders Plant in Latino Neighborhood to Curb Emissions
* Will Co. sales tax consultant fights RTA, Chicago suits
* MetroLINK transit facility going up in Rock Island
* Preckwinkle seeks to loosen Cook County purchasing rules
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 4:28 pm:
Wait, Illinois state revenues are up! Quinn’s got a plan to lower the costs of government! We don’t need the Feds’ stinking money, like there is a chance in hell of the measure passing Congress.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 4:33 pm:
===Wait, Illinois state revenues are up! ===
Yeah, but federal revenues are way down since the end of the stimulus program.
- Fed up - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 4:33 pm:
It won’t pass congress. Which is kinda a bad thing because public sector jobs losses are what is hurting the jobs report each month. After the last year or so I’m not sure how much fat is left for some parts of government. I still think the whole township level of government and about half of chicagos alderman could be eliminated with no one noticing.
- Rod - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 4:36 pm:
No way that the Obama proposal for aiding states and cities will get past the Republicans in the House. So is the real reason for this little speech to be able to blame the Republicans for yet another economic downturn before the elections? I suspect so.
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 4:40 pm:
- So is the real reason for this little speech to be able to blame the Republicans for yet another economic downturn before the elections? -
Well, if the measure would prevent another economic downturn, and the ones blocking it are the House Republicans, wouldn’t you say they’d be the ones to blame?
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 4:54 pm:
Who is holding up the Free Trade Agreements that Obama’s WH has estimated to create 250k private sector jobs? O has nobody to blame but himself.
- Wensicia - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 5:08 pm:
It won’t pass the House so Obama’s speech tonight is just the warmup to blame Congress for holding back the economy and job creation. The Republicans will retaliate by claiming Obama wants to increase spending and raise the debt to support union jobs, while continuing to punish private business with high corporate taxes, hurting private sector growth.
This will drag out until eletion day 2012, the Republicans have no interest in job creation or improving the economy, they want Obama to lose, he won’t if things improve. Will Obama’s attacks claiming they place party before country work? We have little over a year to find out.
- Fed Up State Employee - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 5:12 pm:
“it doesn’t have a prayer of passing the House”
Does “anything” the President proposes have a chance of passing the House? Probably not.
- Snj - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 5:24 pm:
In spite of all the political and media hoopla about creating jobs month after month the fact of the matter is that the number of employed people today is the same as it was in 2004 over seven years ago!.
Where did all the new entrants to the workforce go? Looks more like job CHURNING to lower wages and benefits then it does job creation.
Which brings us to point number two.
Don’t confuse alleged job growth with a return to prosperity. Min-wage part-time temporary WalMart and Put Illinois to Work Jobs provides good window dressing but they still require government provided food subsidies to survive. There’s no tax revenue in that
- wishbone - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 5:30 pm:
Separating the pain of taxing from the joy of spending has always seemed like a bad idea to me. The only possible justification is when local governments are just too poor (by some rational measurement) to meet a minimum standard of performance after they have taxed to their limit (again by some rational standard). Increasing aid to the states generally will only forestall the day when they must match expenditures to revenues by raising taxes or cutting spending. Both approaches are hugely unpopular. As many have pointed out it ain’t going to get through the House.
- just sayin' - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 5:31 pm:
Sounds like Republicans have had enough of Pat Brady. Couldn’t even get a majority of his own committee to support him last night.
Big Fail for Brady and Cross.
- Snj - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 5:39 pm:
DAILY TREASURY STATEMENT — TABLE III-C Debt Subject to Limit
Tuesday September 06, 2011
Total Public Debt (closing balance today)
Subject to Limit 14,653,307
Statutory Debt Limit 14,694,000
My math says we’re roughly $41 billion away from the debt ceiling already.
There had better be some pretty hefty cash flow coming in.. what is the rumor on this job plan announcement again…$300 billion? .
https://www.fms.treas.gov/fmsweb/viewDTSFiles?dir=w&fname=11090600.txt
- ZC - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 6:29 pm:
> Who is holding up the Free Trade Agreements that Obama’s WH has estimated to create 250k private sector jobs? O has nobody to blame but himself.
It’s a bit off IL topic (though it affect us), but since you ask: the free trade agreement is held up, like everything else, because the my-way-or-the-highway approach of the House GOP. Again they appear incapable of compromise, and appear to insist on the bill being passed their way, or not at all. If they were willing to compromise and allow any benefits from government to go outside their own constituencies, we’d have had that bill by now.
- mokenavince - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 6:35 pm:
It seems that the die is cast by Republicans before it’s tossed. The are the party of NO.
Regardless of what the President Proposes the answer will be no. Lost your job, you will have to wait til Republicans are elected. Remember this malaize has benn going on for 6 years.Their
sole abjective since Obama has been elected was to defeat him. Damn the people.
- dupage dan - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 7:00 pm:
More aid for the states? Really? That money will just go down some black, bottomless pit of a hole with little chance of making much of a difference.
Now, if the president wants to really help someone he could pay off the mortgage on my house - I am just as much upside down as the state is but my house is prettier than the governor’s mansion!
(Snark)
Seriously, that is his big speech? His revamping of the “stimulus” (oh, I guess that term isn’t being used again - sorry Nancy Pelosi)? More shovel ready c&@p? He better have something better than that.
- Holdingontomywallet - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 7:35 pm:
Yes, blame the republicans when Obama and the democrats had complete control of the house and the senate in 2009 and 2010. Kind of reminds me of Illinois where the democrats have had complete control of the gov’s office, the house, and the senate since 2002. Blame the republicans, that dog will hunt all day in Illinois - never gets old.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 7:56 pm:
===complete control of the house and the senate in 2009 and 2010===
They didn’t have 60 Senate votes for all that time. Without 60, you got almost nothing.
- ZC - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 8:01 pm:
Holdingontomywallet,
Also, we’re in 2011 now. The federal government is now doing … well, pretty much nothing, this past year. How’s that working out for the economy?
- Holdingontomywallet - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 9:01 pm:
Fair enough Rich, I should have said “majorities.”. I wouldn’t say that majorities in the house and senate are almost nothing without 60. All you have to do is get a couple from the other side to flip to get things done (enter Snowe). My post was a little snarky in response to all of the republican bashing. I’ll be the first to say the republicans have been obstructionists on many issues, but there is plenty of blame to go around including Pelosi, Reid, and President Obama.
ZC: I have no problem with government doing less. In my opinion, many of their decisions have hurt the economy, growth, and job creation.
- Newsclown - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 9:36 pm:
It is no secret the Republican strategy on both the national and state levels has been to undermine the Dem administration at every opportunity, small and large, and I don’t think it is a stretch at all to claim their strategy is to monkeywrench the economy so badly that Obama is cast out by the voting public and a republican, pro-corporatist regime is reinstated. Where the grand scheme falls down however, is that after the damage they’ve done, there is no way the repubs can turn around the economy again in any kind of meaningful time frame. They have put the country on a collision course with massive failure, all out of spite and narrow-minded avarice. The victims will be the voters they are attempting to manipulate into a panic. I find it exceptionally unpatriotic, bordering on treasonous, and that’s not an attempt at hyperbole. This really IS two idiots fighting in a burning building now.
- Shemp - Wednesday, Sep 7, 11 @ 10:04 pm:
Any public employer that’s dealt with collective bargaining in this state, particularly when it’s interest arbitration, knows that shedding employees is important to solving the local budget woes as there’s little hope for winning fiscally sensible arbitration battles. Most local governments won’t want to hire back employees with short term money if strings mandate employees be kept on after federal funds run dry. To many other costs from pensions to health insurance to work comp and even restarting unemployment bennies to make it worthwhile. Unfortunate, but those are the fiscal realities few want to admit to even now.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 8, 11 @ 8:19 am:
–More aid for the states? Really? That money will just go down some black, bottomless pit of a hole with little chance of making much of a difference. –
Might keep some state employees from being canned.
- chicagoan wanting to move out of IL - Thursday, Sep 8, 11 @ 10:46 am:
I really really hope so. Federal gov used to give monies to states until the evil Reagan era when that changed to the present self-funded state budgets.