Phony Baloney GOP

From the Mississippi Clarion Ledger "Federal money? Mississippi's about the easiest girl in town" by Sid Salter:

The jury is still out in the court of public opinion over Gov. Haley Barbour is right or wrong to join with a handful of other Republican governors in saying he will refuse a portion of the $787 billion federal stimulus package that would expand the state's unemployment insurance coverage.

The battle lines, however, are pretty clear at the State Capitol.

"There is some (stimulus money) we will not take in Mississippi," Barbour told CNN's John King on Sunday. "If we were to take the unemployment insurance reform package that they have, it would cause us to raise taxes on employment when the money runs out, and the money will run out in a couple of years."

Barbour joins a handful of Republican governors like Sarah Palin of Alaska and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana in rejecting federal money to expand unemployment insurance coverage.

House Speaker Billy McCoy, D-Rienzi, sharply disagreed with Barbour's take on the stimulus funds on Monday, telling reporters that Barbour's stance "bothers us greatly. Our neighbors, our friends and even family members have lost their jobs in this economic downturn through no fault of their own."

McCoy referenced the possibility of an effort by the Legislature to bypass Barbour should he formally reject stimulus funds.

Is accepting the money Barbour's call? Partly. The stimulus package legislation, on page 491 of Division A, clearly states that state governors must within 45 days of the bill being enacted certify that the state will request and use the funds, and that "the funds will be used to create jobs and promote economic growth."

But if a governor does not accept the money, the bill further empowers state legislatures to bypass a governor and to accept the cash "by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution."

Clearly, that's what McCoy means to try to do if Barbour formally rejects part of the funds. But Republican Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant rebutted that threat: "I would resist any effort by the Legislature to override the governor's decision regarding accepting or declining the federal funds from President Obama's economic stimulus plan," said Bryant.

Make no mistake - this fight is far more about partisan politics than about policy.

Why? There absolutely no aversion in Mississippi among Republicans or Democrats to accepting federal funds - just as there isn't in Alaska or Louisiana. Mississippi's about the easiest girl in town on that score.

In terms of federal aid to states and localities received per capita, Governing magazine ranks Mississippi 3rd per capita at ($2,545) behind second-ranked Alaska ($3,552) and just ahead of Louisiana ($2,366) in 4th place.

Mississippi is just about the easiest girl on the block in terms of taking federal money. In the last two rounds of elections, Republicans bragged openly about how much federal aid they brought home to the state from Capitol Hill in Hurricane Katrina relief.

The pro-union National Employment Law Project challenged Barbour on his claims that of the $54 million offered to Mississippi under the bill, only $4 million would be available unless the state changed its law to expand eligibility to part-time workers.

NELP's co-policy director Maurice Emsellem told The New York Times Saturday that the stimulus package offered Mississippi $42 million for increased payments to unemployment recipients and $4 million for administrative costs without changing its policies.

In a state that clearly likes taking federal money and has a history of doing so with both hands, Barbour still has some work to do to sell his message to recession-battered Mississippi taxpayers that turning down federal help is smarter than taking it.

Or, the Democratic majority in Congress may well raise the price of political poker for Barbour and try to make stimulus approval an all-or-nothing proposition.