Housing Complex

What the President’s Jobs Bill Would Mean for D.C.

I could be wrong, but I think they want jobs. (Lydia DePillis)

Via Kathryn Baer, on Friday the White House posted fact sheets on what the American Jobs Act would mean for every state. The District's goodies include:

  • $387 million in funding for highways and transit systems
  • $20 million for renovating vacant and foreclosed homes
  • Payroll tax cuts for 20,000 businesses
  • $45 million to support 500 teachers and first responders
  • A tax cut of $1,640 for the average household
  • Extended unemployment insurance for 5,500 people

That is, if it passes, of course.

  • http://marketurbanism.com Stephen Smith

    What transpo boondoggles improvements do they plan on making? Or is it the dollar figure that's important and they'll figure out the details later?

  • Hillman

    The DC school system has plenty of money for teachers.

    Instead they spend it on made up bogus do nothing administrative positions, waste, fraud, etc.

    I'd much rather that money go to police resources.

  • Skipper

    No chance in hell of passing.

  • Bob

    DC has the hottest housing market in the country. There is absolutely no reason for the government to pour $20 million into DC right now.

    If a house is vacant, let the vacancy tax rates kick in. This will drive out people just sitting on properties.

    If a house is foreclosed, let it go through foreclosure. Most houses go under contract in less than a month in this city. If you made a bad decision in buying your house, sell it and cut your losses.

  • Pingback: Five thousand jobs and $387 million | HuntersMedia.com

  • Typical DC BS

    We have such idiots representing us in Congress. If they want to do road and road infrastructure work, RAISE THE GASOLINE TAX. 10 or 20 cents a gallon is nothing compared to the recent rise in the price of a gallon of gas that mainly go to countries that hate us anyway.

    It will also have the benefit of getting more people to drive fuel-efficient cars.

  • Will

    @stephen smith, DC has plenty of legitimate and needed transportation improvements for that money. That amount would pay for about 1/3rd of replacing the structurally deficient Frederick Douglass bridge, for instance, or could pay for about 1/2 of replacing the structurally deficient Whitney Young bridge. Spreading it out a bit more, we could use some to double the quantity of annual roadway resurfacing, accelerate phase out of old (dirty emission) work trucks and metro buses...

    Lots of good projects in transportation that produce real, immediate, and long term benefits (those bridges need to be replaced soon no matter what). It's not a boondoggle, it's investing in our economy. We're spending historically low amounts on infrastructure and living off the investment of our parents and grandparents. Now its our turn to step up to the plate and pay for our share.