It's taken a little time, but we're now beginning to gauge the effectiveness of both the 2008 tax rebate stimulus and the larger economic stimulus package passed in 2009.
And they're disappointing.
The tax rebates -- $95 billion sent out to taxpayers from April through July this past year -- were aimed at encouraging low-income and middle-income Americans to spend money, kick-starting the sluggish economy.
The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated 40 percent of that money would be spent within six months, "raising the growth of consumption" in the last half of the year by as much as 2.3 percent.
But that's not what happened, the CBO now acknowledges. Little of the money was actually put back into the economy.
"For the 2008 rebates, some analysts have put the figure as low as 10 percent to 20 percent," the CBO noted.
A survey of recipients showed that people were reluctant to see the check as mad money.
"Only one-fifth of those surveyed indicated they would mostly spend their rebate," the CBO reported. "Almost half said they would mostly use it to pay off debt. And a third of those surveyed indicated it would mostly be saved."
In other words, "no spike in spending corresponds to the spike in income."
Critics of the rebate stimulus plan -- including U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler -- were right. There was no bang for the buck.
We're also learning more about the larger $787 billion stimulus package. Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn has been studying how the money is being spent.
"The American people have a right to know how their stimulus dollars are being spent. In too many cases stimulus projects are wasting money we don't have on things we don't need," Coburn said.
His 45-page report lists 100 specific projects that demonstrate the waste and inefficiency of the stimulus package. Those include:
• A $3.4 million project for an "eco-passage" tunnel to allow turtles to go under a road in Lake Jackson, Fla.;
• Road signs -- costing $300 each -- to tell drivers that road projects are being paid for with stimulus money;
• More than $2 million to install skylights in Montana's state-run liquor warehouse;
• More than $1.5 million for a new wastewater treatment plant in Perkins, Okla. -- which came with so many strings attached the city had to raise utility taxes for residents by 60 percent;
• And the suburban town of Union, New York, was encouraged to spend a $578,000 grant it did not request for a homelessness problem it does not have.
"I opposed the stimulus bill because I was concerned that 80 to 90 percent of the spending would not be true stimulus. I hope I am proven wrong," Coburn said. "Yet our initial findings continue to show that taxpayers are not getting the value they deserve and need."
In both cases -- the 2008 and the 2009 stimulus packages -- the federal government has attempted to spend its way out of a recession.
It's not working. As Coburn noted, the money should have been left in the pockets of taxpayers.
