ADDITIONAL FUNDING DISTRIBUTION AND ASSURANCE OF APPROPRIATE USE OF FUNDS

US Congress, Section 1607 of part A ^ | 2/13/09 | US Congress and their minions

[bigbob]

ADDITIONAL FUNDING DISTRIBUTION AND ASSURANCE OF APPROPRIATE USE OF FUNDS

SEC. 1607.

(a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR. Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall certify that: the State will request and use funds provided by this Act and will use the funds to create jobs and promote economic growth.

(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE. If funds provided to any State in any divrision of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provride funding to such State.

(c) DISTRIBUTION. After the adoption of a State legislature's concurrent resolution, funding to the State will be for distribution to local governments, councils of government, public entities, and public-private entities within the State either by formula or at the State's discretion.

[bigbob]

Rush mentioned this in passing, so I dug it out and formatted it. Really makes one wonder why our fearless leaders thought such a provision needed to be included. Are they afraid some Governor might actually have the guts to say "No, thanks"....Gov. Palin, for instance? Not that it matters, they know the pork-loving state legislatures will happily come to the trough even if the Gov. doesn't.

I'd respect any Gov. who refuses to comply with (a), on the basis that they know it will produce neither jobs nor economic growth.

[goodnesswins]

Sanford does NOT want the funds....soooo...this is for him...

[A.Hun]

That’s right....Clyburn had it put in specifically for Sanford.

[John 3_19-21]

GO SANFORD!!!!!!

He like most of us have had enough already!
He will be depicted in the media and the congress as a nut job, baby killer , blah, blah, blah, but, God bless him. Someone needs to not be afraid to speak truth to power.

[allmost]

There is no logic to refusing the money at this point. The money is taken from state residents whether they like it or not. To refuse part of it back makes no sense to me.

[NTHockey]

>>There is no logic to refusing the money at this point. The money is taken from state residents whether they like it or not. To refuse part of it back makes no sense to me.<<

It didn’t make much sense either to dump a lot of tea in Boston Harbor. In fact, it had very little impact on taxes. It did however, make the point that there comes a point beyond which, you cross at your own peril.

[allmost]

The Boston Event was carried by competent news organizations. The people knew.

[NTHockey]

>>The Boston Event was carried by competent news organizations. The people knew.<<

The people in Boston would have heard, regardless of the media. Outside of Boston, news would have taken days, if not weeks, to reach them.

[hyperconservative]

I’m pretty sure Congress doesn’t have the authority to neuter duly elected governors like this.

I expect lawsuits to be filed by the governors.

With this provision, the ‘Rat congress critters are attempting to rewrite the state constitutions and the republican form of government established by those ratified constitutions.

Of course, I’m not a lawyer yet but if I were a governor, I’d take Congress to court in a lickety-split minute!

[TeleStraightShooter]

Thanks for digging that out but this issue was settled over 200 years ago when the states required the 10th amendment as a prerequisite to adopting our USC.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[rfreedom4u]

I believe the “point” of refusing the money is the fact that the feds are putting stipulations on the states basically saying, “you have to do this or that in order to get the money” and that is illegal.