29.01.2015 Views

1fAWAwx

1fAWAwx

1fAWAwx

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Obama Administration and the 111th U.S. Congress took immediate action.<br />

In December 2008, the President-Elect and the transition team proposed the<br />

overall scope and elements of what they called the American Recovery and<br />

Reinvestment Act. Just days after the President’s inauguration, on January<br />

26, 2009, House Appropriations Committee Chair David Obey introduced<br />

H.R. 1 with the same name on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.<br />

The legislation passed the House and Senate soon afterwards. By February<br />

13, both houses of Congress agreed to a compromise measure, which the<br />

President signed into law on February 17, 2009.<br />

The Recovery Act<br />

In early 2008, before the Nation realized the full extent of the economic<br />

challenge, fiscal expansion policy was guided by the “3T’s” advocated<br />

by Summers (2007), Sperling (2007), and Elmendorf and Furman (2008):<br />

timely, targeted, and temporary. By the end of 2008, however, it was clear<br />

that the recession had turned into a major financial crisis and that a new<br />

approach was needed, what Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers<br />

called “speedy, substantial, and sustained.”5<br />

Several principles guided the new Administration’s policymaking.<br />

First, the fiscal effort was to be implemented speedily, unlike previous<br />

incoming presidents’ economic programs, which were generally not passed<br />

until they were six months or more into office. Second, it should be substantial,<br />

given the very large scope of the economic problem. Finally, it should<br />

be a sustained effort that would not only have significant spend-out over the<br />

first two years, but would continue some temporary support thereafter. The<br />

new approach would require a mix of instruments, with some being faster<br />

to spend-out, such as tax cuts and other temporary assistance that put cash<br />

in the hands of households who immediately needed it. Other components<br />

would be more lagged but have larger cumulative countercyclical impacts<br />

and greater longer-run benefits, such as investments in infrastructure and<br />

innovation. In all cases, however, the measures would end and would not<br />

have long-term impacts on the Federal Government’s primary budget<br />

deficit.6<br />

Goals of the Recovery Act. Overall, this approach was embodied in the<br />

stated goals of the Recovery Act, as written into the legislation:<br />

(1) To preserve and create jobs and promote economic recovery;<br />

(2) To assist those most impacted by the recession;<br />

(3) To provide investments needed to increase economic efficiency by<br />

spurring technological advances in science and health;<br />

5 Speech at the Wall Street Journal CEO Council conference in Washington, DC, Nov 19, 2008.<br />

6 The primary deficit excludes interest payments on the national debt.<br />

96 | Chapter 3

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!