Stimulus I is a great reason to refuse Stimulus II, better known as the American Jobs Act.

The $864 billion Stimulus (originally $787 b with three unemployment offerings added to the bill), will have a negative effect on our economy over the next ten years, so says the Director of the Congressional Budget Office in testimony before Senator Jeff Session’s Senate Budget Committee:

Director Doug Elmendorf admitted to Senator Sessions that in the long run the stimulus will shrink the economy. He testified at a Senate Budget Committee hearing that the stimulus will indeed 'be a drag on GDP' over the next ten years.

ELMENDORF: What we said was there would be a big boost to the level of GDP in the first three or four years . . . . . . The level of GDP is a little lower at the end [of the first ten year period]. That is net negative effect on the growth of GDP.

SESSIONS: And in the next ten years, since you're carrying that debt and paying interest on it and the stimulus value is long since gone, it would be a continual negative of some effect in the second.

ELMENDORF: Yes, and a drag on the level of GDP beyond that, if no other actions were taken.

In other words, Obama dealt us a marvelous round of “stimulus” for three to four years. In return, we pay through the nose for the next 16 years! That is what is being said in this testimony. When Senator Sessions asks about “the next ten years,” he is talking about the second decade following the stimulus. Stop and think about this for a moment: that three to four years of “marvelous stimulus” I mentioned, well, we are two years into that period; not so marvelous, not so stimulating. Understand that the effects of the ’09 Stimulus will be gone within the next two years, leaving us with years of debt and nothing to show for the decision.

Why does anyone think Stimulus II will work any differently?